BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread
> News reporting reforms
Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum
vidcapper
post Jun 2 2018, 01:23 PM
Post #1
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
What changes would you like to see?

Firstly, I would prefer to see it absolutely factual, without any political agenda - put the facts out there and let people interpret it as they may.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post Jun 2 2018, 01:31 PM
Post #2
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,030
User: 18,639
Um that's what I said and you argued with me over it before...
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Suedehead2
post Jun 2 2018, 02:37 PM
Post #3
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,652
User: 3,272
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 2 2018, 02:23 PM) *
What changes would you like to see?

Firstly, I would prefer to see it absolutely factual, without any political agenda - put the facts out there and let people interpret it as they may.

Might I suggest that buying a paper like the i (reasonably intelligent, relatively unbiased) would be a good idea? The more successful a relatively unbiased paper is, the more it might force other publications to change their ways.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Iz 🌟
post Jun 2 2018, 02:50 PM
Post #4
Group icon
I'm a paragon so don't perceive me
Joined: 3 February 2011
Posts: 37,409
User: 12,929
Fines. Large fines for any misleading headlines/articles and large unmissable apologies for any misleading headlines that do appear. Make it unprofitable to print lies.

Any report that isn't marked as an opinion column or similar should use neutral language. If that means more opinion columns in newspapers, fine, but at least they're marked as such.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Brett-Butler
post Jun 2 2018, 03:04 PM
Post #5
Group icon
Howdy, disco citizens
Joined: 16 January 2010
Posts: 12,775
User: 10,455
You could start by crowdfunding my idea for a newspaper I first floated on these forums a few months ago -

QUOTE
The paper will be called "The Centre".

The paper will have have news, and only news (although a crossword and cartoon page will be permissible). There will be no opinion journalists or columnists of any stripe - no Owen Jonses, no Richard Littlejohnses, no Polly Toynbees, no Katy Hopkinses - no-one.

Any stories that feature two sides will obtain statements from two sources of an equitable stature on both sides of the argument for balance.

To ensure impartiality at all times, the paper will not take any political positions, and journalists must not be registered members of political parties, or have been one in the past 3 years, nor or any organisation that could result in "undue influence" over any stories featured.

And my most important feature -
The Corrections Page - page 3 of the paper will be solely handed over for any corrections, errors & clarifications that have appeared in prior issues of the paper, so if there are none, page 3 will be completely blank. This will ensure whenever we get anything wrong, we can put our hands up and admit it, which will help to regain trust in an industry where people are becoming increasingly sceptical of whether the news they are receiving is honest or not.

Of course, I doubt that something like this could get off the ground, as everyone to some extent has some biases that will make their way into the pages, even if your paper's outlook is to remove it entirely.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 2 2018, 03:13 PM
Post #6
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
So we agree that such a publication should be free of bigotry?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Tombo
post Jun 2 2018, 03:15 PM
Post #7
Group icon
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 3 September 2009
Posts: 7,814
User: 9,543
I really don't see this changing anytime soon. It would be great if so but there are too many personal and political agendas at play.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 2 2018, 04:48 PM
Post #8
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812
User: 17,376
Ban foreign or foreign-living millionaires from owning UK newspapers. They do not have the welfare of the citizens of the country at heart or they would live here and have a REAL stake in the well-being of the United Kingdom....

Journalists who knowingly print false information, no matter how minor, to apologise ASAP if it's a mistake of sources, or get banned for 6 months if it's a deliberate propaganda distortion. That way they will stand up to their editors. That also applies to re-writers of copy, not the original piece if it was error-free.

Speculation to be labelled as speculation. Bullshit about bendy bananas to be treated as seriously as fake items about people and organisations.

Journalists should be free to belong to unions to try and remove non-professional cheap labour from writing unprofessional articles that get edited by nobody much - thinking on-line here - and on-line should be subject to the same regulations.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 3 2018, 06:18 AM
Post #9
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 2 2018, 05:48 PM) *
Ban foreign or foreign-living millionaires from owning UK newspapers. They do not have the welfare of the citizens of the country at heart or they would live here and have a REAL stake in the well-being of the United Kingdom....

Journalists who knowingly print false information, no matter how minor, to apologise ASAP if it's a mistake of sources, or get banned for 6 months if it's a deliberate propaganda distortion. That way they will stand up to their editors. That also applies to re-writers of copy, not the original piece if it was error-free.

Speculation to be labelled as speculation. Bullshit about bendy bananas to be treated as seriously as fake items about people and organisations.

Journalists should be free to belong to unions to try and remove non-professional cheap labour from writing unprofessional articles that get edited by nobody much - thinking on-line here - and on-line should be subject to the same regulations.


The main problem with measures like the above, is that it may well drive people away from increasingly bland mainstream newspapers, towards unregulated blogs, or foreign papers not covered by British laws regulating content.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 3 2018, 06:22 AM
Post #10
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Jun 2 2018, 03:37 PM) *
Might I suggest that buying a paper like the i (reasonably intelligent, relatively unbiased) would be a good idea? The more successful a relatively unbiased paper is, the more it might force other publications to change their ways.


On that basis, The Independent should already be the most popular, so there's a flaw in your theory.

IMO it is that people *prefer* sensationalism to accuracy.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Silas
post Jun 3 2018, 07:34 AM
Post #11
Group icon
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,067
User: 3,474
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 2 2018, 03:13 PM) *
So we agree that such a publication should be free of bigotry?

If we ALL agree, why do you read the daily mail?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Suedehead2
post Jun 3 2018, 07:54 AM
Post #12
Group icon
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,652
User: 3,272
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 3 2018, 07:22 AM) *
On that basis, The Independent should already be the most popular, so there's a flaw in your theory.

IMO it is that people *prefer* sensationalism to accuracy.

When did you last read the Independent?
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Klaus
post Jun 3 2018, 07:56 AM
Post #13
Group icon
❤️❤️➕🟦
Joined: 3 June 2012
Posts: 22,246
User: 17,160
People love sensationalism because people love to get angry and complain.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 3 2018, 09:10 AM
Post #14
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Jun 3 2018, 08:54 AM) *
When did you last read the Independent?


I tend not to, as it argues with my adblocker.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 3 2018, 09:11 AM
Post #15
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(Klaus @ Jun 3 2018, 08:56 AM) *
People love sensationalism because people love to get angry and complain.


Precisely - and that's what sells more newspapers.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Brett-Butler
post Jun 3 2018, 12:40 PM
Post #16
Group icon
Howdy, disco citizens
Joined: 16 January 2010
Posts: 12,775
User: 10,455
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 3 2018, 10:10 AM) *
I tend not to, as it argues with my adblocker.


And that's why we can't have nice things.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 4 2018, 11:21 AM
Post #17
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Jun 3 2018, 08:34 AM) *
If we ALL agree, why do you read the daily mail?


Because it's necessary to read more than one newspaper to get the full details of news stories.

Surely if we're to get *absolutely factual* news, as even Queef agrees we should, then we should get the *full* story, warts & all, even if some of the facts aren't deemed PC?

Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Long Dong Silver
post Jun 4 2018, 11:32 AM
Post #18
Group icon
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,030
User: 18,639
As even I agree??

It was me who broached the idea and you who argued with it!! It's there to see in the other threads!!!!
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
vidcapper
post Jun 4 2018, 01:11 PM
Post #19
Group icon
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346
User: 364
QUOTE(Queef of Peace @ Jun 4 2018, 12:32 PM) *
As even I agree??

It was me who broached the idea and you who argued with it!! It's there to see in the other threads!!!!


Well, I was referring to this thread specifically, but as you say...
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post
Iz 🌟
post Jun 4 2018, 02:08 PM
Post #20
Group icon
I'm a paragon so don't perceive me
Joined: 3 February 2011
Posts: 37,409
User: 12,929
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 4 2018, 12:21 PM) *
Because it's necessary to read more than one newspaper to get the full details of news stories.

Surely if we're to get *absolutely factual* news, as even Queef agrees we should, then we should get the *full* story, warts & all, even if some of the facts aren't deemed PC?


I think you will find that there are a large number of journalistic publications that report full stories with much better accuracy and less distracting bigotry than the Mail.

You want two sides, read the Guardian and the Telegraph, or the Times and the I, or any number of more niche publications like Reuters, New Statesman, Economist until you are satisfied you have the absolute facts. There is no need to support tabloids with no journalistic integrity.
Go to the top of this page
 
+Quote this post


2 Pages V   1 2 >
Post reply to this threadCreate a new thread

1 users are reading this thread (1 guests and 0 anonymous users)
0 members:


 

Time is now: 18th April 2024 - 11:38 PM