Ed ~ You can read Part 1 here.
The so-called third estate these days is seemingly inhabited by the products of one of Blair’s much-loved bog-standard comprehensive schools. Whatever these people learned at school or university, it certainly was not how to present quality researched articles based on fact. A little research or a look at their obligatory FaceBook page will open a few ‘quality’ newspapers readers’ eyes to the reality of the backgrounds and lack of subject experience of some national broadcast and print media professionals.
Local newspapers are now seemingly written by people who either failed to reach even that dismal standard or are drafted in at short notice to write on the various subjects that interest local people. Usually, it seems stories on domestic disturbances, drunks, speeding motorists and so on are often now written in some cases by something, artificial intelligence maybe, or somebody called a democracy reporter who has been embedded in local newsrooms courtesy of the BBC. Whether they have embedded broadcast journalists or just journalists, I’ve not been able to find out. But either way, there seems little difference in standards or what they expect me to pay to read. Why I should pay to read their assumptions or opinions? When I refuse, it seems to alarm them as is their fixation with so-called ‘fake news’. Maybe they have not heard of the alternatives readily available now on the internet. Articles are available to meet almost any taste and on any subject and any bias.
It’s not always been like this, local papers at one time had an element of respect from the readership (for example Michael Buerk started his journalistic life on a local newspaper ), even if they were affectionately referred to as the ‘local rag’. In the main, they didn’t push somebody’s particular point of view; they reported on what was happening locally, something also that T.V broadcasts did mainly, although that started to change as more left-wing staff were employed. And it must, of course, be remembered that the BBC has, since the time of Lord Reith, been the government mouthpiece at home and abroad and the arbiter of what was good taste. Its bias then not quite as obvious, or if it was ignored by most people
I recently viewed a couple of contemporary documentary reports by the long-defunct Thames Television; one looked at both sides of the miners’ strike and the industrial action being taken by railway unions. They were an eye-opener on just how far the broadcast media has travelled in the ensuing years. The interviewer asked questions, got answers and queried those answers … unlike the constant interruption and point-scoring that passes for in-depth investigative journalism today when the interviewer presumes that their opinion is the important thing and they are more important than the person being interviewed. It is celebrity news reporting at its worst and shows how far backward we have travelled.
And therein, for me at any rate, is the reason I’m very selective in what I purchase to read or watch these days. I can’t remember the last time I watched BBC or Sky News, I find most of the so-called quality broadsheets unreadable and have cancelled subscriptions to three magazines that I’d supported for years. These non-political magazines bought for the enjoyment of a hobby, suddenly, over the last three years started to employ journalists who apparently wanted to educate me on their views on Brexit. Presumably, the editors no longer read what journalists write in articles which should be totally removed from the political arena. Perhaps it’s something to do with working in Cambridgeshire where, for some reason, many magazines are based. A national club, of which I was a member for many years, suddenly started to carry letters and articles in its magazine from members or contributors on such subjects as political correctness, Brexit and politics in general. I’m no longer a member as I assumed the editor viewed these articles and letters favourably and sought to impose his views on members of an interest club as far as can be away from the world of politics.
Neither am I impressed by actors or so-called T.V celebrities who think I find their opinions on anything but their apparent skill set as remotely important; the fact that you can imitate somebody or speak words that somebody else wrote , or ‘writ’ as Ernie Wise may have said, or sell something or other is neither here nor there, something they may like to heed or even ask the people recently made redundant at CNN recently as viewers turned off in their thousands .
As for the hypocritical luvvies, supposedly supporting the climate change agenda while flying more in a month than many airline staff do, and then having the gall to admit they are hypocrites while expecting me to accept it, then they can all think on. Using children in their advertising and marketing strategies and advertising as the current B.T campaign does complete with what to me seems like a very intense Greta Thunberg type presentation from a young girl along with what looks to me like a ‘common purpose’ inspired slogan is something that I’m not inspired or happy about.
I’m reminded of some very old advice, each has a right to voice their own opinions, it’s a free country (well we mostly thought it was several years ago, now it seems that it is anything but ) so voice them at the right time and place, and if you want to keep friends, stay off religion and politics and keep children from both.
Absolutely right Jim, Mike etc. Most real thinkers are self-taught innovators, unlike those career politicians who change their allegiance to Parties according to their moods. Finally getting rid of the law-making EU, will reveal Parliament in its true colour; what our MPs are made of and whether they can govern a 65million population of such diversity of race, colour and culture. Especially young MPs like Jo Swinson, Layla, Chukka, even Anna, all hopping on the EU bandwagon that will continue to do their work, whilst they pocket huge sums of our hard-earned taxes, sitting on their pretty hands with nothing to show for it except waste, chaos and closures.
Why do we need so many arguing MPs with no experience of work, manufacturing, industrial or commercial skills? How can they know that EU rules and directives actually caused the severe flooding in Cumbria or Romsey by stopping our rivers being dredged? How can they appreciate the hardship of our coastal towns and villages when they give the EU £12 billion to plunder our fishery and stop us trading with non-EU countries? Have they managed to skim through some of the 110 pages of Boris’ “deal”? Based on the 500 pages of Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement with over 7 Clauses to subjugate the UK under European Court of Justice’ rule?
And as for the BBC bias, the questions put to interviewees are so loaded with suggestion such as “Will you take them to court”, that they actually produce the results they incite.
“no experience of work, manufacturing, industrial or commercial skills”
So true and it has to change. No-one who has not held a real job for some years and pays UK taxes should be eligible to stand. Those aspiring to be government ministers should also have a relevant professional qualification, but no lawyers!
I cancelled newspapers and online subscriptions last year. A dinner lady from my school in the sixties told me never to talk about sex, religion or politics unless everyone could give their honest opinion without being villified. How is that working out today?
I used to take the local evening paper, a daily paper and magazines. Some years ago now, I cancelled the lot due to quality and truth being absent and the idea of buying a drips views, that were not based upon facts, and certainly not in accord with my views, just seemed to be a waste of time and money. The Parliament channel gives me insight as to the level of intelligence within Westminster, and to my view is the only reason for the stupidity of the BBC licence fee. – I recon that if individuals have a mind of their own, they should try to use it !
You won’r be a fan of “JoCo” then?
In regards to the BBC. What began as an objection to the magnitude of salaries paid to second-rate ex footballers and deviant abominable effeminate, preening, chat-show hosts,and the host of ‘new’ female interrogators – has now been converted into a helter-skelter for every militant female employee to have THEIR salaries increased to match those of the second-rate aforementioned performers. Consequently we, the public, are in a far worse financial situation than we were before. And instead of reducing the payroll the payroll has been considerably inflated by increasing the salaries of ‘wimin’ (and their multitudinous variety of species!). I have not heard one dissenting voice in the press or media to this decision by the BBC to increase rather than reduce their salaries bill.
Sadly too few of the products of our Education system know how to think for themselves these days. Thinking for oneself has never been encouraged, whilst joining in with the unthinking manufactured emotional outrage has become the norm. Until this tide is turned, we owe it to our Nation to encourage everyone to think for themselves and to stop blindly accepting whatever the “great” the “good” the “experts” and the “scientists” would have us believe.