Thursday, June 03, 2004
The news is the news...
I spent two days early this week in our nation's capital, in order to sit in on a High Court case which was hearing a squirming effort by TVNZ to duck its responsibilities for in relation to violence and children.
In the course of the case, the learned judge repeated (commendingly) the axiom, "the news is the news, and not to be tampered with".
As a former broadcasting journalist of some 17 years or so experience, I cannot credit that anyone actually believes that. An ounce of reflection (let alone a myriad instances of daily experience) would show that it is a grotesque lie.
The people who wield the real power in the media are not the editors or the journalists, but the hidden people - the producers and the sub-editors. It is they who decide what goes to air. They have close to unfettered control.
If you believe that these are totally professional people guided by high principles of objectivity, then I'll put my tooth under your pillow any day.
Consider the reality of compiling a news bulletin. As a TV sub-editor, you have just a couple of minutes to cram what you can from several mountains of material. With an eye to the ratings, you choose the most explicit/entertaining/controversial clips available. The more conflict, the better. There is no time for balance, reflection, consideration of alternative viewpoints, depth of coverage, etc, etc. Interviews are reduced to half a dozen words or so. Anything that cannot be illustrated with a colourful picture or film clip is rejected. Simple is better. Spokespeople are stereotyped, because that avoids shades of grey. The witty takes precedence over the thoughtful. Those who shout louder get more attention. And most importantly, those who conform to the sub-editor's or channel's predispositions get the most favourable treatment.
If you don't believe me, speak to anyone who's been interviewed by the news media.
And by the way, what was your definition of "tampered with"?
I spent two days early this week in our nation's capital, in order to sit in on a High Court case which was hearing a squirming effort by TVNZ to duck its responsibilities for in relation to violence and children.
In the course of the case, the learned judge repeated (commendingly) the axiom, "the news is the news, and not to be tampered with".
As a former broadcasting journalist of some 17 years or so experience, I cannot credit that anyone actually believes that. An ounce of reflection (let alone a myriad instances of daily experience) would show that it is a grotesque lie.
The people who wield the real power in the media are not the editors or the journalists, but the hidden people - the producers and the sub-editors. It is they who decide what goes to air. They have close to unfettered control.
If you believe that these are totally professional people guided by high principles of objectivity, then I'll put my tooth under your pillow any day.
Consider the reality of compiling a news bulletin. As a TV sub-editor, you have just a couple of minutes to cram what you can from several mountains of material. With an eye to the ratings, you choose the most explicit/entertaining/controversial clips available. The more conflict, the better. There is no time for balance, reflection, consideration of alternative viewpoints, depth of coverage, etc, etc. Interviews are reduced to half a dozen words or so. Anything that cannot be illustrated with a colourful picture or film clip is rejected. Simple is better. Spokespeople are stereotyped, because that avoids shades of grey. The witty takes precedence over the thoughtful. Those who shout louder get more attention. And most importantly, those who conform to the sub-editor's or channel's predispositions get the most favourable treatment.
If you don't believe me, speak to anyone who's been interviewed by the news media.
And by the way, what was your definition of "tampered with"?
