|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
the paper size we still use and revere
Quaint! Can't remember when I last touched a piece of foolscap; surely everything here is now A sized (apart from SR print and other trade sizing), and in the USA more Letter format?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004 |
In reply to:
The press and the other media have an absolute duty to report the facts and a collateral duty not to twist them, slant them, or shade them in an attempt to support an agenda, except on the editorial page.
An interesting idea, TEd, but is it (even in principle) one that would work?
It seems to me that the press reports:
1. Stories that will boost circulation, or they will not receive advertising revenues enough to survive. Thus there is an element of pandering to the public taste, plus an element of manipulating it, as in any marketing set-up.
2. Only whatever can fit. A person dying is a person dying, but the press cannot report every single human death in a day.
Therefore all newspapers have an editorial policy of not just attitudes reflected on the editorial page, but of what consititutes 'news'. There can be no single definition - since newspapers themselves are different, and what is news to your local tabloid giveaway is quite different from what is news to your large national broadsheet.
Having an editorial policy, you may say, is still a start only, and once the policy is stated, that's it - the rest should be pure reportage. Even here, however, there are problems. What's to stop the editorial policy being a political one? Suppose a newspaper's policy stated quite clearly that the Tory Party (our equivalent of the GOP) was the most important political force in the country, and consequently reported everything the Tories did, maybe from time to time reporting on the 'other' party, if it happened to be in Government or if it happened to commit a hugely satisfying gaffe. This paper would be following its policy, (which itself stemmed from a definition of what is 'news' which itself is an open question because of the differences between newspapers) and would yet be slanting its coverage of news in favour of a particular party.
This is, in fact, the situation in the UK. We have four major national dailies. This (along with gratuitous comments from me on quality etc), is how they stack up:
1. The Daily Telegraph Tory to the core. Very well written. Superb sports coverage.
2. The Times Tory to the core. Legendary as The Thunderer in days of yore, now simply a lap-dog for Rupert Murdoch. Writing cannot match that of The Telegraph or The Guardian
3. The Independent Middle-of-the-road. Youngest of the nationals, and still not financially secure. Writing can be a strange mixture of the witty and the cheesy.
4. The Guardian Strongly Labour Party. Attempts balanced coverage but doesn't succeed. Very well written, but without the gravitas of an age-old inheritance of power and heirarchy that the 'Torygraph' exudes.
I find it hard to fault these papers for their editorial stances. Certainly, it would be nice to read 'balanced' news once in a while, but, as a relatively committed 'Grauniad' reader (yes, it's legendary for its typos), I find that I can just about stomach the Indy, but throw down in disgust the other two (unless its the sports pages). I, as a reader, have my own 'editorial' stance, and I do not want to spend my money on something that constantly frustrates me by contradicting it. Contrary opinons to my own are available to me for free - all around me - and if any of them sounds interesting, then I will make the effort to look it up.
Put it this way. I am an atheist. So guess what? I don't subscribe to 'The Watchtower'.
In my opinion, therefore, it is impossible for a newspaper not to demonstrate an editorial stance, and at least we can respect those that are open about having one, instead of claiming to aim for the theoretical and practical impossibility of 'simply reporting the facts'.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004 |
surely everything here is now A sized (apart from SR print and other trade sizing), and in the USA more Letter format?
Foolscap paper is admittedly rare, but still in use in legal offices and the like (though not the most frequently used paper there either). It is still 'used', however, more often as a sizing template for files, folders, binders, wallets and the like. Look up any office stationery catalogue and marvel at the way the most common sizes for these are foolscap, not A4.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,317
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
583
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
