There isn't much to look out for in these elections. But there will be one or two interesting pointers.
In the English Local Elections, what will be of most interest will be the turnout, which is traditionally very low in local elections anyway, but could be even lower this time. This will probably be an indication that possible Labour voters stayed away. Also, look to see how many councils change control, from and to Labour and Conservatives. The expectation is that we might see Labour lose councils and Conservatives pick up a few, but don't expect to see any swing directly from Labour to the Conservatives.
The thing to watch in the Scottish Parliamentary elections is to see who forms their next government. My belief is that it will go from being Labour to a combination of the Scottish Nationalists and the Liberal Democrats. But with Conservatives potentially on an upswing as well, the Scottish result is going to be the most interesting.
Sky News have started their election programme, as have BBC Wales. BBC Scotland begin theirs at 2305 UK.
Thursday, 3 May 2007
UK's Super Thursday!
There's many elections happening all over the UK today.
First we have the local elections for district councils across England. Many local councils are re-electing the whole council, whilst some are electing just a third of the council.
Then we have elections to the Scottish Parliament. 129 seats in Holyrood are up for grabs. The BBC is webcasting the election programme online from 2305 GMT. BBC Radio Scotland's election programme is also being webcast from 2200 GMT.
And finally we have the elections for the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff. Again, the BBC are webcasting coverage, this time from BBC Radio Wales. Also, S4C will be webcasting coverage produced by BBC Wales Cymru on their own site.
This is going to be the biggest test of political opinion since the 2005 general election. The results are going to be worth watching.
First we have the local elections for district councils across England. Many local councils are re-electing the whole council, whilst some are electing just a third of the council.
Then we have elections to the Scottish Parliament. 129 seats in Holyrood are up for grabs. The BBC is webcasting the election programme online from 2305 GMT. BBC Radio Scotland's election programme is also being webcast from 2200 GMT.
And finally we have the elections for the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff. Again, the BBC are webcasting coverage, this time from BBC Radio Wales. Also, S4C will be webcasting coverage produced by BBC Wales Cymru on their own site.
This is going to be the biggest test of political opinion since the 2005 general election. The results are going to be worth watching.
Biased News on NPR? I don't think so!
There is a blog which purports to monitor "...rightwing, pro-government and corporate bias..." on the programming of National Public Radio News, called NPR Check. The reality is that this is a blogger that is looking for a news service to be explicitly liberal, in the same way that Fox News Channel is explicitly conservative.
Thankfully, for people like me who are fed up with biased news, from any source, liberal or conservative, NPR News is not biased, but sticks very closely to just reporting the facts. I have listened regularly to NPR's top shows, Morning Edition and All Things Considered, and I find it to be very fair, airing reporting that is based exclusively on fact rather than even the slightest agenda.
Most blogs which attack the public service broadcasters (NPR, PBS, BBC, CBC, RTE, ABC Australia etc) are run by bloggers with a conservative political bent. This one is decidedly liberal, proving that the anti-public service broadcasting community comes from all sides and colours of the political spectrum.
For crying out loud, people STOP TRYING TO FORCE EVERY NEWS ORGANISATION TO MATCH YOUR POLITICAL BENT! If you want BIASED news, there are plenty of newspapers and websites out there with enough bias to fill the Pacific Ocean!!!
Let those of us who would actually PREFER some unbiased news, some sources like the BBC, NPR, RTE etc.
Thankfully, for people like me who are fed up with biased news, from any source, liberal or conservative, NPR News is not biased, but sticks very closely to just reporting the facts. I have listened regularly to NPR's top shows, Morning Edition and All Things Considered, and I find it to be very fair, airing reporting that is based exclusively on fact rather than even the slightest agenda.
Most blogs which attack the public service broadcasters (NPR, PBS, BBC, CBC, RTE, ABC Australia etc) are run by bloggers with a conservative political bent. This one is decidedly liberal, proving that the anti-public service broadcasting community comes from all sides and colours of the political spectrum.
For crying out loud, people STOP TRYING TO FORCE EVERY NEWS ORGANISATION TO MATCH YOUR POLITICAL BENT! If you want BIASED news, there are plenty of newspapers and websites out there with enough bias to fill the Pacific Ocean!!!
Let those of us who would actually PREFER some unbiased news, some sources like the BBC, NPR, RTE etc.
Saturday, 21 April 2007
Is NBC News being tabloidy or being responsible?
There has been a lot of criticism aimed at NBC News for airing the video sent to them by Cho-seeung Hui, the student who killed 31 people at Virginia Tech, before committing suicide.
Some of it came from more predictable sources, such as Accuracy In Media, whilst others have been less expected. Media Bistro's TV Newser reported some of the other sources.
Whilst I have some sympathy for the view that we shouldn't be giving publicity to these people, I also believe that we as a society need to understand what motivates these people to do what they do.
I can also understand the criticism that this kind of coverage is tabloidy and irresponsible. However, I would answer this by asking a question. What is responsible journalism?
Is it responsible to only cover stories and angles that we as a society, country or group of individuals feel safe in covering, or should we actively be covering stories and angles that do make us feel uncomfortable?
I would argue that it is essential that we do cover angles to these stories that do take us out of ouor comfort zones, and make us face up to things that we dislike. In fact, to actively avoid these angles because of this, would in my view be very irresponsible. You would have to handle these angles with tact and discretion and avoid sensationalising it. But you should cover them.
Was NBC right to air the video? Ultimately yes, but did they handle it right? Well, I'm not sure. Perhaps they could have handled it better, but they could have handled it a lot worse as well.
Some of it came from more predictable sources, such as Accuracy In Media, whilst others have been less expected. Media Bistro's TV Newser reported some of the other sources.
Whilst I have some sympathy for the view that we shouldn't be giving publicity to these people, I also believe that we as a society need to understand what motivates these people to do what they do.
I can also understand the criticism that this kind of coverage is tabloidy and irresponsible. However, I would answer this by asking a question. What is responsible journalism?
Is it responsible to only cover stories and angles that we as a society, country or group of individuals feel safe in covering, or should we actively be covering stories and angles that do make us feel uncomfortable?
I would argue that it is essential that we do cover angles to these stories that do take us out of ouor comfort zones, and make us face up to things that we dislike. In fact, to actively avoid these angles because of this, would in my view be very irresponsible. You would have to handle these angles with tact and discretion and avoid sensationalising it. But you should cover them.
Was NBC right to air the video? Ultimately yes, but did they handle it right? Well, I'm not sure. Perhaps they could have handled it better, but they could have handled it a lot worse as well.
Friday, 20 April 2007
Editorialising The News.
I would call myself something of a news junkie. I like to tune in to various news sources to get different perspectives on the news. This is a way of really getting a purer, more factual perspective on the news.
But it is also a way of learning which news sources you can trust, and which ones try to influence your opinions. The Sun, like most if not all newspapers, tries to influence your thoughts. Take the story of the shootings at Virginia Tech University. When the student Cho Seung-hui sent his video package to NBC News in New York between the shootings, The Sun reported it this way...
"...MASSACRE madman Cho Seung-Hui sent a chilling message to TV chiefs after slaying his first two victims."
Now, let me highlight in red, the words that are not necessary to tell the story.
"...MASSACRE madman Cho Seung-Hui sent a chilling message to TV chiefs after slaying his first two victims."
Now, if you read ONLY the light coloured words, the story still makes sense, but is nowhere near as dramatic, and is not nearly as full of hyperbole. The full version reads like an old fashioned newspaper hack's writing style. Now contrast this to the BBC's reporting of the same story.
"...The student who shot dead at least 30 people at Virginia Tech sent a package to the US TV network NBC News on the day of the shootings, police said."
Now, on that, there is one piece that stands out to me as being wrong and that is having the words "...police said..." at the end of the sentence, rather than at the beginning. It reads better the other way, but apart from that, there is almost nothing there in that sentence that doesn't need to be there to tell the story.
So, why do newspaper articles add all these extra words? Mainly it's to reinforce an editorial standpoint on the story. They really want you to think a certain way, they want to create a certain political atmosphere.
Another good example of this was the way the printed media created a political atmosphere, was when the sailors and marines who had been captured by Iran came home, they were allowed to sell their stories by the Ministry of Defence.
Those newspapers who didn't manage to get a story from the former captives, criticised the papers that did. Now this in itself was not unusual, this happens every time. But there was a greater backlash, because other elements of the media, including broadcasters and bloggers, got in on the act as well. The next day, the newspapers that had taken stories from the marines, got in on the same act as the others!
Yet none of them considered that Iran had started this with the videos they had put out showing the sailors and marines 'confessing their guilt'. The Ministry of Defence was always going to allow the sailors and marines to tell their story and always looked like it would, just this once, allow the stories to be sold to newspapers, in order to counter the propoganda being put out by Iran.
I seem to be the only person who thought that this was not a great idea, but had to be done. Everybody else I spoke to, took the critical line that the media portrayed.
In the past few years, a lot of the mainstream media, and a number of bloggers, have criticised Arabic 24 hour news channel Al-Jazeera, for showing the videos that some suicide bombers have sent to them. Newshounds, the anti-Fox News website, made a great point recently about how much the mainstream media in the US had criticised Al-Jazeera for doing what NBC had done on their "NBC Nightly News" programme on Wednesday 18th April 2007.
The media can be that hypocritical sometimes. As bloggers, some of us too have been hypocritical, especially those who promote a political viewpoint. I like to keep my views consistent, and when my views change, I will need to be able to communicate to you, the reader, why my views have changed. I will aim to report, as much as I editorialise, and I hope that I can make a clear link between the facts, and my editorial opinion.
But it is also a way of learning which news sources you can trust, and which ones try to influence your opinions. The Sun, like most if not all newspapers, tries to influence your thoughts. Take the story of the shootings at Virginia Tech University. When the student Cho Seung-hui sent his video package to NBC News in New York between the shootings, The Sun reported it this way...
"...MASSACRE madman Cho Seung-Hui sent a chilling message to TV chiefs after slaying his first two victims."
Now, let me highlight in red, the words that are not necessary to tell the story.
"...MASSACRE madman Cho Seung-Hui sent a chilling message to TV chiefs after slaying his first two victims."
Now, if you read ONLY the light coloured words, the story still makes sense, but is nowhere near as dramatic, and is not nearly as full of hyperbole. The full version reads like an old fashioned newspaper hack's writing style. Now contrast this to the BBC's reporting of the same story.
"...The student who shot dead at least 30 people at Virginia Tech sent a package to the US TV network NBC News on the day of the shootings, police said."
Now, on that, there is one piece that stands out to me as being wrong and that is having the words "...police said..." at the end of the sentence, rather than at the beginning. It reads better the other way, but apart from that, there is almost nothing there in that sentence that doesn't need to be there to tell the story.
So, why do newspaper articles add all these extra words? Mainly it's to reinforce an editorial standpoint on the story. They really want you to think a certain way, they want to create a certain political atmosphere.
Another good example of this was the way the printed media created a political atmosphere, was when the sailors and marines who had been captured by Iran came home, they were allowed to sell their stories by the Ministry of Defence.
Those newspapers who didn't manage to get a story from the former captives, criticised the papers that did. Now this in itself was not unusual, this happens every time. But there was a greater backlash, because other elements of the media, including broadcasters and bloggers, got in on the act as well. The next day, the newspapers that had taken stories from the marines, got in on the same act as the others!
Yet none of them considered that Iran had started this with the videos they had put out showing the sailors and marines 'confessing their guilt'. The Ministry of Defence was always going to allow the sailors and marines to tell their story and always looked like it would, just this once, allow the stories to be sold to newspapers, in order to counter the propoganda being put out by Iran.
I seem to be the only person who thought that this was not a great idea, but had to be done. Everybody else I spoke to, took the critical line that the media portrayed.
In the past few years, a lot of the mainstream media, and a number of bloggers, have criticised Arabic 24 hour news channel Al-Jazeera, for showing the videos that some suicide bombers have sent to them. Newshounds, the anti-Fox News website, made a great point recently about how much the mainstream media in the US had criticised Al-Jazeera for doing what NBC had done on their "NBC Nightly News" programme on Wednesday 18th April 2007.
The media can be that hypocritical sometimes. As bloggers, some of us too have been hypocritical, especially those who promote a political viewpoint. I like to keep my views consistent, and when my views change, I will need to be able to communicate to you, the reader, why my views have changed. I will aim to report, as much as I editorialise, and I hope that I can make a clear link between the facts, and my editorial opinion.
Tuesday, 20 March 2007
OFCOM investigates UK pay TV
At the request of BT, Setanta, Virgin Media and Top Up TV, OFCOM are to investigate the world of UK based pay television.
Whilst I am all in favour of an investigation, I do have my doubts as to whether anything will happen as a result. Ofcom have yet to take any deicisions that have real impact on the industry, and in pay TV, there needs to be something that has to happen.
You see, BSkyB is THE dominant force in UK pay TV , and it is the only one with national coverage across the UK. Virgin Media has a lot of coverage in the cities, but because of the prohibitive cost of cabling rural areas, has no coverage outside of the cities. Digital Terrestrial currently only has about 70% coverage, but that will grow as the analogue signals are switched off in the various areas until 2012.
Sky have already seen off two potential opponents in the pay TV market, first by merging with British Satellite Broadcasting (BSB) in November 1990, and second with the collapse of On/ITV Digital in March 2002. It's only with the recent-ish meger of the NTL and Telewest cable operations that cable has emerged as any kind of a powerhouse in the pay television arena, and it is still limited by the fact that not every house in the UK has a cable connection.
I would like to see Sky undergo some kind of limitation, possibly have them lose control of their EPG. After all, they cannot control who broadcasts on the satellites, as Sky do not own the satellites. The Satellites themselves are owned by a company called Societie European De Satellites, based in Luxembourg.
I would also like to see Sky denied permission to create a pay TV service on DTT. They want to have Sky One, Sky News, Sky Movies and Sky Sports, available on a subscription only basis on DTT, much in the same way that when they started on Astra 1A back in February 1989, they had Sky Channel, Sky News, Sky Movies and Eurosport (at the time they were a partner in the EuroSport operation, but left it after merging with BSB.)
Sky are like Microsoft, they are too dominant in the market, and do need to be reined in. Sky have behaved in a very anti-competitive way, in forcing all the channels in their package to accept much lower subscriber rates, including the Virgin Media channels, whilst at the same time, trying to force up the rates that Virgin Media pay for the Sky channels. If this isn't classic anti-competitiveness, I don't know what is.
I would like to see Ofcom actually do something about Sky, but I don't actually believe that Ofcom will do anything. Such a lack of action, in a market that actually demands it, would be postitively criminal.
Monday, 19 March 2007
Canadian Federal Budget 2007
In the Canadian House of Commons, Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty has been delivering his Federal Budget Speech for the financial year 2007/2008.
Amongst the changes detailed, there are, unsurprisingly, a lot of measures designed at improving the environment, such as a new green levy on "gas guzzlers".
CBC News has the details on the budget speech in a special section, and links to the whole budget speech.
A Television Legend returns to the Cornish airwaves!
Yes, it is true. A legend of the television industry has returned to the broadcasting ether.
This particular legend first arrived on South West televison screens in 1961, and disappeared in 1992. He's been spending his time since then at a local Cornish tourist attraction.
That will probably be enough clues for most people who had experience of Westward and TSW between 1961 and 1992.
The answer is to be found here, at the website of Cornish radio station, Atlantic FM.
Friday, 16 March 2007
RTE broadcasting live news video from St Patrick's Day.
For years now, you have been able to listen to RTE's radio stations online, but the situation with live video webcasts has been very limited at best. Special events is about all you've been able to watch on very infrequent occasions. Even the RTE News was a recorded video webcast and not all programmes and bulletins were available.
But from St Patrick's Day (March 17th) 2007, RTE News output, will be broadcast live online for all the world to see.
For me, this is a very positive development. The BBC have made their BBC1 News bulletins available online live for quite some time now, but News 24 is not available. The old ITN News Channel was available online from it's launch in 2000, til it became the ITV News Channel. In the US, some local stations air their newscasts live online too, such as WCBS TV in News York.
I like the fact that the late night News On Two is also being inlcuded in the live webcast schedule, as this has been the major bulletin that has been missing from the RTE News recorded webcasts.
I will probably be watching a lot of these webcasts.
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
Breaking News: ITV Play to close. Hooray!
Well, I have to say this is great news for people like myself who have a love of the broadcast media. The overly commercial venture known as ITV Play, is to completely closedown, and will be replaced on Freeview by ITV2+1.
Whilst I am not a big fan of the timeshift channels, I have even less inkling to see any more channels of the ITV Play ilk, so this is a positive move.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)