I added one to this:
"Well, you never know. As I’ve already written twice this is perhaps pushing it, but as this is where the debate started...
Out of 36 (at last count) posts, approx 30% (at.. etc, but a few were ‘replies’) were about moderated blogs.
As I may (or may not:) have been quoted, but certainly said, with mouth freshly washed out with soap, – publish-and-be-ignored on another of this site’s Forums - go_on_make_tv_history: “Where there is any form of shortlist*, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story.
*Substitute selection, moderation or any other similar word you fancy here.
I must say that being ‘moderated’ by an outside company adds a new kink to impartial, objective public service broadcasting. Yes, it says so in the guidelines what will happen.
But.. er.. do we get told whose doing it? Rupert Murdoch? Kim Jong Il? Or, horror of horrors, a Govt. spin doctor?!!!"
No comments:
Post a Comment