Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18821 posts, RR: 54 Posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1041 times:
Or something different?
I ask because Prince Charles was overheard muttering 'bloody people' (about journalists) and he disclosed how he dislikes a particular journalist. It's been on the news here in the UK most of the day. So, the second question is: do you think Prince Charles should have said what he did?
I personally think I would have said something much worse than 'bloody people' about journalists
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13333 posts, RR: 64 Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1020 times:
What I don´t like, but which seems to have been becoming standard is journalists, who don´t see their job in giving impartial reports about events, but consider themselves as "opinion makers" by deliberately biasing their reports, this method is used by both, the left and the poliical right, so nobody is innocent.
I just wish that the old standards of reporting would come back. I have no problem with a biased editorial or comment (after all, this is it´s purpose), but it should be clearly seperated from the reports section.
Then reporters should have some knowledge what they are talking about, so that the end result won´t just be pure rubbish (as e.g. often seen in articles about aviation).
Then I hate journalists deliberately going for the "human touch". Stay with the facts.
Everything else is just an attempt to use emotions to boost editions.
It goes hand in hand with the short attention span of modern people. They will stop watching unless there are flashy graphics, and they need talking heads to tell them what to think. We need to go back to people just telling us what the news is, straight and to the point, in a vary objective manner. Of course, that is what they have always claimed to have done, but we all know better than that.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13333 posts, RR: 64 Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1013 times:
I noticed a few years ago that the Spiegel weekly magazine (similar to Newsweek or Time) took me less and less time to read. I´ve been reading it since about 30 years (when I nicked it from my father, who bought it every week). Up to a few years ago I could keep myself busy for about two days going deeply through it. Now there are lots of colourfull pictures and the volume of text has been largely reduced, and it takes me about two hours to finish it.
Although not exactly a news publication, I have seen the same thing happening with magazines such as Readers Digest. I'm only 18, and I've even noticed a decline in the quality, especially when I look at some of the older issues. It used to be filled with pages of interesting stories and articles, but now it is filled with senseless joke pages and other filler like that. I feel as though everything is being dumbed down for us.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13333 posts, RR: 64 Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 997 times:
Same about German TV (I´m not in a position to criticise other country´s TV due to lack of knowledge).
Until about 15 years ago (about up to the time the first commerciakl TV stations appeared), the then public TV stations had at least the goal to educate and often did it with interesting documentaries. Now all you see are the same soap operas on all channels, private and public. I rarely watch TV anymore, because it just bores me.