Volume 21, Number 2, 2010 |
||
ContentsEditorial - Good for a laugh 3Not finally... Subjective views on matters journalistic 5 Chris Doherty, Simon Jenkins, Andrew Osborn Paul Kenyon - First casualty of cutbacks: the truth 13 World Cup James Mossop - Hysteria? Blame it on the rotters 19 Bryan Rostron - South Africa's bi-polar seesaw 25 Trish Evans - We are all in PR now 31 David Leigh - Secret spookery still under wraps 37 Brian McNair - A movie tradition of love and hate 43 Suzanne Franks - Why Bob Geldof has got it wrong 51 Ellie Levenson - Courting comment for survival 57 Michael Foot - On journalists 63 Victor Davis - Couldn’t make it up? Wanna bet? 71 BOOK REVIEWSEdward Stourton on John Simpson 79Ivor Gaber on Lance Price 81 Justin Webb on John Maxwell Hamilton 83 Bill Hagerty on Francis Williams 85 Quotes of the Quarter 1 – 42 Quotes of the Quarter 2 – 87 Ten years ago The way we were 88 
|
Editorial – Good for a laughFor most of the media, this was a post-modern General Election, in which the representations of events overshadowed the events themselves. The central reason, of course, was the emphasis on the televised so-called debates between the leaders of the three main parties. It seems strange to use the word “debate”, which normally implies the exposition of some reasoned argument based on evidence, when what we are in fact discussing is an opportunity for three men to repeat statements written and over-rehearsed by their advisers and consisting chiefly of the repetition of platitudes. Only one memorable phrase emerged, and Gordon Brown coined it: “I agree with Nick.”
World CupHysteria? Blame it on the rottersStand by for over-the-top reporting, hyperbole and speculation to fuel England’s obsession with football, writes veteran sports journalist James Mossop, now reporting on “the beautiful game” for the Mail on Sunday. He looks back to a time when it was easy for football reporters to mingle with the players and there was little controversy about WAGs. Then there’s the eternal problem of hooligan fans...
South Africa's bi-polar seesawFIFA’s early promise of a financial bonanza for South Africa as host of the World Cup now looks empty. Bryan Rostron, one of the most perceptive of journalists living in the country, contends that “the naive euphoria of the last few years has worn off and is being replaced by a growing sense of ‘performance anxiety’.” A relatively poor country is trying to compete with rich countries to show that it can put on a ritzy spectacular. Rostron concludes: “FIFA, under the guise of sport, threatens to become the new colonialism.”
Blog: We are all in PR nowTrish Evans, a journalist-turned-PR-strategist explains why public relations and journalism “are two sides of the same coin.” In an article that challenges the accepted wisdom that journalists are the good guys while PRs represent dark forces, she lists the ex-editors who have become major public relations players and thus helped to legitimise PR as a necessary and useful public service. A useful public service? Yes, says Evans, its agenda is overt but the media’s unspoken agenda is more worrying.
First casualty of cutbacks: the truthRash and inaccurate reporting about asylum seekers has a lengthy history, but matters don’t appear to be getting better. Paul Kenyon, a Panorama reporter, details the failures of newspapers to cover immigration fairly and honestly. “The wilful misreporting of the issue among some tabloid newspapers, appears to have worsened”, he writes. It’s a strong allegation, but a fair one, he argues. … journalists “seem to have a different set of standards when it comes to migration stories.”
Secret spookery still under wrapsIt’s time for MI5’s official historian to come clean about the intelligence agency’s former practice of vetting BBC journalists. David Leigh, investigations editor for The Guardian and the professor of reporting at City University London, urges Christopher Andrew to put the record straight when the paperback edition of his book In Defence of the Realm is published later this month. The careers of many journalists were damaged because of the secret vetting process.
A movie tradition of love and hateIn an edited extract from his book Journalists in Film, Brian McNair, professor of journalism and communication at Strathclyde University, points out that cinema has played a key role in how journalists are perceived. He writes: “The movies perpetuate stereotypes of journalists which are stupid and crass (and why not? Some journalism is certainly possessed of those qualities), but they also contain sophisticated, often radical critiques of how the media work, and of how they relate to political and financial power.”
Why Bob Geldof has got it wrongBob Geldof exploded after a BBC documentary claimed that 95% of the aid sent to Ethiopia never reached the starving victims. He countered that not one penny of the aid sent by Band Aid and Live Aid had gone astray. Suzanne Franks, an academic who has conducted research on the Ethiopian famine, explain why the true story is more complex and “nuanced”.
Courting comment for survivalAre columnists affected by the comments underneath their articles on newspaper websites? Do they write with one eye on attracting as many comments as possible? Do they keep the comments in mind when writing again about the same topic? Do they pretend never to read them? Do they get upset by them? Ellie Levenson, who has had plenty of online readers commenting on her work, receives some interesting answers to her inquiries.
On journalistsIn a commemoration of Michael Foot, who died in March, the magazine runs three articles he wrote about other giants of the newspaper trade: cartoonist Vicky, “a twentieth-century Don Quixote”; writer James Cameron, “the prince of modern journalists”; and owner Lord Beaverbrook, though it’s really about one of his amours, Lily Ernst, a beautiful and fragile Hungarian countess who was neither Hungarian nor a countess. Read on...
Couldn’t make it up? Wanna bet?Victor Davis, one-time foreign correspondent and celebrity interviewer for the Daily Express and Mail on Sunday, draws the finest of lines between making up quotes for the benefit of the interviewee and the wholesale fabrication of interviews. And he tells of the only time he did concoct a story. It involved a Russian bear cub, Nikita Kruschev and Princess Anne. Unbelievable? Not as unbelievable as you might think.
|
|