What's on the menu Clive? As a news addict, this is something that I often think about. Blink and you might miss it - the ebb and flow of the news agenda.
Sometimes the news spotlight shines upon an issue night after night and you just cannot get away from it. Then, even though the original issue is by no means resolved, that spotlight swings elsewhere until it becomes very easy to forget about the first focus. To a large extent, assuming there's no political interference, this is all about decision making in the conference rooms of news services.
Why don't we hear about Syria any more - the strife between the ruling forces of Bashar al-Assad and the various rebel groups that oppose him? This civil war has been going on since 2011. Half a million people have been killed and more than 14 million have fled their homes. What's the state of play right now? News services have decided not to tell us any more. It's off the playlist.
It's the same with Afghanistan. Western forces went in there to kick ass after 9/11 and then they departed quite abruptly in 2021. We used to get endless reports from Afghanistan but now the curtain has more or less come down on a still troubled country with a population of over 41 million. Do the news services think we are not interested any more? They appear to have decided not to tell us much else. It's also off the playlist.
Ukraine? Once we were bombarded with news reports. Night after night. And okay, we still get occasional reports from Kyiv and elsewhere but the news has become greatly reduced. Maybe the decision makers imagine that the public are bored with it. We can only stand so much of Russian aggression and territorial maps that hardly change. Maybe soon weeks will pass by before we hear anything more from Ukraine.
Gaza? The vengeful ruination of Gaza had top billing for weeks from last October onwards but even Gaza has been been pushed into the news shadows by what is happening in Lebanon right now.
And what of Yemen? Well - for whatever reason, in mainstream news we have pretty much heard nothing about what has been going on there since 2014. No word about Saudi Arabian involvement, the 377,000 deaths or the 85,000 children who have died from malnutrition according to Save the Children. It's all hidden by a massive blind-spot.
Another thing I notice about news programmes is that whenever there's a big new story to tell, it seems to occupy the entire agenda - meaning that other news stories are simply cancelled - as if they didn't really matter.
I am sure there are plenty of other news stories I might have used as examples of how subjects are picked up and then dropped even though that particular story is not yet finished. You can't help feeling that in this area, news can be rather like entertainment - keeping things fresh and giving the customers new stuff to consume.
This same thing happens with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, wildfires, etc. It takes these communities and areas years to recuperate. Just because you never hear about them anymore, doesn't mean they aren't still suffering and struggling.
ReplyDeleteYou make another great associated point Kelly.
DeleteI was going to say the same. Natural disasters get initial attention and then people are left to try and cope with the loss and devastation, hardly thought of again.
DeleteThe world is so sad and cruel I just want to go to bed and cover my head.
ReplyDeleteI sometimes feel the same way. Mind if I join you?
DeleteI never really thought of this ... until you just said it. So true.
ReplyDeleteHello again Tom and thanks for reading this blogpost.
DeleteIf we followed everything that happens in the world at once we would be overwhelmed by information overload. There must be some selection on what is served up to us by the so-called news media, and then as well as the largely hidden principles of selection which lead to some stories being left out, there will always be the angle or slant with which the stories that do get through are packaged. If you've ever had first-hand experience of an event which has been reported in the press you can hardly fail to be aware how partial the packaged account is. The slightly scary thing is that everything we know about the world reaches us this way.
ReplyDeleteHere's today's example from Australia, presenting the results of an opinion poll about Israel/Gaza/Palestine/Lebanon/the whole cluster****, which included this question:
"Last year, a conflict broke out between Hamas in Gaza and Israel in the Middle East. This started when Hamas fighters crossed the border from Gaza to Israel to kill and kidnap civilians, and then Israel retaliated with strikes on targets in Gaza followed by a ground incursion. The conflict is ongoing. Please tell us whether Australia should…"
As I am unable to italicise parts of this for emphasis, and just in case it's not clear (because we swim in this discourse daily like fish in water) my issue with this question is: did a conflict really only break out/start last year?
Well that's a very good point Marcellous. The conflict has been happening intermittently for at least a century. And if the "war" was really with Hamas, how come so many innocent children have been killed in Gaza? It is easy to "load" questions.
DeleteGo a little further. Each news service has it's own particular bias on whatever the news happens to be. Change the news channel and you wonder if you're still in the same news. They look for ratings rather than good journalism.
ReplyDeleteThat's a great point Red. Different news channels often pick different items.
DeleteOn a lighter note, and to honour (more in the breach etc) my previously announced intention to source comments on this blog solely from Flanders & Swann:
ReplyDeleteWe know perfectly well that if there are no newspapers, I mean, if there was a strike or a public holiday or something, nothing happens, it's marvellous!
Oh, O Tempora O Mores! Oh Times, oh Daily Mirror!
Mmm... yes Marcellous. Not the kind of response I anticipated.
DeleteI barely watch the news these days, it's all bad or sports related, or another house/car/building fire/car crash. It's all in the next day's newspaper anyway.
ReplyDeleteYou still read a newspaper regularly Elsie? I don't.
DeleteI skim the headlines then turn to the puzzle pages, a double page spread of enjoyment for me, though the cryptic doesn't often get don.
DeleteNews is business like any other media content. They want viewers, readers, subscribers. They cater for various tastes or leanings just like other TV channels, magazines and so on. At least on our main news, the reporters tell us when the information they have sourced secondhand can not be verified; they do not simply present something as truth because it suits their agenda and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteWhat often makes me shake my head is the mix of stories in one single slot of 15 minutes of main news: A terrible conflict (such as Gaza/Ukraine/Sudan etc.), an international meeting of politicians, a short feature about climate change. That may be followed by the announcement of the birth of an albino wallaby, and the 15 minutes end with football results and the weather. But I guess such is life - we can not always only focus on the horrors, especially if we - the general public - can do relatively little about them.
Typically thoughtful reflections. I like the point you make about the standard news "mix".
DeleteAdd to that Burma and some African countries. BBC World News gives better coverage of less known troubled countries.
ReplyDeleteYou are right. We hear very little about the displaced Rohingya people and the terrible situation they find themselves in + Somalia + the continuing AIDS epidemic in eastern Africa.
DeleteIf we kept abreast of every bit of the world's news, we would need a whole day to report it. The daily Home news is more to report major new things. My husband used to work for the BBC World Service, so I am sure if you tuned into that you would get answers to your questions. .
ReplyDeleteEven The World Service allows important news items to fizzle out when they are clearly not done.
DeleteYou are right YP. It's increasingly difficult to follow any news story to it's natural conclusion. Unless it's salacious and deals with sexual affairs involving Royalty, memebers of government or celebrities! Perhaps the media use the tried and tested yardstick of 15 minutes of fame and apply that to all news items, no matter how serious they may be.
ReplyDeleteI am so glad that that this blogpost chimed with your own perceptions Carol.
DeleteWhy do they have a North of England Correspondent but not one for the South?
ReplyDeleteBecause the news and even the national weather are already heavily biased towards the south - specifically London.
DeleteI don't suppose Mr Myrie reported this story then...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/bbc-presenter-sorry-for-manx-talk-rule-breach/
I would have happily chaired that event for half of his fee.
DeleteNews, as the name implies, is what's "new." It's hard to make fresh news out of a long, grinding, ongoing conflict in which there are only incremental (at least for us in the UK or USA) changes from day to day. Having said that, I think print media is much better about keeping track of stories that have fallen off the TV broadcasts. I suspect you'll find more news about Syria in newspapers or the Economist than on TV.
ReplyDeleteThank goodness the BBC rarely forgets to tell us who is on Strictly Come Dancing.
ReplyDeleteI didn't realise you were a fan Tasker.
DeleteOh yes. I like lots of ballroom.
DeleteFox, Times Warner and a few others turned news into infotainment. If it does not draw audience share it is not covered. It is much more entertainment than news of the world.
ReplyDeleteThe news cycles can be very short or, in the case of our election, veeeeeeeeery long.
ReplyDeleteI check in with the BBC to get my world news. To be blunt, most of our news stations in the US are crap.
ReplyDeleteI was just thinking the other day when I was listening to the news that we never hear of Syria anymore. The news piece was talking about Lebanese refugees fleeing to Syria.
ReplyDeleteYou make some good points, and yet I doubt most of us could cope with digesting much more bad news than we're already being fed, on a regular basis... (I myself have periods of following the news more intensely - and then periods of cutting it down to a minimum, because it's just feels too much to take in, when one can't do anything about it anyway.) Through following blogs from a few other countries, I feel I sometimes learn things that I would otherwise have missed completely, though.
ReplyDeleteHow right you are. What of Sudan? When did that last feature in the news? It almost seems that there is a bandwagon and we all must jump on it. It's hard to find current news that isn't of the latest blockbuster type.
ReplyDelete