Quote:
|
Originally Posted by towny
That is simply not true! You say you work in the media; well, so do I. I was a journalist for three years and now I work in the coroporate comms office of a hotel company. So I know a thing or two about how news editors like to report major events, and how spin doctors try to get their messages in print.
I am also sitting next to a great big pile of today's papers, so I can say for a fact that the Times, the Independent and the Telegraph (the only ones I've had time to flip through today) all carry, as part of their extensive reporting on yesterday's events, a panel explaining what F4J is campaigning about. The Telegraph is the most complete in this respect. I have no doubt that many of the other national papers have similar reports. When major events unfold, newspapers like to give them extensive coverage. They block out two or more pages and then start wondering how to fill them. It is inevitable, therefore, that some analysis of why an event has happened will end up on the page. I just don't recognise your analysis of how newspapers function in this regard.
On a separate note -who is castigating you? Have you had any PMs or a red rep? I don't see any severe tongue lashing going on in this discussion, just an animated and interesting exchange of views.  |
If you work in corporate comms then you will know that the stunt is vehicle for getting the message across. But I really don't think the message is getting across - and by that I'm referring to broadcast media rather than print. I haven't seen any papers today, but would hazzard a guess that the broadsheets are putting in their editorial what most of the intelligent readers knew already, but I take your point. They will fill the story out, but I still don't think that by doing so will enlighten that many people, and the net result (after you've taken away the people who think it was a stupid act and the group should not be taken seriously) will be less support.
BTW, I wasn't referring to you.
I also saw the background piece on F4J - that's a good bit of editorial - but it's still not the headline, which is what I said before. It's buried way down as a side link to a very low priority story. And that's the great thing about news isn't it? Today's front page, tomorrow's fish and chips wrapper. When it comes to tomrrow can you honestly say that there will be more support for F4J?