The beauty of journalism

Hamberg

Hamberg

Those who know, they know
Contributor
What a load of useless hot air. Storm in a tea-cup.

Are we BOTHERED? (And this is NOT directed at you Hamberg :))

Many many years ago I briefly managed a Newsagents and one day the national dailies reported a plane crash. The casualty figures were all over the front pages. No two were alike! From that day on I believe most journalists must be related to Charles Dickens and make it up as they go along - obviously spicing it up at the same time to sensationalise it and increase sales and thereby profit for their publications. Don't trust 'em at all I'm afraid.

Bah Humbug.

(Grumpy Old Cynic!)

:cheers:
 
You're right Axle. I just can't believe that people are that interested in making a story (and especially about somebody that's hardly controversial) like this.

Edit: It's great Nico has put this statement out and I can see why he has as he appears to be such a genuinely nice person that really cares about his reputation. For others constantly in the press, they probably can't be bothered given all that is written about them or they would be forever releasing statements to this effect. It's just wrong that journalists are allowed to do this and those impacted are the ones that have to go to lengths (sometimes financially and emotionally challenging) to correct their good name.

Mr Alonso may be a very good example of this - he has previously declined to comment further (Island holiday for instance) and insinuated that he knows the truth and that's what matters. I for one after seeing it in black and white now will be much more sceptical than I used to be about what I read (I thought ESPN were reputable!) and I was pretty guarded before.
 
Hamberg said:
It's great Nico has put this statement out as he appears to be such a genuinely nice person that really cares about his reputation. For others (Mr Alonso perhaps??) they probably can't be bothered and have a think what you like attitude. It's just wrong.
Click to expand

Is that really necessary? Particularly after all the angst of today.
 
Sorry, Hamberg, not having a pot shot - just felt that naming another driver in a slightly negative way (however well intentioned) may be deemed to be a bit over the mark.
 
No that's fine jen, don't apologise. When I read it back I realised how it sounded, I was really confused to start with! I was actually trying to defend Alonso's right to ignore what's written - how ironic on this thread of all places that I should get it so wrong!
:embarrassed:
 
Anything in the newspapers is twisted to be shown in a different way than possibly intented so that said newspaper can sell more copies or attract more attention.
 
MCLS said:
Anything in the newspapers is twisted to be shown in a different way than possibly intented so that said newspaper can sell more copies or attract more attention.
Click to expand

Oh I know that, but I had hoped it was more spin that axle had alluded to - to edit for nasty vicious headlines that can only serve to upset every single person linked in the article shouldn't be allowed. I thought ESPN was a sport channel not The Daily Sport.
 
It was interesting to hear Nicki Lauda in the pre-race build up on Sunday refuting the comments that had been credited to him concerning Hamilton's driving and the reaction of 'fans' to what they thought he had said. I don't think it's helping the evolution of our species, really.
 
I've just seen the latest BBC Headline of Hamilton targeting a 1-2 at Silverstone, I thought "has he lost his mind?" No he hasn't it's just yet more (un)clever pulling of words out of context.
 
I believe we all do our own editing - that's why we have different opinions. We read into it want WE want to.

A newspaper, on the other hand, creates a regular following by simply telling it's readers what they want to hear. Which is why some people buy the Sun and others the Times.
 
AXLE TRAMP said:
I believe we all do our own editing - that's why we have different opinions. We read into it want WE want to.

A newspaper, on the other hand, creates a regular following by simply telling it's readers what they want to hear. Which is why some people buy the Sun and others the Times.
Click to expand

I always thought the Sun and the Times say the same to its readers, the difference, some can afford £1 and some £0.30 and therefore some can understand full English and some an abbreviated version.
 
Back
Top Bottom