Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Anybody else catch the ITV news at 6.30pm and their leader 'FA secretary bonks boss?'

    Did you notice that they actually mocked the idea that this was 'news' by framing it with titles and music as if it were a soap opera?

    If this isn't news (and it isn't) why should a news programme cover it? How far have our media standards fallen that even news programmes mock the idea that that they should focus on important issues?



    Assume I rely on ITV to give me my info, what should I know that they didn't see fit to share?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We need a war. There just aren't enough news in the world right now to fill half an hour.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheVlad)
    We need a war. There just aren't enough news in the world right now to fill half an hour.
    There's a hint - aren't we at war?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No. It ended last September.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Its pathetic the way some media channels over-hype some nobody stories especially this crappy case. These kinda stories represent a low life side to society - certaintly call into question where some people's priorities ly.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    About 50 Turkish troops were killed by Kurdish separatists in the last few weeks, and not a single incident was reported in the main papers. You'd think that this kind of violence in a country bordering Iraq would make the news, but apparently not.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    About 50 Turkish troops were killed by Kurdish separatists in the last few weeks, and not a single incident was reported in the main papers. You'd think that this kind of violence in a country bordering Iraq would make the news, but apparently not.
    Affairs relating to the FA make better headlines (pun intended :p: )
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    About 50 Turkish troops were killed by Kurdish separatists in the last few weeks, and not a single incident was reported in the main papers. You'd think that this kind of violence in a country bordering Iraq would make the news, but apparently not.
    Yes you would. The natural nationalist urge eh, seems universal. More please.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Yes you would. The natural nationalist urge eh, seems universal. More please.
    It seems that the only way to keep track of the news is to either read papers from every region of the world or read specialist journals. Most people aren't able to dedicate enough time to that though, and the major papers don't seem to be concerned with anything happening outside of their backyard unless they need to blame some of their national problems on someone else.

    For some other recent news, Russia is close to agreeing to withdrawing troops from Georgia (after stalling for 5 years), Nagorno-Karabakh took one step closer to independence by holding relatively free and fair elections (it's nominally part of Azerbaijan for those who don't know), and the deputy prime minister of Turkmenistan has been "disappeared" after displeasing the country's president. And this is just from my area of expertise (Central Asia and the Caucasus). Chances are Uighurs have been killed by the Chinese military, Western Saharans by the Moroccan military, Chechens by the Russian military, and Tamils by the Sri Lankan military. But apparently those stories aren't important enough to be reported. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    Diversionary news is when a guy bombs an aspirin factory in Algeria to divert the news from getting a blow job from a white house intern.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Douglas)
    Diversionary news is when a guy bombs an aspirin factory in Algeria to divert the news from getting a blow job from a white house intern.
    In Sudan. :cool:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    It seems that the only way to keep track of the news is to either read papers from every region of the world or read specialist journals. Most people aren't able to dedicate enough time to that though, and the major papers don't seem to be concerned with anything happening outside of their backyard unless they need to blame some of their national problems on someone else.

    For some other recent news, Russia is close to agreeing to withdrawing troops from Georgia (after stalling for 5 years), Nagorno-Karabakh took one step closer to independence by holding relatively free and fair elections (it's nominally part of Azerbaijan for those who don't know), and the deputy prime minister of Turkmenistan has been "disappeared" after displeasing the country's president. And this is just from my area of expertise (Central Asia and the Caucasus). Chances are Uighurs have been killed by the Chinese military, Western Saharans by the Moroccan military, Chechens by the Russian military, and Tamils by the Sri Lankan military. But apparently those stories aren't important enough to be reported. :rolleyes:
    Pretty much all inter-ethnic strife. If we were told this every night we might begin to wonder about the sense of needlessly creating an ethnic war zone in our own happy land - that your point Bizzy?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Pretty much all inter-ethnic strife. If we were told this every night we might begin to wonder about the sense of needlessly creating an ethnic war zone in our own happy land - that your point Bizzy?
    A vast majority of ethnic conflicts are sparked off by political oppression or lack of economic opportunity (usually a combination of the two). People don't turn to extreme ethno-nationalism if they're allowed to voice their opinion and have enough money to support themselves and their families. The ethnic minorities must also make up a substantial part of a country's population and be located in a one part of the country (which they would presumably want to make their own). As long as those conditions can be avoided, there should be no problem in the West.

    As for my point, it's that the world is a very dynamic place. Political realities change rapidly, and if we're unaware of those realities, we're not able to make accurate decisions, which can have a devastating effect on our interests.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    A vast majority of ethnic conflicts are sparked off by political oppression or lack of economic opportunity (usually a combination of the two).
    Examples in context?
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    People don't turn to extreme ethno-nationalism if they're allowed to voice their opinion and have enough money to support themselves and their families.
    TV and 'manufactured consent'/democracy will keep the natives quiet?
    The ethnic minorities must also make up a substantial part of a country's population and be located in a one part of the country (which they would presumably want to make their own). As long as those conditions can be avoided, there should be no problem in the West.
    No problem for whom? Are you advising ethnic dispersal/cleansing? Are you recommending that immigrants be distributed so as not to be able to maintain their traditional culture?

    I'll give my viewpoint on your three offerings.

    Ethnic conflicts flare up in every kind of circumstance. Ethnicity creates conflict. Rule.

    Extreme is relative. The palliatives you mentioned are no barrier to recruitment to exclusive nationalist parties in Europe and Israel.

    Minorities are geographically focused. Easier to target for those who would. Also they tend to make ethnic demands for sovereignty to some degree. Eternal problems...multiculturalism.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    In Sudan. :cool:
    Right assertion, Wrong country??
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaf1986)
    Nice of you to let the rest of us know that you are insane and have no idea what you are talking about.
    Mutual ethnic/national/religious misunderstanding Zaf, different senses of humour. One of the trials we'll overcome if we all become non-British British.

    Is she 8?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Anybody else catch the ITV news at 6.30pm and their leader 'FA secretary bonks boss?'

    Did you notice that they actually mocked the idea that this was 'news' by framing it with titles and music as if it were a soap opera?

    If this isn't news (and it isn't) why should a news programme cover it?
    Because it doesn't cost much but/and will keep people watching. It's also rather funny. This sort of thing- along with staged celebrity events- indeed, the very conceot of celebrities- is what TV can do easily and cheaply, so they do it. Because it's on TV it's news so the'papers cover it [again it costs very little]. The two together concentrate on this sort of thing. It doesn't require a conspiracy or anything- just human nature and economics.
    How far have our media standards fallen that even news programmes mock the idea that that they should focus on important issues?
    We don't know what will turn out to be important issues in the future and they probably aren't the sort of thing you can show on television news- too complicated and too difficult to explain. Television, Marshall MLuhan said, would turn the world into a global village. He forgot to say that it would be full of global village idiots. The very nature of TV means that it is emotive, unnuanced, and uninformative. The very idea that television news could be informative is a sign of TV's destruction of our ability to think and reason.

    To take the example above; how much would it cost to send a TV camera crew to Turkey to see what was going on? Would the turkish army or the kurds allow them free access? What's the likelihood that they'd be held to ransom and expensive equipment destroyed? Where would they find someone who looks good on TV who knows enough to explain the background and current circumstances- even if you could do that on TV at all? Even if they could do all that it'd take weeks to get a few minutes worth of info, about a bunch of foreigners that no-one has heard of and shots that might make people sick. Stick to what's cheap and cheerful and safe, with ready acces to a coffee shop and you can get home in time for dinner too.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Mutual ethnic/national/religious misunderstanding Zaf, different senses of humour. One of the trials we'll overcome if we all become non-British British.

    Is she 8?
    I'm English, British and non religious. Whats the misunderstanding?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaf1986)
    I'm English, British and non religious. Whats the misunderstanding?
    Whatever else you are you're not English. Is she 9?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Whatever else you are you're not English. Is she 9?
    Being born in England's capital, London qualifies me being English. And proudly so.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,267

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.