Showing posts with label markets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label markets. Show all posts

Thursday, 25 October 2012

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.

 

Wednesday, 24 October 2012

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 25th 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.