Thursday, February 08, 2007

Ratings Whores

Talk about Newsnight

'Just watched on PC. A bumper crop.

Motorists - What struck me most was how superficially this issue was treated, and how what was shared could shape the way it was viewed, even down to the choice of debaters with JP's 'moderation'. One inarticulate 'pro'-motorist 'representative' and one smug, though equally inarticulate 'anti'. Were they chosen just to make JP look good? Why just two? Why from such extremes (as if I'd didn't ratings-well know)? This was not a worthwhile discussion or debate on an emotive and highly topical issue. I have more interesting things to sift through in the few posts above. Nothing to do with breaking the law of not. It's whether the law is being applied fairly or accurately. Where all the money goes, if not to improving transport to offer non-driving options. Urban-centric vs. country chasms of perception, especially between policy-makers, activists and a lot of the chattering classes in Islington, Westminster and Fleet Street. The complete collapse of trust in officialdom.

Peerages - I should do more, but I could really care less. Again, a couple of extreme bookends - one duffer and one shrill harpie - to make things spicy but not exactly informative.

Balls - Golly, what you can read when the lines have such great pauses to look between: http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/01/better-devil.html
At least the car-less lady had the grace to stumble on what constituted reasonable protest. Speaking of one law for one set...

Text Mess - So the school is going to cut the dodgy pages out and all is tickedy-boo? That's it? I rather hope a follow-up is planned.

Iraq widow exclusive - http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,,2007881,00.html
Why is the BBC so obsessed with 'exclusives'. It matters little to me whether they are or not, so long as they are covered accurately, objectively, with integrity and in a timey manner. Maybe it explains the 'twofers' we get for 'debates': Ratings. And that is more about boosting individuals' media careers than anything else.

Shame.'

No comments: