Declining Standards in Reporting

In the Scotsman this morning they run this headline.

Safety measures leave road travel as dangerous today as in medieval times

The article goes on to say. Road travel remains as hazardous now as it was 500 years ago, according to new research. Despite centuries of safety advances – including better road surfaces, safety barriers and airbags – travelling is still one of the riskiest areas of human activity, the study found.

It’s utter rubbish! Why do our newspapers and the rest of the media seem totally relaxed about reporting such tosh? The fact is that in 1930 there were only 2.3 million motor vehicles in Great Britain, but more than 7,000 people were killed in road accidents. By 1971 road accidents had killed 8,302. Come 2005 and the numbers killed on Britain’s roads had dropped to 3,201. This highlights how in every way, almost every day the news get away with this kind of stuff. Everything is worse, more, increasing, dangerous, catastrophic etc etc. It’s all about the news’ desire to compete with one another as the harbingers of doom and gloom.

The story wass 'driven', as many are by research. Elizabeth Towner, from the University of the West of England, who led the study, said, Across five centuries, "one continuity is the hazardous nature of travel".

It's probably our money that paid for the research. This story will probably get picked up by other sections of the media in the next couple of days and we'll be urged to 'stay in doors and seek cover" if we want to avoid being killed on Britain's roads.

BBC News Vignette

There's a fascinating news vignette on the BBC News web site that has unfolded as the morning has gone on. It gives an insight into the minds of those that serve us up our news. At around 7 a.m. this morning the headline on the BBC's front page said.

Dozens die in Russian plane crash

Now at 11 a.m. it says

Scores die in Russian plane crash

In both cases the opening paragraph said

A passenger plane that crashed on the outskirts of a Russian city, killing all 88 people on board

So why not just say, 'Eighty eight die in Russian plane crash'. It couldn't by any chance be because it sounds more sensational to say scores could it?

Channel 4 News is a Joke.

I've just watched Channel 4's news and it was appalling. The lead story was from Kenya and featured their senior reporter Lindsey Hilsum. She arrived by helicopter in an area about 100 west of Nairobi at which there was a huge mob of Africans, many of whom were brandishing bows and arrows, and machetes. This apparently is an area where there had been some tribal violence, possibly killings. Channel 4's reporter referred to these people as 'Warriors'. They were not warriors they were a mob. If it was a group of youths and men in Britain doing similarly how would they have been described? Channel 4's agenda driven news is a disgrace.

We Want The News

The plans for ITV Borders News to be combined with Tyne Tees is bad news for the Scottish Borders. Our region already suffers from a lack of coverage in the broadcast media and unless there is renewed focus on the issue it will not improve.

For years the Borders have suffered from being stuck in the sandwich of Northern England on the one hand and the Central belt of Scotland on the other. It’s as if nothing of substance happens in the region; the forgotten frontier of broadcasting is what we’ve become.

It’s easy to see, from an economic viewpoint, why ITV want to make this move. The Borders is a small area of just over 100,000 people and even when added to the area in England that ITV Borders covers it is still not a large potential number of viewers. However, with the Scottish Parliament our ‘news’ is very different in slant and substance from what is relevant to the English side of the Border. With any amalgamation of ITV News the Scottish Borders will virtually slip of their news radar as much of what would be covered is of no interest to the majority of their viewers.

So what are the alternatives? Either the change doesn’t happen or the Scottish Borders should get ITV Scotland programmes and we break from the Borders franchise altogether. That way at least the news will be more relevant on political issues. If this were to happen, and can happen technically, then it requires a commitment from ITV Scotland to place emphasis on the region from newsgathering as well as a dissemination.

Currently the BBC TV and radio cover the region within their overall output with ‘split’ news bulletins being broadcast solely for the Borders. We need to see a vast improvement in the BBC’s newsgathering within the Border region so that they are able to give us emphasis on what is important to us. Besides the odd story about the Waverley line and foot and mouth outbreaks the news about the Borders on the BBC has tended to be ‘soft’ stories.

We need our MPs and MSPs to be calling for change that will not see the Scottish Borders becoming a forgotten backwater. We are in danger of fulfilling the news media’s prophecy of disinterest.

Important News?

Britney Spears is to lose the custody of her children to her former husband. The BBC consider ths to be headline news. Shouldn't someone be explaining to them what is and what isn't important?

Brainwashed By The News Media

It's ironic that the two helicopters, from rival news channels, that collided in the US while covering a police car chase is bigger news than the car chase; it’s a prime example of what our news coverage has come to. Apparently there were five helicopters covering the chase. In the coverage I've so far read no one has detailed why the police was chasing the man - chances are it was for some offence that was not that grave. No matter what it was are we that interested in watching cars being driven at high speed? Apparently we are as in Los Angeles; a service exists whereby viewers, in return for a monthly subscription, are paged every time a pursuit is being shown.

Once we started to believe that news is entertainment all hope is lost of getting the type of coverage we want rather than we need. It's no different here in the UK as news programmes have competed to bring us shots of reporters standing in the deepest waters talking to people who have lost the most, suffered at the hands of the flood in the worst way. There's no question that those who have suffered as a result of the floods must have had a horrendous time. Even if your home were not flooded, to be without water for such a protracted period would be frustrating and very difficult. However, the actual number of people that were flooded, compared to the population, is very small yet the news just pile on the agony and make the rest of us feel like we are all living on the edge of the end of the world.

I watched the One Show on BBC 1 this week, which followed the news, that spent most of the show covering the floods. The presenters of the show are not the best and their reporters look and sound like they've just come out of the local collage of knowledge's media studies course. There use of language to describe situations was so inept that it was laughable. Their interview techniques consisted of asking questions to try to elicit answers that they wanted. One lady who basically kept saying it was just something you had to get on with frustrated the reporter greatly as he was more interested in getting her to say she was worried about looters - which clearly she was not.

It's yet more evidence that the news have an agenda to paint a country of darkness and despair when we are largely the opposite as a nation. However, how much longer it will be before we fall foul of their constant brainwashing I'm not sure. There was a study done recently that said people were more optimistic and happy in the early 1950s than they are now. The news media and particularly the TV have an awful lot to answer for.

News Should Not Be A Business

Watching the BBC 6 p.m. news last night it is irritating and sad that their coverage of the attempted bombing took on such alarmist tones. Their reporter 'somewhere near Glasgow Airport' said, "People across Scotland are living in fear". No we're not! Of course there's concerns, but lets not get this out of proportion. The BBC’s political correspondent at Westminster said and I paraphrase. ‘The bombers are altering their tactics and instead of the security people looking for home grown radicalized terrorists they are now importing foreign nationals which is all helping to keep the terrorists one step ahead.’

By its very nature this is what terrorism is, but at the same time we seem to be doing a pretty good job in dealing with it - albeit with some luck thrown in. Not perfect, but then you wouldn't expect that. Equally ‘the terrorists’ are not some homogenous group of people and however well organized al-Qaeda is there is a limit to how effective that organization can be.

In the papers today there's the usual rash of stories asking what did the Home Office and the security people really know? What weren’t they telling us? Our news obsessed world, the competing nature of news providers and this desire to always be able to say things like 'worst ever', 'most', 'dire', 'dreadful', 'disturbing', or whatever other words designed to make us feel even worse is potential crippling. There needs to be a sense of perspective from news providers and a recognition that they are providing us with what is at its heart a service and not a business. Competition in the news rating wars is irrelevant to us as recipients of news.

Franklin D Roosevelt said in 1933 “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”. We should heed those sentiments and so should the news media who have a duty to not stir up the fear of fear.

Breaking Hot Air

I've just been watching BBC News 24, while eating my breakfast, and two things just happened that show the absurdity of 24-hour rolling news. The business of having to put so much on our screens must create pressures, not least when it comes to the rolling info and headers that appear at the bottom of the screen. The presenter was interviewing Anne Weyman, one of the vice-chairs of the Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV. Instead of using the group’s proper name they had her name with Sexual Health Advisory Group written underneath it. That's SHAG for short!

All morning there's been news that Portuguese police are searching some ground 9 miles from where Madeleine McCann disappeared. Straight out of that piece on SHAG the newsreader said. "We have breaking news from Portugal." Mrs. H. and I both looked at each other assuming that they were going to say they had found something – but no. "Portuguese Police have said that four police dogs have been sent from Lisbon to aid the searchers." More like breaking hot air than news.

How True The News?

On Channel 4's web site under the news section there are all sorts of stories. Most carry this disclaimer at the bottom. Click HERE for an example.

"These news feeds are provided by an independent third party and Channel 4 is not responsible or liable to you for the same."

So is it true news or not?