I am not one of those modern journalists who operate from press releases and private sector driven hand-outs. I also believe that the best news is the stuff that people DON'T want printed. Most else is little more than public relations.
However, it is worth noting that when I entered journalism 40 years ago, there was very little in the way of comment, except in newspaper editorials (leader columns) and by named writers.
The news was the news was the news. Most of it was printed in the past tense. There were few pro-active articles steering or anticipating the likely outcome of events, which is the norm these days, especially in political reporting.
However, the passing of time has seen the editorialising of news by national publications particularly, not least headlines which express merely an opinion, and therefore completely colour the story.
But there is also greater use of comment. I believe (well, I would, wouldn't I?) that the best printed journalism is now comment led. The 'news' is available from so many different sources.
Therefore I defind the right of journalists to either interpret events or to publish opinions that are elsewhere in the public domain about certain events.
Today has brought squeaking from the Culture Company aboutcertain facts and figures in my Liverpool Echo column concerning the Robyn Archer 2008 artistic director fiasco, which are disputed by them as distorted or incorrent.
This, however, despite the council line that they are prevented from actually disclosing information because of legal restraint, and also depsite the fact that the figures I have used where from perfectly credible (and elected|) sources.
Heaven forbid we should ever be prevented from airing such issues (which can always be replied to).
Journalism is not about waiting for press releases. That needs to be clearly understood by those churning out material which often amounts to nothing more than personal propoganda.
There is an alternative: People could quite simply answer Press questions in a straightforward manner.Then there would be no room for misunderstanding.
« Previous | Home | Next »
