Freedom of Speech or is it ?

[Kes]

www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph

 

I found this article disturbing because its credible.

There are many parallels and I wonder if the values we used to cherish (and which this guy still has) have been sacrificed for money, or maybe influence ?

 

[The Mighty Prawn]

The media has always worked like this in the commercial sector, I know Top Gear is not everyone's cup of tea but one of the major plusses is on BBC they can say what they like about cars but mates who work on fifth gear say they have to be rally careful as the channel is twitchy about not losing car advertising money.

 

Also in retrospect look at the way the Murdoch channels reported the phone hacking as they were in it up to their necks - count how many times they mention "in the public interest" as justification for their actions rather than risking hurting their paper based siblings

[Vince Green]

Yes I find it credible and yes I also find it disturbing. The newspapers and the media are manipulated by the immediate rather than the longer view.

[SneakyD]

The Mighty Prawn is right, newspapers have always been biased in favour of their commercial interests.

 

The only thing new here (imho) is that for the last year or so, the Telegraph has been letting go, some of it's big name (expensive) writers.

I think Oborne jumped before they could push him.

[Vince Green]

The media has always worked like this in the commercial sector, I know Top Gear is not everyone's cup of tea but one of the major plusses is on BBC they can say what they like about cars but mates who work on fifth gear say they have to be rally careful as the channel is twitchy about not losing car advertising money.

 

Also in retrospect look at the way the Murdoch channels reported the phone hacking as they were in it up to their necks - count how many times they mention "in the public interest" as justification for their actions rather than risking hurting their paper based siblings

Do you believe that the Murdoch press were the only ones hacking phones? I worked periperally in the press for a few years and my belief is that everyone knew what everyone else was up to.

Day to day I heard things about celebs, MPs even prime ministers and the Royals that never got aired in public but it was all known about. Most of it just salacious gossip but the stuff that has come out since about Diana proves that a lot of it was true

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Standards slipping!

[Hamster]

Late last year I set to work on a story about the international banking giant HSBC. Well-known British Muslims had received letters out of the blue from HSBC informing them that their accounts had been closed. No reason was given, and it was made plain that there was no possibility of appeal. "It’s like having your water cut off," one victim told me.

 

Above extract received next to no coverage on the media considering its importance and implications for peoples lives, had it occurred (the other way) it would have been like the proverbial bomb going off.

I have long said and believed that what we get served as news is at best highly doctored/self serving. Why else would there be soooo much difference between the versions served up by opposing factions ? Listen to our news on a given subject and then the same via an independent foreign source they are often completely at odds with their interpretations and context (not saying the foreign ones are better).

At the end of the day I think we need to use our own intelligence and see through things, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle, rarely at one extreme or other.

[TriBsa]

The Mighty Prawn is right, newspapers have always been biased in favour of their commercial interests.

 

The only thing new here (imho) is that for the last year or so, the Telegraph has been letting go, some of it's big name (expensive) writers.

I think Oborne jumped before they could push him.

 

Spot on. Oborne was guilty of writing many articles that were clearly cheap propoganda from Tory Central Office, he hardly stood out as a paragon of journalistic virtue or integrity.

[Grandalf]

I shall read todays copy of the paper with a reawakened interest.

The paper has been a daily part of my life for more years than I can remember - one gets used to the routine of a paper that one enjoys.

When working abroad, which I did a lot, one could usually obtain a copy or The Memsahib would send me the 'weekly synopsis' version.

Just lately I have been wondering why some articles were 'missing' from my newspaper although featured prominently in her comic. (Mail).

Now the penny has dropped. Old age clogs the brain.

[TriBsa]

I shall read todays copy of the paper with a reawakened interest.

The paper has been a daily part of my life for more years than I can remember - one gets used to the routine of a paper that one enjoys.

When working abroad, which I did a lot, one could usually obtain a copy or The Memsahib would send me the 'weekly synopsis' version.

Just lately I have been wondering why some articles were 'missing' from my newspaper although featured prominently in her comic. (Mail).

Now the penny has dropped. Old age clogs the brain.

 

Grandalf,

 

Have a look at the online version as well, particularly the Comments section. The number of articles the readership is allowed to comment on has been dramatically reduced in recent months, but the few open to comment raise some serious questions over whether the paper still reflects it's readership's views.

 

Tom

[Zapp]

The press in general is an end to end nightmare - every publication out there has a spin and a bias and will send out the only message or version of events their readership, backers and advertisers find palatable. Stories that outright dont fit with their agenda will be spun or outright ignored. The only possible way to get anywhere near the truth would be to read everything put out on a subject, which takes a long time and still only gets you so far.

 

All we can do is to think critically about what we read/see/hear and avoid the temptation to believe things because they fit with our natural bias, or to discount evidence out of hand because we dont automatically agree with them.

 

I suppose what I am trying to say is that the best way to look at any news outlet is to treat it and what it says like a political party or politician, and assume that a lot of people have been paid a lot of money to craft, spin and massage the story to suit a particular viewpoint. Oh, and the other thing to bear in mind is that the ones that shout loudest about being honest and unbiased are usually the ones you can trust the least.

[secretagentmole]

Do you believe that the Murdoch press were the only ones hacking phones? I worked periperally in the press for a few years and my belief is that everyone knew what everyone else was up to.

Day to day I heard things about celebs, MPs even prime ministers and the Royals that never got aired in public but it was all known about. Most of it just salacious gossip but the stuff that has come out since about Diana proves that a lot of it was true

The Mirror Group has admitted that 75 stories between 200 and 2006 were published that were sourced directly from phone hacking!

[Scully]

The press in general is an end to end nightmare - every publication out there has a spin and a bias and will send out the only message or version of events their readership, backers and advertisers find palatable. Stories that outright dont fit with their agenda will be spun or outright ignored. The only possible way to get anywhere near the truth would be to read everything put out on a subject, which takes a long time and still only gets you so far.

 

All we can do is to think critically about what we read/see/hear and avoid the temptation to believe things because they fit with our natural bias, or to discount evidence out of hand because we dont automatically agree with them.

 

I suppose what I am trying to say is that the best way to look at any news outlet is to treat it and what it says like a political party or politician, and assume that a lot of people have been paid a lot of money to craft, spin and massage the story to suit a particular viewpoint. Oh, and the other thing to bear in mind is that the ones that shout loudest about being honest and unbiased are usually the ones you can trust the least.

This is bang on the button.

With the advent of the internet it is now possible for outlets, media, whatever, to cater their submissions directly to a persons particular bias or leaning. Through information gathered by browsing the internet, youtube and even the films we watch (Netflix now target my kids with films of a certain genre based on those films they have watched) media target individuals with news, articles etc which lean towards that persons particular bias and interests. Therefore those who lean to the left can increasingly be fed only information with leftist biased opinions and outlooks, and this equally applies to those with rightist tendencies etc.

It's nothing new, newspapers have been doing it since day one; my Dad wouldn't read any other paper than the Mirror when I was kid. We believe what we want to believe based on personal bias, again, much of which is based on our upbringing and social class.

The worrying aspect of all this is that once an individuals bias or beliefs are ingrained, and while it may not be described as indoctrination, it doesn't bode well for a persons ability to question each and every aspect of the news we are fed.

We need to, more than ever before; the truth is as has been said, somewhere in the middle. Nothing is black and white; there are two sides to most stories.

[Zapp]

 

The worrying aspect of all this is that once an individuals bias or beliefs are ingrained, and while it may not be described as indoctrination, it doesn't bode well for a persons ability to question each and every aspect of the news we are fed.

 

 

This is very true. It is no coincidence that a lot of effort is devoted in training for any serious research job to effectively deprogram years of ingrained acceptance of bias and received wisdom.

 

I dont want to get too tinfoil hat about it, but the press is absolutely a tool of manipulation, and often for less than noble ends.

[The Mighty Prawn]

What's strange is everyone thought the rise of the citizen journalist would level the playing field on news impartiality due to reports from non commercial sources but the reality is if one hundred people witness something they will all report it differently due to their own bias so the Internet new is just a big cloud of Mosquitos buzzing away and you don't ever get clarity on a topic

[STOTTO]

The press in general is an end to end nightmare - every publication out there has a spin and a bias and will send out the only message or version of events their readership, backers and advertisers find palatable. Stories that outright dont fit with their agenda will be spun or outright ignored. The only possible way to get anywhere near the truth would be to read everything put out on a subject, which takes a long time and still only gets you so far.

 

All we can do is to think critically about what we read/see/hear and avoid the temptation to believe things because they fit with our natural bias, or to discount evidence out of hand because we dont automatically agree with them.

 

I suppose what I am trying to say is that the best way to look at any news outlet is to treat it and what it says like a political party or politician, and assume that a lot of people have been paid a lot of money to craft, spin and massage the story to suit a particular viewpoint. Oh, and the other thing to bear in mind is that the ones that shout loudest about being honest and unbiased are usually the ones you can trust the least.

 

When I was a young man I was given some very good advice that has served me well through the years, “Of what you hear and read accept nothing as the truth and believe only half of what you see, rely only upon the evidence to base your judgement on things”!

 

Newspapers would be useful to wipe your backside on if the print was not as transitory at sticking to the paper as the editors are at sticking to the truth!

[grrclark]

I think there is still a role for good journalism and some of it still exists. Sadly the "free press" ceased to exist a long time ago, I believed the origin of the saying is that the press was free to say whatever it wanted to, but I think that when the media started to have any sort of commercial interest or motivation then "free" was no longer appropriate.

 

People would be stupid if they honestly believed that any opinion from any source did not have some sort of bias, even if it is nothing other than a self serving egotistical desire of the author. Sadly our ability to interpret what is said and challenge that based on reasoning seems to be in a dreadful decline, we work on absolute values even if they are absolutely rubbish.

 

Education teaches kids absolutes, we work to a rigid syllabus of subjects with specific subject matter and teach them to learn by rote, we even give them past papers of previous exams so they know what is coming. It used to be said that University didn't tell you what to think, it taught you how to think, but with some exceptions I don't think that is the case now either.

 

To some extents I think the digital revolution and the easy availability to so much information, because of the brilliance of mind of previous generations, is going to have the ironic effect of dumbing down the next generation or two as they lose that need or hunger to think for themselves and will be directed by media manipulation.

Edited February 20, 2015 by grrclark

[Scully]

I think there is still a role for good journalism and some of it still exists. Sadly the "free press" ceased to exist a long time ago, I believed the origin of the saying is that the press was free to say whatever it wanted to, but I think that when the media started to have any sort of commercial interest or motivation then "free" was no longer appropriate.

 

People would be stupid if they honestly believed that any opinion from any source did not have some sort of bias, even if it is nothing other than a self serving egotistical desire of the author. Sadly our ability to interpret what is said and challenge that based on reasoning seems to be in a dreadful decline, we work on absolute values even if they are absolutely rubbish.

 

Education teaches kids absolutes, we work to a rigid syllabus of subjects with specific subject matter and teach them to learn by rote, we even give them past papers of previous exams so they know what is coming. It used to be said that University didn't tell you what to think, it taught you how to think, but with some exceptions I don't think that is the case now either.

 

To some extents I think the digital revolution and the easy availability to so much information, because of the brilliance of mind of previous generations, is going to have the ironic effect of dumbing down the next generation or two as they lose that need or hunger to think for themselves and will be directed by media manipulation.

Excellent post.

[AVB]

Blimey. Journalists don't always tell the truth! What next? Chelsea supporters are racist thugs?

[Grandalf]

I find myself watching Al Jazeera News more often these days.

I wonder why?

Edited February 20, 2015 by Grandalf

[Kes]

I find myself watch Al Jazeera News more often these days.

I wonder why?

Funny you should say that .

[Vince Green]

You should go to America if you are looking for biased reporting. Part of the reason the American public is so nieve about world affairs is because they are told very little and what they are told is totally pro America

[aris]

You should go to America if you are looking for biased reporting. Part of the reason the American public is so nieve about world affairs is because they are told very little and what they are told is totally pro America

Fox News in the US in particular is jaw dropping.

 

As for bias, Even the guardian is at it

 

 

Http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/media/11425580/Guardian-changed-Iraq-article-to-avoid-offending-Apple.html

Edited February 21, 2015 by aris

[krugerandsmith]

Funny you should say that .

 

+1 More up to date ...... I remember a plane crash in the far east. Aljazeera up in the Mountains with the rescue team giving on the spot reports ...... Three hours later BBC NEWS tells us of a possible plane crash in the far east.