A stormy time for the news

The impact of Hurricane Sandy has thrown up more than just chaos in America. While houses are being ripped up, Wall Street shut down, power outages and lives lost something far more important seems to have gripped the minds of a rather substantial amount of news agencies and bloggers, the cause of the storm.

While it may come as a surprise to many people it would appear that Hurricane Sandy is not, as may have been foolishly  thought, a natural meteorological event. Instead it is in fact anything from the wrath of a vengeful god, a callous campaign stunt from President Obama or alien intervention.

For the most part we are all aware of the rants which some conspiracy theorists come out and have become inculcated against. As such it is reasonably safe to assume that the views of Pastor John McTernan, who argued that the storm was a punishment from a divine being for America allowing homosexual marriage, or that the storm itself was foretold by little green men from a galaxy far far away (and not as suspected at Disney studios) would be dismissed as ever so much rot.

When the conspiracy ideas start to form in relation to President Obama or the American elections the sheer weight of people jumping on the bandwagon has to make people start to wonder about the sanity of those people allowed to report on the news.

Articles accusing Obama of orchestrating the storm via a genuine scientific experiment the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP) caught the attention of people shortly before certain rather right wing republican news organisations started to accuse the President’s administration of using the storm to hide bad news, cover up employment figures, postpone the election or in one case create some form of dictatorship.

When the religious and political right start to use a natural event to help them spout ideas of a vengeful god, intolerance and bigotry, hatred and just plain stupidity, then the news and those who write and broadcast it must step back and question where it has all gone wrong.

Hurricane Sandy is obviously a huge story. As with any big story the challenge is finding a new angle, something to capture people’s attention and beat out the competition. When news agencies resort to publicising the rants of the mentally ill and delusional though they degrade the integrity of journalism and diminish the true impact of the hurricane on the lives of innocent people. Conspiracy theories can be fun to read but at the end of the day they are not news and must never be treated as though they are or else the real news will be lost in the maelstrom.

 

The eternal question, how could it happen?

As shocking stories go the continually evolving news about Jimmy Saville has to beat most. I find myself drawn to having to comment on the case, particularly as it is escalating beyond anything anyone could ever have imagined.

Normally I would try and step aside from any article which deals with anything other than cold hard facts. It is one thing to espouse my opinions but at least when I am writing about my usual fair I know that people will normally have the sense to ensure that the facts are correct. When dealing with a topic such as Jimmy Saville, however, it will always be hard to establish what all the facts are though. His death has robbed people of a final reckoning. Too many questions left unanswered, too many lives wrecked and no conclusive ending to the whole debacle.

With what is coming to the fore at the moment it would appear from the media that Saville was one of, if not the, most prolific sex offenders to have ever lived. Unfortunately we will never know the true extent of what he did. We will have no trial, other than that by public opinion and media, to get the facts out in the open.

United Kingdom Justice Secretary Chris Grayling warned of the risks of such a trial by media when saying on the British Sunday morning current affairs programme the Andrew Marr Show that while what had happened was "horrendous" it was important not to "rush into a judge-led inquiry," arguing it would take "much longer to get to the truth".

It is perhaps for this reason that those who can still face the music are being hunted so diligently by the authorities. When police sources announced that "officers working on Operation Yewtree have arrested a man in his 60s in connection with the investigation...The individual falls under the strand of the investigation we have termed 'Savile and others',” it wasn’t much of a surprise that it was Paul Gadd, Gary Glitter for those who really care.

Saville escaped justice by shear dint of dying, in his wake he left shattered lives, not just those who suffered at his hands but those who put their faith in him, those who worked for his charities, those who relied upon his good name to help them continue. He duped the world, not just those who were subjected to his depravations. The world now wants blood and they will get it in the shape of those who helped him and even more from those who shared with him. Arresting Gadd/Glitter is just the start but at least it is a start.

One of the argument’s being spouted as to how the affair was covered up for so long has been that they were different times, different ethics, certain things weren’t talked about. That may have been true four decades ago when Saville started but it does not excuse it, nor does it explain how it continued for so long into an era when it wasn’t tolerated anymore. Those in the “others” section should start feeling a bit uneasy as Yewtree continues, the public will start to bay for blood and the courts will start to deliver justice where it can be delivered. So long as these things happen then as hard as it may be the media must deliver only the truth and only the facts.

 

Back to basics, finding the truth

When I started writing this blog the idea was that it would give a different analysis of the top news stories. The principle of good journalism should, must, be to provide people with all of the facts so that they are able to have the tools they need to form their own judgements.

While journalists can have their own opinions it is a crucial part of the job that they must not allow those opinions to colour a story. The reality of the situation is somewhat different, as reality tends tp be when put up against an ideal. The very best journalism should engage the reader, it should make people want to learn more and read further. Without putting something extra into an article, without putting something of ourselves into it then why should the reader engage with it?

The key is that when we do write with passion we do not allow our judgement to be clouded. The facts must still be reported fairly and accurately, the angles must all be covered, the information must be gained ethically and the article itself must be in the publics’ best interest.

Blogging, and the hypocrisy of my nest statement is far from lost on me, has opened up an arena whereby anyone with an opinion can publish it as news, it has taken away the professionalism of journalism and removed the objectivity. That was why I decided that this blog would provide a different approach. It would be an objective approach to news analysis. In time it may even be a source of unbiased and fair reporting.

After a couple of blogs, however, I have realised that it is something else, it is a place where the top stories of the day can be simplified, explained and treated to an analytical approach which provides the reader with a way in which they can find their own angles to the story. If it achieves anything it should be that it encourages people to look at articles in a different way and conduct their own reading to ensure that they are being given all of the facts.

A perfect example of this today has been the news released by the Office of National Statistics. Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osbourne will be slapping  themselves on the back for being so clever in solving the country’s economic woes. After his “good news” slip up yesterday Mr Cameron must be feeling rather pleased that the good news has eclipsed the slip, something which there was distinct risk that it may not do.

Despite the potential for jubiliation, however, the story must also be tempered by reality. Once again the story has different angles from which it can be approached. Some could say that it is superb news and shows that the coalitions policies are having the desired effect, some could argue that it is inflated due to the Olympics, others that it is unreliable as data from the eurozone is giving the pound a false sense of security. 

Even George Osbourne has signalled a note of warning: "There is still a long way to go, but these figures show we are on the right track. Yesterday's weak data from the eurozone were a reminder that we still face many economic challenges at home and abroad."

The outlook could be many things, the key is looking at all the data, from different sources, and coming up with your own conclusion.

 

Good news, bad news for PM

It has really been a good news, bad news, what was he thinking news day for Prime Minister David Cameron.

While his stance on maintaining the ban on prisoners being allowed to vote will have gained a certain mixed reception it must be his jumping the gun on hinting that there may be an improvement in the gross domestic product which will be his moment of the day to try and escape from.

The seemingly innocuous statement that there may be “good news” ahead could potentially lead the PM into very bad news situation. It is a testament to the need for carefully coordinated communications when dealing with politicians, and the press. Many people would not think of the phrase as an explosive revelation breaching regulations on the release of sensitive information.

At the end of the day, however many people will be wondering whether or not the slip means anything other than that the Office of National Statistics, which is due to release the actual figures tomorrow (Thursday 25^th October 2012), will kick up a fuss over losing its thunder. In and of itself it may mean very little, taken in a wider context though it becomes a serious matter. The markets rise and fall on the slightest whiff of information, rumour and suggestion can have as much of an impact on the price of stocks and bonds as cold hard facts, something which the ONS is keen to maintain its control over.

What it also demonstrates is that once again politicians, no matter how senior, do not appear able to maintain a confidence on something which has national importance. It would not be seen as incontrovertible that Mr Cameron made the ‘slip’ as a means by which to get ahead of the ONS releasing the figures to the press and thereby ensure that his government, which up until now has been taking something of a battering on the economy, could bask in a bit of the glory before it was eclipsed by everything else.

Instead what he has successfully done, however, is removed any good news from what could have been an incredibly positive story and turned it into another government fiasco article.

There is always the chance that Mr Cameron’s ”good news” has nothing to do with the soon to be released figures. If having received the figures at 9:30am and being one of the few politicians allowed to see them he did mean something else though then he must surely be accused once again of mistiming his comments. What appears to be the core to this case is that either the Prime Minister knowingly let slip confidential information regarding the financial markets, albeit in an oblique way, or he made an ill timed and misjudged comment about an unrelated matter which will surely demonstrate that he is unable to think about the bigger picture of what impact his statements may have. Either way it does not bode well for the Prime Minister’s communications ability for the future.

EU-broke or just bust

There is something to be said for the recent contretemps which has caused friction between Britain and the rest of the European Union. Then again perhaps the standoff between David Cameron and Angela Merkel over EU spending is not such an unforeseen event.

Cameron has already demonstrated that he is prepared to take a firm stance when it comes to Europe. Likewise Ms Merkel has postured plenty of times before in the belief that she who shouts loudest lasts longest.

The current friction between the British and German leaders is, perhaps one of the more predictable that have been faced over recent years. With so much uncertainty surrounding the euro, and the lack of fiscal control being demonstrated by other EU countries, it is not surprising that Cameron has promised to use the United Kingdom’s veto any type of deal that does not impose a total freeze on spending.

What has struck the writers of this blog, as well no doubt as it has the policy makers at Number 10, is that if Ms Merkel does attempt to cancel next month’s EU budget summit then she will be demonstrating exactly why the Prime Minister, on one of the rare occasions, is right to stick to his guns.

The question must be asked as to what Ms Merkel hopes to gain from cancelling the summit, other than to stoke her not inconsiderable ego, that Mr Cameron could not achieve by implementing his veto. At worst she would leave the EU without any clear direction to focus its energies, at best cancelling the summit could ensure that Cameron’s position is strengthened by demonstrating that he has the power, albeit by proxy, to influence the entire bloc just by threatening a course of action.

What the whole debacle has clearly demonstrated is that the EU is clearly being run by school yard rules writ large. Whereas Ms Merkel could have used the summit as a place whereby leaders could debate their opinions and hope to turn people to their sides through reasoned debate she has decided to take the stance that if people won’t play by her rules then she will take the ball away and ruin the game for everyone.

Whether Cameron actually would use his veto is a matter which can only be judged after the fact. He has already demonstrated that he is not afraid of alienating EU leaders, and UK politicians, over his stance to the bloc. All Merkel has managed is to push him into a corner whereby his only option is to use the veto no matter when or where the summit is hosted. Rather than creating an atmosphere of discussion she has generated a toxic scenario where no-one will achieve anything. If she had taken the wiser path then a reasoned debate could have taken place instead of posturing and strong arming. This unfortunately has become the norm within the EU and its governance. It is also perhaps one of the most crucial reasons why any economic decisions involving the bloc must  be treated with scepticism by the individual states. Ms Merkel has argued to cancel the summit if she does not get her own way, Cameron has argued to veto any decision which is not in line with his feelings, with two out of the 27 acting in such a way how can the EU ever be trusted to succeed on solving an economic debacle on the scale that it is supposed to be tackling?

The press' whipping boy

If the recent resignation of Conservative Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell has demonstrated anything it is that the power of the press is stronger than it ever was. Unfortunately in this case it was also shown that the power which it wields can easily be subverted to suit the purposes of interest groups and lobbyists.

Andrew Mitchell’s resignation was not forced because of anything he may, or may not have said, to police officers. It was forced through a determined effort by the police federation, the press and MP’s, both opposition and from his own party. At most his comments, if they were said, merited a disciplining by the Prime Minister not resignation.

The whole situation has weakened not just the coalition government but David Cameron’s own position as Prime Minister. By exposing the Prime Minister’s key weakness, bowing to the pressure of the press, he has irredeemably opened himself and his government up to attacks from every interest group, union and protest movement who may disagree with a policy.

What has also not been stated clearly enough during this whole sorry saga in British governance is that the issue has never really been about his use of the word pleb. As insults go it is fairly tame, particularly when Mr Mitchell freely admits and apologises for using the F word in anger at the officers in question. The whole issue is one of class, or the perception thereof. 

Perhaps this is why it has grabbed the attention of the press so much. The poor downtrodden masses being once again walked over by the arrogant elite was always guaranteed to get some coverage.

The sad fact is that the coalition government has continually demonstrated far more newsworthy levels of ineptitude, as has the opposition in the interests of objectivity. Until the papers picked up on the word pleb it wouldn’t have crossed the mind of many for any other reason than being an anachronistic word with little to no relevance anymore.  Reporting the hard facts, however, and attempting to find relevant news stories is far harder, and seemingly therefore less important, than playing on outmoded concepts of class.

George Osborne’s mistimed train ticket fiasco has if anything highlighted just how class orientated the press is becoming in regards to the articles which they are running. The fact that a government minister failed to purchase the correct ticket should if anything demonstrate that he is just like the vast majority of the so called plebs who the papers are sticking up for, rather than being a elitist who feels that he is above the rules of the little people.

We are no longer living in an era where the class which you are born into determines the rest of your life. We live in world where anyone can make anything of themselves which they wish, provided that they are willing to put the work in to do it. The class system in the UK is not about holding people back, it is about giving them a reason to fight and strive to improve their lot in life.