.......or Chucaro's option: "me no english" :D
Printable View
.......or Chucaro's option: "me no english" :D
Like the All Black captains after a game, Game of two halves, put pressure on... boys responded well... really proud etc etc All Credit etc etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0PCsVIDwgM]Post match interview with Fitzpatrick - 1992 return match - YouTube[/ame]
Phillip did not disagree with the report, he was implying things which did not occur. Which suggests either an extreme bias or an altered state of consiousness...Quote:
Originally Posted by nugge t
Of course the ABC and SBS must seem biased - as it presents factual and balanced information, compared to the sensationalist politically and financially motivated propaganda of other media outlets (the few that still remain).
What next?
Commercial news will soon need to be approved for release by Roy Hill Iron Ore Co.???
As I read isuzurover's post, he made no reference to anyone's intelligence. But he did find it odd (strange and twisted to use his colourful language) that the particular interview with the BOM’s Alasdair Hainsworth could be interpreted as biased. There was no comment about disagreeing with an ABC report.Quote:
Originally Posted by nugge t
hahahhahahaha....just playing with ya guys.....not hard to get the same old gang jumping through the same old hoops in defence of the same old sacred cows.....have a good one guys...:D
The word that annoys me the most is "inundated" every time the rain falls, it used to flood but now its "inundated" although we need the rain now....
You forgot to add 10 degrees from all the hot air coming out of parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by isuzurover
And subtract 10 degrees from the cold hearted sods that work there!
:p
This article says it well, Bob
Viewpoint
Gripped by disaster, are we fuelling an industry of exploitation?
- by: Karen Brooks
- From: The Courier-Mail
- January 09, 2013 12:00AM
http://resources3.news.com.au/images...-reporters.jpg
No matter where disaster strikes, television news reporters gather, but how many fly-in/fly-out journalists will stick with the story after the immediate threat passes? Picture: Thinkstock Source: Supplied
MAINSTREAM TV reporting of catastrophes is turning reporting of human struggles, the mighty elements, loss and consequences, into nothing more than disaster porn.
Nowhere has this been so evident than with recent "live" coverage of Tasmania's bushfires.
Late last week and into this one, the southeast of Tasmania burned, forcing thousands of residents and holidaymakers to evacuate as homes and livelihoods, never mind pets and livestock, perished.
Operating under the guise of "human interest" and "keeping the public informed", reporters from various TV networks descended on the Apple Isle and into the afflicted communities and evacuation centres, determined to be the first with a scoop.
Crossing in situ during any disaster has become de rigueur, as if live reporting endows the story with more gravitas. The last thing a community in calamity needs is extra people, strangers, who aren't there to help as much as they are to exploit.
Finding bewildered and displaced people in affected areas, reporters posed and repeated invasive and stupid questions ("Are you heartbroken?"), set ridiculous expectations ("When do you expect to start rebuilding?"), and tried to make those interviewed emote to the point of breakdown.
Tears become justification for keeping cameras rolling, to capture grief for all to share - for what purpose exactly?
An emotional soundtrack accompanied some reports; a soap opera instead of news.
Sadly, for all the earnest reporting and faux displays of empathy, the media interest only lasts until the next emergency.
The commercial imperative that drives the networks means as soon as the next "big story" breaks, the TV crews will move on.
Until then, however, the current disaster is recycled ad nauseam across news, current affairs and morning shows. New angles are found for our consumption - and consume them we do, like fast food.
Why is suffering newsworthy? Focusing on loss, fear and trauma, this type of reporting, our expectations about broadcasts and even our reactions, are normalised.
Some victims willingly talk to the reporters, believing they're doing the community a service by explaining what happened, their grief, gratitude for the help they received and that they survived.
But where will the crews be when rebuilding starts?
Answer: Doing what's required of them. Filming and filing from elsewhere.
Where will the interested audiences be? Answer: Glued to the next catastrophe, oohing, aahing and feeling grateful it's not us burning, drowning, being blown to smithereens.
No doubt, the media serves a very important role in terms of the social understanding of all kinds of events: triumphs, tragedies and everything in between.
In this, print media especially has the time to display a degree of sensitivity and appropriateness.
But, somewhere along the way, particularly in TV current affairs, the need to inform has blurred with the desire to entertain.
Hence, we have disaster porn, a media sideshow from which we're unable to look away; where we, the audience, become the worst kind of voyeurs, fascinated by the spectacle of others' despair and trauma.
The ethics of this kind of "on the ground" and "in your face" reporting, and the insidious nature of the interviews, need to be balanced against respect for human dignity and an awareness that those in crisis must be allowed time and space to process what's occurred without a camera or microphone in their face.
We need to ensure that, as both audiences and human beings, we don't overlook the people at the heart of these stories.
Long after the cameras stop rolling, their suffering and attempts to rebuild continue, as does their hope for the future.
Excellent article Bob, although I am not sure that by describing it as "disaster porn" this journalist is being any less sensationalist than those she is criticising.
Whilst agreeing in general with her, she may have forgotten the excellent work those same networks do subsequently hosting the inevitable disaster appeals.