Does anyone think there is a lack of good journalism?
I'm not talking about the traditional cliches about media bias, which I think are often a case of "This source does not share MY bias, therefore it IS biased" which is seriously flawed thinking, the press that tells you precisely what you want to hear, confirms your suspicions is absolutely awful too.
The issue I'm talking about is more to do with the media as marketing, reporting as commercial PR, infotainment, click bait and to a much less extent a general dumbing down and reductionism in messages. I know a lot of these trends tie into the death of print media and the need to desperately chase a bottom dollar.
However, there are stories, obvious ones which suggest themselves which I definitely do not see being reported or pursued.
Like I would really like to see reports of events being "super spreader" occasions followed up with exacting information about how many people got sick, also mass gatherings, whether they are raves, house parties, protests, I would like to see the follow up to them too and see how it has objectively effected the spread of disease. Not simply that they have breached regulations, that much is obvious and not news, not journalism, not especially reportage I would say.
And if these things are not influencing spread then some good explanation as to why, not with a view to undermining policy or encouraging even more cavalier attitudes than there already appear to be among the public but just increasing the amount of accurate information there is for anyone who happens to be taking these matters seriously.
In the UK the media, broadly speaking, have been as supportive as they possibly can be of failing individuals, departments, government for some time now. In a bizarre kind of "nannying" of anyone in public office. And its really weird to see when they have consciously attempted to change tact, it becomes a case of simply being rude to individuals being interviewed, giving them a hard time or playing a kind of game in which they may "catch them out". Its terrible to watch as any skilled public official, or anyone with any kind of talent in discussion could deal with it, most of the people they wheel out cant but in any case its a pantomine. Instead of a sort of haranguing they never ask any decent questions worth asking.
Like I've seen some pretty good points made by individuals from the medical profession about the lack of planned responses to crisis, not simply COVID but more generally, for some time in the NHS, which is both a public funding and revenue issue but also about the calibre and quality of management, political oversight and a number of factors.
Factors which older beliefs about the "magic" of market forces or "spontaneous order" or any of the eighties maxims have nothing to talk about. Those key theories are looking everyday more like excuses and rationalizations for politicians and service managers who want to be paid for doing absolutely nothing. It didnt get picked up by the journos or the politicians at the time and I get a feeling it wasnt simply because they wanted to avoid a difficult or complex topic on the breakfast news but also that there was a lack of understanding, insight or even interest.
These trends are reflected more broadly too, in fact I think they are a major factor in the spread of conspiracy theory, why pay attention to mundane reality when instead you can buy into an imaginative tale of how you are the hero at the heart of a sensational struggle and everything is in the balance?
I'm not talking about the traditional cliches about media bias, which I think are often a case of "This source does not share MY bias, therefore it IS biased" which is seriously flawed thinking, the press that tells you precisely what you want to hear, confirms your suspicions is absolutely awful too.
The issue I'm talking about is more to do with the media as marketing, reporting as commercial PR, infotainment, click bait and to a much less extent a general dumbing down and reductionism in messages. I know a lot of these trends tie into the death of print media and the need to desperately chase a bottom dollar.
However, there are stories, obvious ones which suggest themselves which I definitely do not see being reported or pursued.
Like I would really like to see reports of events being "super spreader" occasions followed up with exacting information about how many people got sick, also mass gatherings, whether they are raves, house parties, protests, I would like to see the follow up to them too and see how it has objectively effected the spread of disease. Not simply that they have breached regulations, that much is obvious and not news, not journalism, not especially reportage I would say.
And if these things are not influencing spread then some good explanation as to why, not with a view to undermining policy or encouraging even more cavalier attitudes than there already appear to be among the public but just increasing the amount of accurate information there is for anyone who happens to be taking these matters seriously.
In the UK the media, broadly speaking, have been as supportive as they possibly can be of failing individuals, departments, government for some time now. In a bizarre kind of "nannying" of anyone in public office. And its really weird to see when they have consciously attempted to change tact, it becomes a case of simply being rude to individuals being interviewed, giving them a hard time or playing a kind of game in which they may "catch them out". Its terrible to watch as any skilled public official, or anyone with any kind of talent in discussion could deal with it, most of the people they wheel out cant but in any case its a pantomine. Instead of a sort of haranguing they never ask any decent questions worth asking.
Like I've seen some pretty good points made by individuals from the medical profession about the lack of planned responses to crisis, not simply COVID but more generally, for some time in the NHS, which is both a public funding and revenue issue but also about the calibre and quality of management, political oversight and a number of factors.
Factors which older beliefs about the "magic" of market forces or "spontaneous order" or any of the eighties maxims have nothing to talk about. Those key theories are looking everyday more like excuses and rationalizations for politicians and service managers who want to be paid for doing absolutely nothing. It didnt get picked up by the journos or the politicians at the time and I get a feeling it wasnt simply because they wanted to avoid a difficult or complex topic on the breakfast news but also that there was a lack of understanding, insight or even interest.
These trends are reflected more broadly too, in fact I think they are a major factor in the spread of conspiracy theory, why pay attention to mundane reality when instead you can buy into an imaginative tale of how you are the hero at the heart of a sensational struggle and everything is in the balance?
