Comments on: So is the press a ‘feral pack’?

By: Sean Dudley

Sean Dudley — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:37:19 +0000

I strongly agree with Tony Blair’s statements.

Guy, why do you hesitate to express your opinion at Reuters?

By: May

May — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:30:48 +0000

By and large the media is worse than a pack of feral beasts. They ignore reality, pander to the currently popular views, get facts wrong, rarely give 2 sides to any story, even when they say they do and work hard to make very person look bad who they interview or report on. There are a few shining examples of real dedicated journalists, but they are increasingly shoved to the nether reaches of the industry and ignored.

I have to admit that the best of a bad lot is Reuters, BBC, Jim Lehrer, Washington Week and the Nightly Business Report. All else is junk.

By: Chippy

Chippy — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 15:43:52 +0000

I didn’t think Blair was blaming the press for anything. It seemed to me he was making an observation which has been pretty apparent for some time now. That he chose to single out the Independent was significant in that it, more than any other newspaper has changed its style, largely from one of genuine, informed reporting, to an almost crusading zeal on anything to do with human suffering,blaming ,of course ,authority.
To me the biggest change in journalistic reporting in the last 10 years has been the decline of the expert. In the past you could read an article, and while you might not agree with its opinions, you could respect them because you knew the author was an authority on the subject he was writing about. Today there is a distinct lack of expertise in journalism, with most journalists relying on press releases for their stories and background, spending precious little time trying to become acquainted with a subject.

By: Pete Brown

Pete Brown — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 15:07:52 +0000

The media has changed dramatically in the last ten years or more. With the advent of 24 hour news programmes the role of the newspaper has changed quite dramatically, the reader now expects comments and analysis becaus ethey have seen the item already. The first to grasp this nettle were sportswriters so now in the tabloids we get washed up has beens ‘commenting’ on the weekend sports, we already know the results it is up to the individual reader if they want more indepth comment i.e. should Vaughan continue as England Captain etc..
I for one am greatful to the Indie giving space to journalists such as Robert Fisk to ‘comment’ om world events at least they are abreast of the facts and therefore worth reading.
i can get fantastic news coverage on al Jazeera -what I want is the story behind it and other thoughts about it.
At least the Indie writers are not embedded.

By: Paul Brinklow

Paul Brinklow — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:07:12 +0000

“views and comment now masquerade as news” Ye Gods thats a bit rich from someone who took us to war via a dosier downloaded from the net!! He wouldn’t recognize a fact. he doesn’t even bother with them now just says “I believe” or “I feel/think/was told so by The Great Wombat”
Hoist by his own petard he squirms, unfortunately David Kelly is not around to complain, his life ruined by Blairs lies.
I dont think the press has been invasive enough in our Ex PMs life - “unruly kids parents fault” - drunken child of PM found lying in West End, flat buying convicted fraudster is a mate….the list goes on

By: The beautiful game

The beautiful game — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:02:47 +0000

This is entirely predictable isn’t it? Hardly the first time an outgoing leader has blamed the media for making it hard to achieve what they set out to do.