Yeah that bits true. But media reporting has changed immeasurably over the last 20 years. Gone are the days when Richard Baker would announce 'Good evening, this is the nine o clock news' and then proceed to actually present the news. Nowadays it's more like 'Good evening, this is what we want you to believe......'
I haven't read newspapers for several years and I stopped watching TV news this year , it is no longer news it is just propaganda , the media is controlled by the super rich and it is used to divide and control .
Haven’t bought a newspaper in more than 20 years, cannot be arsed to watch TV news or listen to news on the radio or look at social media. My smart TV has the BBC news app which I occasionally scan through. Tried a couple of internet news sites but lost the will to live with the obvious bias of the contributors and what is for me, an unreasonable focus on the salacious. Bah, humbug Andy
Condone sounds a bit like turning the other way but it's worse than that, they knowingly vote for it in their millions.
When talking about "bloke stuff" mine said " Don't believe everything you hear, only half of what you see, and nothing your mother told you"!
I have two well-trusted periodicals that I always go to for the inside news on major geo-political issues ... The Chicken Breeders Gazette , and Asian Babes magazine Some cynical buggers once wrote a song with the line " I just read the Daily News and swear by every word " ..... can't recall exactly who it was at the moment ....
The 'truth' of the matter is that 'truth' is not as important than sales. The truth isnt nearly as profitable as lying. Plus the truth impinges on those with power, who incidently profit from the lies in both power and financial terms. Plus they own the media or are sponsored by them. It is all corrupt and we are distracted by the lies to hate those we have no reason to hate rather than those we should. Politicians, media magnates, the super rich trillionaires. No-one cares anymore. As long as they can buy another car, or some other trinket to bedazzle themselves then theyre alright Jack. We've all become selfish and self entitled and absorbed. I read Viz and Private Eye (Viz with longer words and slighly less bawdyness)
not all have become selfish, far from it. but the very organisations folks are critisizing here are hardly gonna promote that, and if they do, they aint gonna flurish it with the good reasons for why we are not selfish.
Well, several issues arise from that. 1. IIRC, Asian Babes hasn’t seen the dusty light of a top shelf for about 15 years now. 2. Its editor Richard Desmond also used to own the Daily Express, which given its slavish sycophancy towards the Tories, ironically, contained more c*unts than his other tawdry publications.* 3. Desmond is also a Tory party donor twice over, which had absolutely nothing to do with his lobbying of housing minister Robert Jenrick when rather fortuitously seated next to him at a dinner and by subsequent (misspelled) text messages. Jenrick’s overruling of the Planning Inspectorate and Desmond’s further post-planning permission donation do not in any way imply that this was the quid pro quo of a bribe because that and the associated conspiracy would be serious criminal offences. * He really missed an open goal because his talents as a pornographer combined with his access to politicians meant a Leaders Wives title was an obvious tie-in.
You do know some freaky ass sh*t zhed! I wonder if my daughters picking all this sort of stuff up at law school
That is exactly what many news stories are like. From what I can glean from my own experience of when stuff I've been involved in gets reported, one reporter files a sorry with a central agency, and then reporters from other papers "pick it up" (AKA "copy and paste") and report it as one of their own articles. In the Daily Mail's case, they usually also harvest material from Facebook and include a totally irrelevant and often crashingly insensitive reference to the value of the person's house (both of which were in their article on the death of my client). Reports of court cases often, in fact usually, focus on a tiny irrelevant element of the matter and present it as the central theme, thus presenting a totally skewed version for the purpose of either making the article entertaining or to present a particular political view (sentences are too soft - judges are out of touch - immigrants are taking the p*ss etc). To adopt a a musical analogy, it's as if most the notes are there but they are played in a different order. A few weeks back I was representing someone at a sentencing hearing who was at signifiant risk of gong to prison and because my advocacy style can be quite conversational and I was getting on with the judge who I could tell was "with me" and was likely to suspend my client's sentence, I dropped a slightly flippant remark about how prison would affect him into my mitigation. It turns out there was a newspaper reporter in court and of course, they ignored all the other points but seized on this one throwaway point and wrote a report of the case which not only made it sound as if the judge had declined to send my client to prison for a pretty silly reason, but also referred to the price of my client's house, along with his immigration status. So, of course, rather than the truth - "sensible judge follows good sentencing practice and declines to impose immediate custody on a man with no previous convictions and impeccable character references running a viable business which employed others" - the whole thing was presented as "soft touch judge refuses to send immigrant to prison for really stupid reason". That's a trivial example but it contributes to the corrosive narrative that judges are out of touch with reality and make arbitrary sentencing decisions when IME, barring a few exceptions, the opposite is true.
If you want to find the truth (and I’m not talking about current news but the institution that is the media and politics for that matter) then look to satire: The Media - The Day Today Politics - Yes Minister or The New Statesman Once you’ve watched those you can safely watch the news and politics and filter the BS and pick out the elements that might be true and make your own decisions from that.
From a very early age, I taught my son to be wary of sales signs, ignore the big lettering and check out the ‘upto’. Media is the same. Ignore the hyperbole and concentrate on any fact. Trouble is these days there is barely any in many reports!
I can hardly believe that I'm writing this , and I have even less trust that you are taking me seriously but anyway , it's a dull day .... There was a comedy sketch way back ( Fast Show ? ) , where there was a ministerial briefing and members of the press were standing up and announcing themselves .... " Kevin Drongo , Daily Mail ..... Nigel Fookes-Retard , Daily telegraph .... and Tony Harrison , Asian Babes " ..... and I thought it was hilarious . As to my other " source " , The Chicken Breeders Gazette , I doubt that it ever existed ( outside of my imagination ) . Everything else I wrote is the truth ( possibly ) ..... ..... " Stand on me guv , I swear on my granny's eyesight "
But these papers are a business, and need to sell copies and or advertising. There is no public desire to pay for the plain truth. I don't expect commercial newspapers to tell me things that cost them money, just like I refuse to work free myself. Though of course the plain truth is essential to avoid division, and discontent. Which is where the BBC have always been useful, until this last five years or so. Stop paying the licence fee, to force the BBC to rethink.
And I’m a bit concerned that you think that I thought you were serious! This infinite regress could go on forever*. Things don’t always come across as intended on forums. * Obviously, or else it wouldn’t be an infinite regress.
