Dr Gonzo Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 The point all you folks seem to be missing is that so long as Johnson Press is kept going by state handouts it'll never report, or comment, on Government activity objectively.Funny isn't it the way it's good for business to profit on the back of handouts yet those poor unfortunates forced to rely on state aid, for whatever reason of personal circumstances, are pilloried by the hypocrites at IOM Newstraitors and on this forum. Who are the poor unfortunates pilloried by Isle of Man Newspapers? The point YOU'RE missing is that in a competitive environment, there'd be more reason to be nice to the government. At the moment, the government can't threaten to take its advertising elsewhere if IOMN is nasty to it. I've seen cases in the UK where a paper is critical of an organisation and its taken its adverts elsewhere. Doesn't happen here. On a more general note, it's a shame that the people who post news on the forum and then whine about how poor the local media is don't just ring the media first. Not even journalists can read minds or see into the future - they rely on contacts and tip-offs. I suppose it's easier to post about what you heard today at work, safe in the knowledge you can appear smug and not have to back up your facts in the face of potential legal action which - as has become apparent - happens whether or not you're right/wrong/lying/truthful. You still have to pay the lawyers even if you know something's true. As for investigative journalism, if anybody can name a newspaper the size of IOMN which employs investigative journalists, let me know because I'd love to see how they perform that financial and staffing miracle. The argument about whether or not the government SHOULD spend £2m a year on advertising through the papers is an issue I'd hate to comment on and it's fair game for taxpayers to question government spending. But arguments about journalism and the media on these forums is cloaked by ignorance of the subject. Hands up if you're ever been a journalist... *edited to remove references to a legal topic best left undiscussed* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Who are the poor unfortunates pilloried by Isle of Man Newspapers? The poor suckers who pay the exhorbitant price for the Examiner and Independent? Oh, sorry... that was meant to be a rhetorical question, wasn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 As for investigative journalism, if anybody can name a newspaper the size of IOMN which employs investigative journalists, let me know because I'd love to see how they perform that financial and staffing miracle. However, there are views that the lack of investigative journalism in regional papers is often down to laziness. Most journos seem content with sitting ontheir backsides and using email, the mobile phone, or [searching] the internet for misinformation. "Gone are the local contacts built up over years — the personal touch, knowing the councillors, police contacts and community gossips. And many papers don't even bother covering courts, councils or planning meetings. Have we lost the nose for a good story? A lack of investigative journalism can do nothing but aid the erosion of freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. A lack of quality journalism, I'm sure, is down to profiteering driven by short-term shareholder interests, and I can see the staffing concerns that come from that. All this means is that local communities lose out and that papers fail to perform their historical role of watchdog and thus let down their local communities by selling them out. The failure to scruitinise politicians and business through investigative journalism can also help foster corruption as the phrase "who'd ever know" becomes more common in politics and business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumble Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Albert, Dr G makes the point - fairly I think - that the IOM media can't justify the expense of investigative journalists. They have to knock out so many column inches or minutes a day, every day. Investigative reporters can go to ground for months at a time and STILL come up with nothing but a lawsuit from an aggrieved (and often powerful) target. I've known a few journos over the years and the LAST thing you could call any of them is 'lazy' - they work under tremendous pressures from above and impossible deadlines - rehashed press releases (actually a perfectly legitimate and valid source of information) are only a tiny part of the job. The media in the IOM is relatively unfettered and reports objectively and impartially. More so than in the UK certainly - where the Government is far less concerned about applying pressure to keep its foul deeds quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gonzo Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 "Gone are the local contacts built up over years — the personal touch, knowing the councillors, police contacts and community gossips. And many papers don't even bother covering courts, councils or planning meetings. Have we lost the nose for a good story? A lack of investigative journalism can do nothing but aid the erosion of freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. A lack of quality journalism, I'm sure, is down to profiteering driven by short-term shareholder interests Firstly, I'd disagree with the Press Gazette over contacts. A journalist can't function without them... interesting about the internet & misinformation point however, given the number of times people say things here that they can't ring a newspaper with. Posting "I think this government initiative/property deal is dodgy" and then accusing local journalists of laziness for not investigating it is simple ignorance unless you know for a fact no reporter has even tried to follow it up. Most of the time, without somebody to speak to and only an anonymous internet post to go on, a story dies at the first hurdle: Is this information reliable? Does the person know what they're talking about or is it just an internet lunatic? As for a lack of investigative journalism ending freedom of speech and freedom of the press, well, local newspapers have never done investigative journalism. Campaigns, yes, but paying one reporter to stay away and produce nothing for weeks, no. Perhaps the difference here is best described as confrontational journalism. And I don't know anybody in any of the Island's media outlets that are afraid to stand up to the government, given the information necessary to state a case and defend it. Put frankly, the best way you can help improve the standard of journalism in the Island is to ring a reporter, have a chat to them, figure out whether you can trust them and supply information required to blow the whistle on whatever you know. A journalist's job doesn't involve defending freedom of speech: that's for politicians, lawyers and activists. A journalist will tell the story of how they defend it. It's a misconception to think journalists should know everything, instantly, and communicate that to the public. A journalist only knows what they discover, and as with any discovery, there has to be a starting point. That involves a tip that can be followed up. The Isle of Man is the worst place I've ever worked to find people who either say "I can't tell you", "I won't tell you", or "I can't give you any evidence but here's some gossip". If you think reporters are scared of the government, I'd flip that right back and say people here are so scared of authority they very rarely manage to stand up for themselves. Hence the popularity of "anonymous" posting over internet forums. If the fear lies anywhere, it lies with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 From a personal point of view I have, in the past, given the Manx Taxi Federation's views on a subject - explaining it very carefully and backing it up with facts - only to find it swamped by the 'official' view when the story appears in the local press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gonzo Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 From a personal point of view I have, in the past, given the Manx Taxi Federation's views on a subject - explaining it very carefully and backing it up with facts - only to find it swamped by the 'official' view when the story appears in the local press. MHKs do have more of an opportunity to point their points, but if you get along with the reporter, there's always a follow-up story. As an old editor once said, there's no new story, only a new angle. Part of the problem is that officials have years of experience dealing with the press, whereas most of the public hasn't. The trick is to build a relationship with a reporter. In my peronal experience, there are few things more satisfying than having a good contact who can give you chapter and verse on a subject which you can then use to expose lies, misinformation or simple stupidity on the part of the powers that be. At the same time, I have to accept there are times when those powers are in the right and the person trying to take them on is simply following their own agenda. I don't argue Manx media outlets are perfect, merely that people here seem to expect a lot more than in the UK in return for putting a lot less into them. I'd certainly accept some reporters are better than others, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copycat Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Can we all just be aware:- there are no journalists in the local media - they are all mere reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 arguments about journalism and the media on these forums is cloaked by ignorance of the subject. Hands up if you're ever been a journalist... You make some valid points in your posts but you often rather overplay the point that unless you're a journalist you have only a limited right to comment on journalism and the quality of the work of journalists. I'm not a qualified carpenter either, but I can still tell if what they produce isn't up to scratch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Can we all just be aware:- there are no journalists in the local media - they are all mere reporters. Please explain what you think is the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 You also have to remember that a lot of people are old, infirm and don't get out of the house much, so notices in 'free' newspapers are probably the best solution and will remain so for many years to come. You underestimate the power of necessity. Take something old people love (having a good skeet) and encase it within a new technology (the internet) and count the weeks before they all become net junkies Everybody wins: we keep old people mentally active: learning new skills and gaining a new source of interaction with the world; and we cut government advertising costs, and the number of trees that are pulped in vain. I think you are deluding yourself. There are still a number of major hurdles to overcome for getting people on the internet. These include class, race, cost, confidence, and people who just aren't happy with the relative complexity of PCs etc. Many people simply haven't been trained to use computers, as computing courses were only adopted in schools (Douglas High School for example) in the very late seventies, and the chances are that anyone under 47 years of age on the island did not have an opportunity to study computing at school - and even then only a minority took up the option in the early years as computing was overly complicated then. The eighties were all about Commodore 64s, Amigas, BBC Micros etc. which were holy different computers compared to PC's of today - so the reality is that only people under 30/35 were taught anything about computers at school that has any relevance to computers in use today. Even Ballakermeen were using Apple Macs at least till the late 1990's when businesses used Dell/IBM etc. type PCs and predominately used MS Office. Besides, if it were that straightforward the government could just have easily stopped newspaper advertising already, and e.g. displayed all of its notices in Post Offices for many years now - but that hasn't happended either. Just because a target is set to get 'everyone access', doesn't automatically mean that all people will have the desire or ability to take up that opportunity. I'm not convinced by your arguments: (1) the points about race and class are just plain condescending; (2) the cost issue can be overcome by subsidy; and (3) the confidence issue can be overcome by exposure. There are many things that I have not had training to do, yet am still able to accomplish. As you point out, standard home computing tasks can now be carried out with much less technical savvy than would have been required even five years ago. My mum is unlikely ever to understand how to program a video recorder, but she can still use a computer to the extent required to send me an email or find stuff out using Google. We cannot afford to create a digital divide. Change will always be frightening for some, but we cannot stifle it because of that: either economically or socially. It is entirely within the government's power to stop newspaper advertising, and it would be a small signal that the Isle of Man is a progressive country if it did so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 The argument about whether or not the government SHOULD spend £2m a year on advertising through the papers is an issue I'd hate to comment on and it's fair game for taxpayers to question government spending. Although I agree with your posts in general, look again at the spend, the £2 million is over three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 I'm not convinced by your arguments: (1) the points about race and class are just plain condescending; (2) the cost issue can be overcome by subsidy; and (3) the confidence issue can be overcome by exposure. We cannot afford to create a digital divide. Sorry - but you are talking out of your arse. There is a major digital divide. One-third - 16 million - of individuals in the UK have not been online and they don't understand how to do it, and there is a direct correlation between social class and Internet use. At one end of the spectrum, 80% of professional adults have used the Internet. At the other end of the spectrum, only 30% of unskilled adults have done so. 90% of those aged 16-24 have used the Internet whilst only 10% of those aged above 65 have done so. The Asian community appears to make slightly greater than average use of the Internet, whereas the Afro-Caribbean community seems to make significantly less use than average. Many pensioners, for example, struggle to survive as it is - never mind find £500 for a computer and the associated monthly costs to get themselves on the Internet. I suggest you start here or here You really need to research this much further Perhaps you could go on a Google training course - because it's so ****ing obvious there is a digital divide that Google produces 3.72 million pages for the phrase 'digital divide' (now I am being condescending). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 My mum doesn't use the Internet. But she reads the paper. Why should she 'train'? Why should anyone just because someone's got the hump about IOM Newspapers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Sorry - but you are talking out of your arse. There is a major digital divide. Apologies for my inaccurate use of language - please substitute the phrase 'create a digital divide' with 'further widen the digital divide', but I stand by the rest of it. My point is similar to yours, except I'm presenting a solution to make sure everyone has the tools to make the best of the digital future. Your attitude seems to be 'group x, group y and group z are underrepresented among those who use the internet therefore let's forget about trying to make wider use of the internet'. There are many benefits to delivering essential services online, provided you ensure everyone has the means by which to access them - both in terms of infrastructure and education. Also, I would suggest that statistics about internet usage in the UK as a whole are not necessarily representative of the Isle of Man. Being a relatively small and affluent country, we should in theory be more agile in getting everyone online than a behemoth like the UK. Let's not live up to the stereotype that we're always 20 years behind them... although my haircut would disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.