On 5-10-2015 20:46, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 05/10/2015 07:28 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 19:22:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>> You would think so going by all the reports we get.
>>
>> Well, the news is always unbiased.  It's not like they're trying to sell
>> anything, or that sensationalism doesn't get people to watch. ;)
>
> Curiously, a lot of people seem to think that news has to be factually
> accurate - by law or something. And that we have these "journalistic
> freedom" laws to protect the public by allowing news media to bring
> important matters to public attention.

It is very simple. With the exception of tabloids (which I use to wipe 
myself clean with) any serious, self-respecting newspaper makes sure to 
bring the news as factually accurate as possible. This has nothing to do 
with law at all but with professional integrity, which the public is 
sure to critically control on a daily basis. Journalistic freedom works 
the other way round as it offers the possibility for journalist to 
investigate things that some would prefer to stay hidden.

>
> But... er... last time I checked, the media can print absolutely
> anything that will sell copies. In other words, MAKE MONEY. So... um...
> am I being dense or something?

It is difficult to survive in this society. Some media stretch the 
notion of integrity to a thin line indeed.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message