h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Is there such a thing as objectivity, anyway?

B

"First off, there IS no "liberal media". It is a myth and a lie, perpetrated by the conservatives in this country. Clear Channel Communications (the people who bring you Rush Limbaugh, in syndication) control an ungodly amount (43% ?) of some local radio and TV programming, are very conservative. If you want to know the bias, follow the money. "

Er, there is. Same as there's a conservative media (as you just said). In Britain some of the media (Channel 4 News being a prime example) has an obvious liberal bias. What *is* true is that the liberal-leaning media is nowhere near as partisan as some of the more rabid conservatives make out (the BBC, in particular, has been singled-out over the war in Iraq for accusations of partisan reporting, which is absolute garbage). You said "follow the money" but the uncomfortable fact is that, in the West, many liberals are as filthy rich and powerful as conservatives (John Kerry, for example, is reputed to be worth more than George W Bush).

"Is there such a thing as objectivity, anyway?"

It's hard to be objective without having your own "angle" on something, and unfortunately everyone has a way of looking at the world (whether they realise it or not). I think the only way to tackle a subject objectively is either report on a single issue which you have no real interest in (eg, have an American baseball fan report on whether Celtic or Rangers are the better Glasgow football team ) or take several reporters with varying persepectives and have a team of non-partisan editors create a documentary about it.

"Compare this with our very own BBC who are being burned at the stake for over-asiduously questioning our government on the legality of the war in the Gulf. And I *loathe* the BBC..."

The BBC as a whole didn't "over-asiduously question" the government over the "15-minute" WMD claim, it was a handful of journalists. They were hardly "burned at the stake" either - a few people were rapped over the knuckles and one BBC high-up resigned to make a point.

Why do you loathe the BBC? Just try and imagine British television without any BBC for a second...


...ugh, horrible wasn't it? It'll take weeks to remove that image of Vernon Kaye Presents Hitlers Secret Weapons From Hell from your mind.

You have one of the finest broadcasters in the world in the BBC, and it costs you less than a poorer-quality private broadcaster would charge you. Cherish it.

I think he was saying there was no liberal media in the US.

Liberalism in the US seems very much to follow the classical liberal path, which is not what we'd consider liberal in Europe circa about 1920.

Personally I quite like the BBC, but I can certainly think of a few ways in which they could improve. An obvious one being that I'd like them to talk about government spending in terms of percentages please. x billion pounds spending increase could well be the result of inflation as far as I know. And also would they please cover all those wars that keep breaking out in Africa? I would also like to know at least the name of any world leader that isn't Tony Blair, Kofi Annan, George Bush, Colonel Kadaffi or Jacques Chirac.

I suppose the BBC and New Labour are similar in that they only pay token service to their mandate. If Tony wants to be a great reformer then the task at hand is surely the increasing wealth gap. The House of Lords can wait.

Fair point about the florid language referring to the BBC, Zagreb. Good to see you again, btw. The phrase 'over-assiduously' was in mental quotes when I typed it, denoting sarcasm. It never occurred to me that anyone would read it straight. Dumb of me. Sorry.

My personal view is that Gilligan got it more right than the government, and thank goodness he did. The irony is that he was let down by the BBC's lack of internal checks when went out on a limb to support him, thereby in turn exposing themselves to extreme criticism by Hutton.

My gripe with the BBC boils down to the fact that not only does it not do what it says on the tin, but that - good though it may be - it is so much less good than it *could* be. You only have to look at the over-cautious decisions and hiding behind process which has taken place on this web-site to see that. Home-made pornography, anyone?

B

"My gripe with the BBC boils down to the fact that not only does it not do what it says on the tin, but that - good though it may be - it is so much less good than it *could* be. You only have to look at the over-cautious decisions and hiding behind process which has taken place on this web-site to see that. Home-made pornography, anyone?"

Don't forget that the BBC has specific *obligations* as part of it's charter, which lead it to take certain decisions on censorship. That's why it was ridiculous when people complained about being censored regarding the Iraq war. The Beeb is obliged not to publish anything that might put British troops at risk and, given that all sorts could be published on a site used by the public - not just in the UK but internationally - a blanket-ban on mentioning the war was the only sensible (and responsible) solution. It pissed me off too, but I didn't complain because I knew the reasons.

The Beeb certainly could be better. I'm personally unhappy with the tendency to commercial-mindedness regarding programming. The BBC has the advantage, being publically-funded, of taking risks and innovations commercial broadcasters are too timid to take. I understand why the BBC needs to be popular (otherwise it wouldn't have any right to be funded as it is) but the culture of risk-taking in TV and radio is an essential part of British TV and I hate to see the ugly and self-defeating culture of ratings-chasing which has transformed the once-great ITV into a parody of a television station.

Having finally waded through the backlog and wishing I had found this thread earlier, I'll say first that I've read everything that has crossed my path by Bradbury but only seen most of what MM has created as film but not read him. I'm going to see F 911 tonight. I put the gap between those btw to prevent the rather bizarre link it would create if I didn't.

As far as a Left or Right (capitals intended) Media goes, I think there are definitely media outlets with that agenda. As to organised media blocks, I don't think they exist although in North America the right leaning media tend to be more self-supporting as opposed to the left. I'm all in favour of conspiracy theories for entertainment but there isn't a Star Chamber somewhere that is steering the future towards a corporate whole.

As to the word *documentary*, here's one online (US) definition:
Main Entry: doc·u·men·ta·ry
Function: adjective
1 : being or consisting of documents : contained or certified in writing
2 : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art; broadly : FACTUAL, OBJECTIVE
Function: noun
1 : a documentary presentation (as a film or novel)

Factual and objective are the words that the definition for film seem to hinge on. Moore has himself proved that the information is factual enough, so perhaps his objectivity may be questioned. Since the film would be a sad attempt if it had no focus, that must surely be pardoned.

c?

disclaimer- the following is humorous and out of context, but meant.

ben- if you mean the flip page stick figure kind i've got tons of that, let me know if you find an interested market!!!

as for the BBC, i have always appreciated the different perspective on current events. it was the BBC on NPR who shone like a beacon in the fog of pre war Iraq. while the mainstream commercial media (liberal conservitave or whathaveyou) were showing awe inspiring banners and computer generated jets flying through the tv, BBC radio remained committed to facts and details, however nerve wracking they may have been. Keep up the good work, and don't let 'em bring you down.

(did i mention that i do so love the British accent?!)

i also feel that tv has damaged our ability to focus on just the talkie news. one needs not focus on the words when there are moving pictures to go along. i think that if more were spent on radio journalism, so much more news would be covered. I'd bet that for the cost of one mobile satellite tv anchorperson news vans with the ac and heated seats (buckets and chrome wheels optional), i could rig up no less than five all wheel drive radio reports car(s) with satellite, shortwave, and cellular. as well as being a hotspot, and having a digi-cam for the website it(they) would carry tools, an emergency kit, and a pa system(hi-fi), weather tracking equipment, and a foghorn. (disco ball and fuzzy dice sold seperatly). anyone know what a used carerra 4 goes for these days?

>> (did i mention that i do so love the British accent?!) <<

Umm, we don't have an accent. It's the rest of the world (including that part outside the M25) that has an accent!

A long time ago, back when the concept of a fourth channel was only jus being discovered back here in the good ole U of K, there was a programme that started life as a pilot doing just that - pirate television stations, lo-tech, operating out of VW camper vans (the MPVs of the time)...it was called Max Headroom, but it soon degenerated into a proto-MTV.

RF

Fascinating, i recall a teevee show (here in LEU) titled MMM-Max Headroom. i quite liked it, though i guess it didn't last too long. the main character, his name escapes me, wound up doing CCC-, i mean, SSS-Soda spots down the road!!@ i still drink way too much of the stuff... are these two one and the same?

ps does anyone have a link on what phenylketonurics are, why they contain phenylalanine, and why this would even matter to the general public?
*looking closely at beverage of choice*

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Phenylketonuria.html

It's a relatively common genetic disorder that used to lead to mental disorders in later life but which, if detected in infancy, can be completely controlled by a careful diet. Which is why soft drinks have the warning.

If you've ever had children, and wondered why they have to prick their heel and take a small blood sample, this is why. The Guthrie test was developed by Robert Guthrie, who then promoted the test until it became a standard neonatal test. It tests the blood levels of phenylalanine and indicates those children who carry the defective gene. Before this test was widespread, Phenylketonuria was responsible for as much as 1 percent of mental retardation in the US. Since the Guthrie test became widespread there are only a handful of cases per year.

>>>Kinetic Artist said: "In NZ the BBC tends to be highly regarded especially for it's journalism ethics. But I can see that some of the issues you raise might not be so obvious from here."
I find discussions of journalistic ethics interesting. Did you know that the idea of unbiased newspapers are a relatively new phenomenon?<<<


Actually I don't believe I said anything about bias .

When you talk to journalists over a certain age they will tell you how much journalism has changed in their time. In the past compared to now, there were much more ethics in journalism.

I agree that all reporting has bias. But there are ways of minimising bias and I think that the BBC has a solid reputation of doing this (although I guess they are not as good at it as they used to be).

The ethical part is that journalism can make certain choices to report what is happening in a way that is useful for the culture including attempting to present a balanced view.

I would say that most journalism now reports what gets ratings and makes money (and often there is some control of editorial process from outside) and that the idea of serving the public with information is much further down the list of priorities than it used to be.

kea.

Max Headroom - you're showing your age RF

thanx, webster'said about the same thing

>>>Mr Bradbury comments on his feelings about MM's use of his title, here. It is a 25 minute interview, and the question is asked 13 minutes in:

http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/index.shtml

SC<<<


I just had a listen SC

Bradbury says that he called Moore's office 6 months ago and his call was never returned. Then Moore called him recently 'shamfacedly' to apologise. Bradbury still wants Moore to stop using the title.

>> ..and found some of your more detailed critique earlier in the thread..<<

Oh god yes, the backlog!
Yes. It's kind of like history.
We all sort of jump in where we're born and are then doomed to spend our lives repeating a lot of good stuff and a lot of bad stuff until we figure out there must be a pattern here somewhere. By which time of course we're too old for anyone to take us seriously. BTW, as a general rule never take anything I say seriously, for that way lies madness.

But thanks.
One does hate to be un-mis-quoted.

~jwf~

>> Is there such a thing as objectivity, anyway? <<

Yes. And sadly, no.

~jwf~

>> ..know what a used carerra 4 goes for..<<

If you have to ask...

~jwf~