Brexit Hit To Uk Trade Less Than...
News2 mins ago
Is This Type Of Thing So Common, That It Seems Only The Daily Mail Chose To Bother To Report On It?
13 Answers
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There are Crown Courts all over the country, typically with up to a dozen court hearings taking place simultaneously in each one. No national newspaper can have afford to have a reporter in each court room, so they largely rely on local freelance 'stringers' to send them reports.
If you were a freelance reporter and noticed that a case involving illegal immigration was to be heard in your local Crown Court, which national newspaper would you try to sell the first serial rights to? (That question should be regarded as rhetorical because the answer, I suspect, is obvious!)
If you were a freelance reporter and noticed that a case involving illegal immigration was to be heard in your local Crown Court, which national newspaper would you try to sell the first serial rights to? (That question should be regarded as rhetorical because the answer, I suspect, is obvious!)
AOG
I'm reading 'Flat Earth News' (highly recommended) right now, and much of what Buenchico writes is echoed in the book.
If you went back say, 30 or 40 years ago, there would be upwards of fifty news agencies, taking regional stories which would be sold on to the nationals.
Now, there are two - one is the Press Association, and I forget the other.
In addition, reporters on nationals have to produce much more content (with online newspapers, Facebook and Twitter feeds) than their counterparts in the past.
In this high turnover of news stories, there will be many local stories that aren't picked up by the nationals.
I'm reading 'Flat Earth News' (highly recommended) right now, and much of what Buenchico writes is echoed in the book.
If you went back say, 30 or 40 years ago, there would be upwards of fifty news agencies, taking regional stories which would be sold on to the nationals.
Now, there are two - one is the Press Association, and I forget the other.
In addition, reporters on nationals have to produce much more content (with online newspapers, Facebook and Twitter feeds) than their counterparts in the past.
In this high turnover of news stories, there will be many local stories that aren't picked up by the nationals.
>>>and I forget the other.
http://
http://
-- answer removed --
divebuddy
I don't think it's that necessarily. It's just that in the past week, there have been massive stories that the nationals have all swarmed around (the South Korean ferry disaster, Moyes, the ongoing hunt for the Malaysian flight etc).
And also, news aggregators (which is what so many online newspapers are transforming to) will concentrate on stories which will appeal to their readership demographic.
The FT will cover stories that the Daily Mail will ignore, the Mail will cover stories that the Daily Star will ignore, The Sun will ignore stories which The Independent will cover etc.
That's just the way it is.
If you want to read stories about illegal immigrants, Muslim fanatics, sexy teenage girls, uppity gays, things that give you cancer (lemons, Facebook, walking quickly, glass coffee tables) - head to the Mail.
If you want to read stuff about the latest environmental thing to worry about, go for The Independent.
If you want to see a woman's breasts, pick up The Sun.
If you want to read articles that give you a strange, and unwarranted sense of superiority - it's The Guardian for you.
I don't think it's that necessarily. It's just that in the past week, there have been massive stories that the nationals have all swarmed around (the South Korean ferry disaster, Moyes, the ongoing hunt for the Malaysian flight etc).
And also, news aggregators (which is what so many online newspapers are transforming to) will concentrate on stories which will appeal to their readership demographic.
The FT will cover stories that the Daily Mail will ignore, the Mail will cover stories that the Daily Star will ignore, The Sun will ignore stories which The Independent will cover etc.
That's just the way it is.
If you want to read stories about illegal immigrants, Muslim fanatics, sexy teenage girls, uppity gays, things that give you cancer (lemons, Facebook, walking quickly, glass coffee tables) - head to the Mail.
If you want to read stuff about the latest environmental thing to worry about, go for The Independent.
If you want to see a woman's breasts, pick up The Sun.
If you want to read articles that give you a strange, and unwarranted sense of superiority - it's The Guardian for you.
-- answer removed --
sp1814
/// I don't think it's that necessarily. It's just that in the past week, there have been massive stories that the nationals have all swarmed around (the South Korean ferry disaster, Moyes, the ongoing hunt for the Malaysian flight etc). ///
What a classic excuse when one wants to bury a certain piece of sensitive news.
Oh and by the way in your list of massive stories that 'the nationals have all swarmed around' you forgot to mention the ongoing tour by Prince William, Kate, and baby George.
/// I don't think it's that necessarily. It's just that in the past week, there have been massive stories that the nationals have all swarmed around (the South Korean ferry disaster, Moyes, the ongoing hunt for the Malaysian flight etc). ///
What a classic excuse when one wants to bury a certain piece of sensitive news.
Oh and by the way in your list of massive stories that 'the nationals have all swarmed around' you forgot to mention the ongoing tour by Prince William, Kate, and baby George.
AOG
This isn't my opinion, it's a fact looking at what has been the lead stories in the papers this week.
And yes, the royal tour has been a big story.
I was not making an excuse - I was simply trying to answer your question. I totally understand you thinking I'm making an excuse, but believe me, I'm not trying to because I have no interest in defending the news media.
Like I say, I was trying to think of an answer to your question.
Would you like me to ignore your posts?
Not being aggressive or anything - just trying to make sure you're happy. If you are not happy with my answers, just let me know.
This isn't my opinion, it's a fact looking at what has been the lead stories in the papers this week.
And yes, the royal tour has been a big story.
I was not making an excuse - I was simply trying to answer your question. I totally understand you thinking I'm making an excuse, but believe me, I'm not trying to because I have no interest in defending the news media.
Like I say, I was trying to think of an answer to your question.
Would you like me to ignore your posts?
Not being aggressive or anything - just trying to make sure you're happy. If you are not happy with my answers, just let me know.
1 to 13 of 13
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.