Anglonautes > English vocabulary / words > Media > Journalism / Newspapers

Los Angeles

AS long as we have had tabloids, we have had tabloid scandals.

Weighing in on the spate of scandals plaguing the British tabloid press, one commentator in 1936 acidly condemned what he called “the almost unbelievable indecency of the intrusion of the tabloid newspaper into people’s private lives.” Surely only the most degraded, low-minded people, he claimed, could produce this kind of news.

The article, from the magazine Fortnightly, was part of an ongoing debate in the interwar years about the intrusions of certain newspapers — the tabloids chief among them — into moments of “private grief.” The debate eventually made its way into the House of Commons, where major news agencies were encouraged to punish reporters who violated standards of decency in pursuit of a story. Surely, 75 years on, newspapers should have learned their lesson.

As recent events have shown, the tabloids have not lost their grip on indecent reporting, especially when it comes to breaches of privacy. Yet this is, I think, for the better.

Rupert Murdoch, in his grilling before a Parliamentary inquiry on Tuesday, said that he did not support an absolute right to privacy. He should be commended for that, even though many of the tactics used by journalists at his now-shuttered News of the World — hacking into the cellphone messages of crime victims, slain soldiers’ families, government officials and members of the royal family, and paying police sources for information — were beyond the pale of acceptable reporting.

One does not have to support illegal activity in order to defend intrusive reporting. Perhaps intrusiveness is “indecent,” but who’s to say that is reason enough to tighten restrictions or create new laws to prevent it (or create another flaccid governmental investigation into the activities of the press, as Prime Minister David Cameron has ordered)? The concepts of privacy and decency are so slippery (and class-bound) that they are not really the stuff of effective (or desirable) legislation when it comes to the press.

Leaving aside the illegal activities of News of the World, part of Mr. Murdoch’s News Corporation empire, the truth is that the vast majority of the tabloids carry out their news coverage above board. They are not an external source of infection, slowly contaminating the mainstream press, but rather an extension, and often an exaggeration, of the basic logic that animates all news reporting.

Every journalist, not only those working for the tabloids, is called upon to take risks in the pursuit of truth — usually within agreed-upon limits. And it is true that, to a remarkable degree, even the most egregious news outlets adhere to those limits. The tabloids may be sneakier and more persistent than more respected news sources, but this is a matter of degree, not kind.

The tabloids may test the limits of the ethically or legally acceptable, but they are often doing so in the service of a popular desire to see behind the facade of public life. They rely on the appeal (a very human one) of seeing elements of our societies that are often shamefully hidden away from view.

The tabloids are the newspapers most dutifully dedicated to ideas of exposure, and are willing to take risks in the service of that goal. It may be the case that much of what they expose is perhaps of little social import, but this is more a matter of taste, and the tabloids certainly never claimed to be tasteful. Certainly the fact that the American tabloids first broke important news stories, like the extramarital affair of John Edwards, the former United States senator and Democratic vice-presidential nominee, suggests that they are not merely peddling insignificant gossip.

Watching the painfully choreographed, and highly policed, red-carpet arrival of Prince William and Kate Middleton at a recent Los Angeles polo match reminded me why intrusive journalistic tactics are often called upon. They exist to break down the barriers of access that keep social elites at a remove from ordinary people. The tabloids, throughout history, on both sides of the Atlantic, have been predicated on chipping away at that division. They play a fundamental role in democratic cultures, especially in societies characterized by the pull between the demands of a mass society and the persistence of social and economic inequality.

Of course, not all of the hacking at the center of the News of the World scandal had to do with social elites. Some very ordinary, private people have been harmed merely because their lives had been touched by horrible crimes — perhaps most sensitively, the terrorist bombings of the London transit system on July 7, 2005.

Certainly laws protecting citizens from wiretapping and computer hacking should apply just as readily to those people, but that does not lead inevitably to the conclusion that any coverage of ordinary people, even if it might be considered invasive, should not be allowed, or even that it should be condemned as indecent.

Within limits, digging into private lives and exposing unsettling information is, and will most likely remain, a basic feature of popular culture in the West.

The work of the tabloids can be irritating, provocative, ethically questionable and even (as the scandal spectacularly shows) highly illegal, but when practiced according to existing laws, tabloid journalism can be an important player in modern culture, helping to mitigate some of the central tensions in democratic society. Journalism has always been marked by a battle to define the boundaries of acceptable investigative behavior. The tabloids — just as they ought — constantly test those boundaries.

Ryan Linkof,

a lecturer in history

at the University of Southern California,

wrote a doctoral dissertation on the origins

of tabloid photojournalism in Britain.

Why We Need the Tabloids, NYT, 19.7.2011,
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/
opinion/20linkof.html

tabloids > The Daily Mail

KEITH WATERHOUSE:

These three

at the old Unhappidrome

Last updated at 1:07 AM
on 25th September 2008
The Daily Mail

There used to be a radio variety show - so long ago that it was billed as a wireless variety programme - called Happidrome, featuring three resident comics whose signature tune went something like this:

'We three, from Happidrome, working for the BBC
- Ramsbottom, and Enoch, and me. . .'

Watching Labour's Unhappidrome show from Manchester this week, I was reminded of this irrepressible and now long-forgotten trio.

Ramsbottom, whose catchphrase was 'Is it you putting it around that I'm barmy?' is our doleful Chancellor Alistair Darling, with his plaintive message from weeks ago, that all is lost, but that we just wouldn't listen.

Enoch, younger and even more gormless, is the banana-clutching David Miliband, described in his publicity material as 'Foreign Secretary'. Enoch took the stage with not so much a polished turn as an audition piece. Thank you, Enoch, don't call us, we'll call you. And by way of a hint, drop the sickly Bob Monkhouse grin from the routine.

And so to the Big Me of the act - the Me-Me-Me. Most Prime Ministers, of course, occupy this role. They are self-obsessional like all star turns. With the world in flames and a recession battering the door in, Gordon's first words in Manchester on Tuesday were: 'I want to talk about who I am.' Practically his last words, an hour later, were: 'This job is not about me.'

In between, he dealt briefly with the economy - though not as memorably as his long-ago predecessor Ted Heath and his unacceptable face of capitalism; with the NHS (bringing in again the story of how his sight was saved); with sundry initiatives, most of them second-hand; and with a virtuous declaration that he wouldn't expose his family to disgraceful PR stunts - 'My children aren't props - they're people' - this minutes after his charming wife Sarah had wowed them in the aisles with her brief warm-up act.

If the day needed saving - and it did - it was Sarah's intervention that saved it. But overall, and not withstanding a couple of gags such as the two-birds-with-one-stone 'This is no time for a novice', I've heard better standing ovations. True, even the Party faithless got to their feet for Gordon, but then they could hardly do otherwise. But not even Gordon - especially even Gordon - could shake off a general air of despondency.

I had the feeling that a lot of delegates would rather have been somewhere else. I don't mean not in the conference - that's their annual treat - but in some other town. With which finding I would agree.

I have nothing against Manchester, except that it is on the wrong side of the Pennines, but it is just not the place for a political party conference. Give Manchester an annual meeting of some learned association, a beanfeast presentation for the laptop computer salesman of the year, or even a girlies' night out, and you couldn't beat it.

But the big party conferences have only lately decided to move inland. Previously they have traditionally chosen between the 'three B' seaside resorts - Blackpool, Brighton and Bournemouth. True, run- down Blackpool has lost favour with the politicians - but then the politicians have lost favour with Blackpool, for refusing them the much-needed super casino for which it was the obvious candidate.

Such carps aside, however, the seaside, especially in an Indian summer, is the natural home for a political conference. Despite Gordon's insistence that 'there's a lot to be serious about', the promenade and the pier are not venues where one can be serious for long. An outbreak of hilarity is just what Serious New Labour could have done with this week.

Next week it is the Tories' turn. Instead of one of the three Bs they have opted for a fourth - Birmingham.
Rather them than me.

Skills

When Ed Balls, instead of becoming simply the Education Secretary, was allowed to go about calling himself the Children, Schools and Families Secretary, it was obvious that no good would come of it.

Now here he is, ordering an inquiry into primary school lessons, and the team behind that review calling for pupils to study 'concepts and skills' including healthy eating, 'self esteem', sex and relationships, drugs and philosophy.

Anything to avoid drumming the five times table into the little angels.

If Balls were a proper Education Secretary he would be most concerned about children of seven lacking the 'concepts
and skills' required for them to write their own names.

As for healthy eating, I go by P.G. Wodehouse's dictum that an apple a day, if well aimed, keeps the doctor away.

KEITH WATERHOUSE:
These three at the old Unhappidrome, DMa, 25.9.2008,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1061314/KEITH-WATERHOUSE-
These-old-Unhappidrome.html

How can they do this

to our own soldiers?

17/03/04 - News section

by LYNDA LEE-POTTER, Daily Mail

This week is the first anniversary of the British invasion of Iraq.

It's a year since newspaper headlines and conversations were dominated by war.

Ordinary life seemed to be on hold and Army families were desperately worried about the safety of their loved ones.

However, they had an additional fear which the rest of us did not comprehend.

They knew that troops were terrifyingly ill-equipped as they went to fight an unknown enemy.

Soldiers didn't have enough flak jackets, ammunition or antidotes in case of chemical attacks. Their gas masks didn't fit and the filters intended to protect them from chemical warfare were out of date and useless.

The new report by MPs about lack of basic equipment is shaming, damning and devastating for the relatives of those who died. Their sons, husbands and fathers were trained professional soldiers who accepted that war means endangering their lives.

However, in spring 2003 they faced death not only from enemy attack but also because of shoddy equipment, parsimony and disastrous Government planning which we now realise was furtive, chaotic, rushed and dishonest.

In February last year, when the invasion was being planned and when he knew that there was a chronic shortage of equipment, Geoff Hoon, our Secretary of State for Defence, went skiing, saying that he hadn't had a break since Christmas.

His reaction whenever he's justifiably attacked is to bluster, fudge and pass the buck. There may now be calls for his resignation but I hope he's forced to stay and answer some vital questions.

Why did the Government send men and women to war with such haste? How could the Prime Minister put young lives in danger when foresight would have ensured that they were properly equipped?

Why did Geoff Hoon constantly lie about the shortage of armoury and protective clothing?

Tank commander Sergeant Steven Roberts was the first British soldier to be killed in action. He died unnecessarily after he gave his body armour to a foot soldier because there weren't enough sets to go round.

When his widow Samantha determined to find out the truth, she was initially treated with disdain by Geoff Hoon. He patronisingly told her that she should behave like other bereaved families, go away and stop making a fuss.

When he thought, mistakenly, that she was a malleable widow who could be intimidated, he was brusque and aloof and made her feel a nuisance.

Today, she and the parents, wives and children of dead soldiers are still unable to rebuild their lives because their grief is poisoned with anger, mistrust and bitterness.

The Prime Minister deliberately created an atmosphere of fear to pursue his own agenda.

How would he have felt if his 20-year-old son Euan had been sent to fight without a steel lining in his flak jacket?

How angry would he be now if his elder son had died because the Government lied and acted with undue haste for its own ends?

Shamingly, all too often the Prime Minister proves he's prepared to make decisions for other people's sons that he would not take for his own.

We know that Tony Blair ruthlessly used untruths to frighten those who were initially opposed to war.

However, if he'd told the House of Commons that our troops were being sent to Iraq without adequate clothing, without sufficient arms and with ineffective protection from chemical warfare, I suspect that the majority of MPs would not have supported him.

When it came to the crunch, Tony Blair showed little concern for our soldiers.

They were there to be exploited for his own ends.

Source : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html
?in_article_id=259498&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=

UK tabloids > The Sun

Mr Blair,

you have wasted six years

THE SUN SAYS

SUN READERS have run out of patience
with the Labour Government.

For six years the nation has heard an unending stream of pledges . . .

But today the goodwill of our readers, and the rest of the country, is finally draining away.

People are fed up with broken promises, fed up with spin, fed up with the blind arrogance of those in power.

Voters have given Labour the yellow card. And Tony Blair must raise his game or the red card will be next.

As the Labour Party conference gets down to business today, the Prime Minister must know he is fighting for his political life.

Again and again, Blair has pledged he is committed to vital reforms in public services. The well-being of this country depends upon these reforms.

The Sun, 29.9.2003,
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2003450514,00.html

UK tabloids > The Daily Mirror

Vicar

'terrorised by howling vampires'

Family bombarded with calls

TWO self-styled vampires, who boasted of drinking each other's blood, waged a campaign of terror against a vicar and his family, a jury heard yesterday.

Scott Bower, 26, and Benjamin Lewis were joined by Lewis's girlfriend Natalie Gibson, 19, who allegedly howled like a wolf from a graveyard close to the vicarage.

The group deny religiously aggravated harassment - the first time in Britain anyone has been charged with committing the crime against a Christian.

The prosecution claims they made scores of abusive telephone calls to the Rev Christopher Rowberry and his family, set off fireworks at the vicarage and left obscene pictures, including one of a disembowelled Christ, on a church notice board.

When police raided Lewis's home, they found pictures of him and Bower apparently drinking each other's blood. Lewis, 25, allegedly told officers: "I am a vampire and proud."

James Newton-Price, prosecuting, told the jury at Southampton crown court that several times dad of two Mr Rowberry challenged his tormentors to "come over here and howl, you cowards".

Mr Rowberry, vicar of the 9th century St Mary the Virgin in Eling, near Southampton, told the jury that he and his family were bombarded in the middle of the night by loud howling outside the vicarage and "strange" phone calls.

"The howling was very loud. We had double glazing and yet it would still wake my family during the night."

He said he could not take the phone off the hook because he wanted to be available to help a dying parishioner.

Mr Rowberry added that he found a picture under his car windscreen wiper showing the mutilated body of Jesus. He said he also found a set of branches, bound together to form a satanic five-pointed star, outside the front door of his church.

He said that one night fireworks were thrown into the garden, adding: "It was extremely frightening."

On another night, Mr Rowberry and his wife were outside their home when a car kept driving past.

He said: "I saw Scott Bower hanging out of the window. He had his head and shoulders out of the window and he was howling like a wolf as he went by."

Prosecutor Mr Newton-Price told the jury: "There is only so much of this treatment and harassment that any person can take.

"It appears to be motivated by some hostility on the part of the defendants against the Christian religion."

The trial continues

Daily Mirror, Geoffrey Lakeman, p. 15, 10.10.2003,
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm
objectid=13498499&method=full&siteid=50143

HOWARD

EMERGES FROM DARKNESS

AS IDS IS BURIED

"Michael Howard ghosts in

from the shadows to announce Tory leadership intentions

after MPs sank their fangs into Iain Duncan Smith... "

31 October 2003

Related > Anglonautes > Vocapedia

media, press, newspapers,

radio, podcasting, TV,

journalism, photojournalism,

journalist safety,

free speech, free press,

fake news,

misinformation,

disinformation,

cartoons, advertising