Change in the Media landscape

[lazarus]

I'm hoping the unraveling News International (Rupert Murdoch's media empire) will be a change for the better. Am I naive?

[Dr. Shane]

Am I naive?

Probably biased would be a better word. Basically you are happy that someone who disagrees with you is going out of business. Since you think your worldview is right, and theirs is wrong, you think the world will be better off without them. Of course that logic is completely based on the assumption that you are right. If you leave room for the possibility that your worldview is wrong, than there is much less reason to celebrate the silence of someone who disagrees with you.

[Bravus]

Have you been following the News of the World hacking scandal in the UK, Shane? This is not just a matter of differing opinions, it is a matter of criminal, unethical, corrupt 'journalism'. With the collusion of politicians. If journalists and editors get 'scared straight' that's a good outcome.

[Ellen]

Is it better to squeal on real items or make up sensational "news"? I heard a woman who wrote for the "Enquirer" tabloid say she was given a head line and told to make up a story to go with it. Inferring that was the way they did journalism all the time.

The News of the World seemed to be reporting truth they found out in unethical ways. Even the bribing seemed to bring out actual facts; (just surmising from the reports.)

You would think the paper could survive and only the criminal reporters be denied, but the whole thing must have been pretty corrupt.

[Bravus]

It came right from the top, as is coming out: editors knew and sanctioned criminal acts.

[lazarus]

Originally Posted By: lazarus

Am I naive?

Probably biased would be a better word. Basically you are happy that someone who disagrees with you is going out of business. Since you think your worldview is right, and theirs is wrong, you think the world will be better off without them. Of course that logic is completely based on the assumption that you are right. If you leave room for the possibility that your worldview is wrong, than there is much less reason to celebrate the silence of someone who disagrees with you.

Wow, you just came out swinging didn't you. Go ahead, knock yourself out!

[skyblue888]

hehehe

[lazarus]

It came right from the top, as is coming out: editors knew and sanctioned criminal acts.

The corruption seems to encompass at the very least the press, politicians of both parties and the police. There is also some suggestion that these shady practices are not confined to News International but other media groups. This is going to get bigger.

[Dr. Shane]

Have you been following the News of the World hacking scandal in the UK, Shane?

Yes, but that was not the question asked. Steve was asking if he was being naive. I was answering his question.

[Dr. Shane]

Wow, you just came out swinging didn't you. Go ahead, knock yourself out!

This is not about me. This is about you. You asked us to give our opinion about if you are being naive. I don't think the issue is so much about being naive as it is about being biased.

Reporters have long had a reputation of digging through trash cans to get stories. It is not surprising that in the modern era, they are hacking emails and tapping phones. Is it good that some are being caught? Sure it is. It is good when cocaine dealers and corrupt bankers get caught too. It is always good when the bad guys get caught. Do I think some bad reporters getting caught will change the way news is reported? Of course not. There are plenty of other bad reporters ready to fill in the gap.

If the conservative news sources that you disagree with so much are taken down in scandal, other conservative news sources will simply come about. These news organizations exist because there is a consumer demand for their services. As long as the demand remains, another organization will come about to service the demand. We shouldn't expect any change at all in how news is reported.

[ClubV12]

Shane, I think this will have an impact on how the news is reported. I am "glad" to see this paper being shut down. Regardless of what may rise in it's place. I think THIS paper's "cup of iniguity" was full and the Lord took action.

This was off the chart in the what they were doing. Above and well beyond even the worst maggot newspapers out there. Society has a right to be disgusted and happy to see this action taken.

Even in an evil world, we must attempt to "hold the line" on moral issues, no matter how difficult that may appear to be.

[Dr. Shane]

I am not British so I am not well versed on the News of the World newspaper. From what I understand, it was a tabloid which is basically gossip like our National Enquirer here in the US. I don't value those types of media myself at all. However in this thread Lazarus started out by making reference to "(Rupert Murdoch's media empire)" and in another thread Lazarus went as far as to say, "My guess is that, Fox news executives, The Wall Street Journal journalists and all the NI outlets are scrambling to shred documents, delete emails, sever contacts, bury the 'bodies'." I have not seen any stories that would call for us to speculate that what a British tabloid was doing was also being done by the more reputable news organizations in the US. Of course, I wouldn't put it past them but the nature of the business is different. Tabloids are all about gossip so they would be more prone to those types of crimes but it certainly isn't beyond any news organization.

Quote:

I think this will have an impact on how the news is reported.

You think tabloids like the National Enquirer and The Sun will change the way they report their "news"? I doubt that.

As long as there exists a demand for that type of sensational gossip, I think we will find a news source reporting it.

[ClubV12]

In this case I think it will. It's not just another "National Enquirer" rag, it's the TOP selling news paper in the UK.

This would be more equivelant to the Post or the Times getting caught with hand in the cookie jar.

[Dr. Shane]

Does it not sell sensational gossip? I thought it was the top seller because British folks are more into gossip than us. Was that a serious, hard-news newspaper like the Washington Post or New York Times?

Regardless what it was, the principle is still the same. Some company will arise to feed the demand. If it is a hard-news newspaper, another will take its place. If it is a gossip tabloid, another will take its place. I can't see anything changing. In an open market, a demand by the market will always be met some how.

[Dr. Shane]

News of the World

Quote:

it was transformed into a tabloid in 1984. News of the World was the Sunday sister paper of The Sun. The newspaper concentrated on celebrity-based scoops and populist news. Its fondness for sex scandals gained it the nicknames "News of the Screws" and "Screws of the World". It had a reputation for exposing national or local celebrities as drug users, sex freaks or criminals, setting up insiders and journalists in disguise to provide either video or photographic evidence, and phone hacking in ongoing police investigations.

That doesn't sound like the New York Times of Washington Post to me.

[ClubV12]

I see your point and it IS well taken, some other paper will take it's place.

But we still need to root out and take action against moral issues when we can. We KNOW a national Sunday is a done deal, it is coming, but we are still obligated to do what we can to stop it. Doing that sends a message, that we won't go beyond a certain line in the sand and it brings attention to the issue for people to make a choice.

It's influence is similiar to our big name papers here is the point there.

[phkrause]

I'm hoping the unraveling News International (Rupert Murdoch's media empire) will be a change for the better. Am I naive?

Not at all Lazarus. But I don't believe it will change anything unfortunetly.

I also heard that FoxNews is involved some how! Not sure if that's right or not??

[ClubV12]

Murdoch owns Fox news. But I doubt their tapping the phones of some 4,000 citizens, including murder victims and war heros!

[lazarus]

Yes, but that was not the question asked. Steve was asking if he was being naive. I was answering his question.

What led you to the place where you feel its OK to use the name "Steve"?

[lazarus]

This is not about me. This is about you.

Dude, you made it about you with the tone of your opening remarks. What's up?

[Bravus]

Apparently, even when right-wing media organisations straight up break the law, that's OK because they're right-wing.

[lazarus]

Does it not sell sensational gossip? I thought it was the top seller because British folks are more into gossip than us. Was that a serious, hard-news newspaper like the Washington Post or New York Times?

LOL. Shane have you ever traveled outside the North/South America?

[Dr. Shane]

Dude, you made it about you with the tone of your opening remarks. What's up?

I think you are reading between the lines too much. All I have stated about you is that you are biased. I don't think you would deny that nor do I think that is some kind of insult. You were questioning whether or not you were naive. I would rather be bias (which all of are to one degree or another) than naive. So no derogatory tone was intended. Simply trying to have a healthy exchange of ideas. I respect you and love to see you posting here at C/A.

Big bear hug.

[Dr. Shane]

LOL. Shane have you ever traveled outside the North/South America?

No I have not. The company I work for does work in Africa. We have weekly management meetings where I am included on what is going on there and business decisions made in regard to that. Of course, Al Jazeera English is one of my favorite news channels. So I don't think I am sheltered but God has yet to call me into the Eastern Hemisphere.

[Dr. Shane]

Apparently, even when right-wing media organisations straight up break the law, that's OK because they're right-wing.

Can you show me who justified any criminal action? How has anyone in this thread justified breaking the law? And are you saying the News of the World aka "News of the Screws" was a conservative organization?