I have to admit mild amusement at the way the news reports on incidents like the flooding.

WHY should the producers feel that we get a better "sense" of what is happening by relocating the "studio" to the area and having the presenter hopst the show standing in a pool of water????

During the recent prostitute murders in Ipswich, the news was frequently presented "live from the scene" by someone standing in front of a brick wall ! Just how did this brick wall add to our understanding?

Examine too closely ITK and you'll find a hefty chunk of our perceptions are faulty.

You're quite right - it's time "those in charge" had a major rethink on ALL media presentation and format.

Rather like the dreadful coverage of the Madeleine McCann story. 'Soham in the sun' as I referred to it but without an Ian Huntley. She's still missing, but our loathsome media have finally gotten bored with it all. So they never actually cared about the girl. How incredibly unsurprising.

In The Know wrote:

WHY should the producers feel that we get a better "sense" of what is happening by relocating the "studio" to the area and having the presenter host the show standing in a pool of water????




For me the rot set in with footage out of Vitenam in the '60's of a young girl walking up the road with most of her skin missing having been the victim of a chemical attack by invading US forces, that is an image that will stay with me for the rest of my life, truly an indecent image of a child. I think since around that time when the media could flash images around the world in seconds the public seem to have developed a taste for grissly detail which quite frankly I think is unnecessary, 'enough to know that there is a tragedy without having to see it ..

chrissy wrote:
Rather like the dreadful coverage of the Madeleine McCann story. 'Soham in the sun' as I referred to it but without an Ian Huntley. She's still missing, but our loathsome media have finally gotten bored with it all. So they never actually cared about the girl. How incredibly unsurprising.

The media are doing their level best to "create" an Ian Huntley though, aren't they?

This kind of "accusation by media" is the thing that got Barry George jailed for a crime he did not commit.

Phil wrote:
In The Know wrote:

WHY should the producers feel that we get a better "sense" of what is happening by relocating the "studio" to the area and having the presenter host the show standing in a pool of water????




For me the rot set in with footage out of Vitenam in the '60's of a young girl walking up the road with most of her skin missing having been the victim of a chemical attack by invading US forces, that is an image that will stay with me for the rest of my life, truly an indecent image of a child. I think since around that time when the media could flash images around the world in seconds the public seem to have developed a taste for grissly detail which quite frankly I think is unnecessary, 'enough to know that there is a tragedy without having to see it ..


I'd disagree about that photograph - it is indecent but it showed people what the war really meant. It was distasteful but it is reality and a reality the world had to be aware of.

The photo is one of the icons of the 20th Century, the caption "This is what we are".

On the relocating to the "scene" the best ones are -

Studio: We don't know anything lets go to the scene...
Scene: Well there is nothing happening here and nothing to add whatsoever.
Studio: Could you fill up a few minutes with some mindless drivel?
Scene: No problem...

I think showing the image of the burned child in vietnam was ok. It did show the horror of the war and had an effect on the public opinion turning against the war.

DJones wrote:
I think showing the image of the burned child in vietnam was ok. It did show the horror of the war and had an effect on the public opinion turning against the war.

Agreed

Let's not get into a position where the governments can "edit" what we are told and can see, shall we?

zooloo wrote:
I'd disagree about that photograph - it is indecent but it showed people what the war really meant. It was distasteful but it is reality and a reality the world had to be aware of.

Yes, you are absolutely right, I went off on a tangent somewhere thinking about early live location media reports .. I feel rather silly now ...

Phil wrote:
Yes, you are absolutely right, I went off on a tangent somewhere thinking about early live location media reports .. I feel rather silly now ...

Well don't be, Phil ... all contributions are relevant and help focus minds (even our own !).

Imagine how things would be if the Governments could really "control" the information that we receive. The 2 B's (Bush and Blair) are continually carping on about how wonderful Iraq is these days - all democratic bliss (quite oblivious to the one million killed and the 2 million who have fled the country).

It's only the evidence of our own eyes (from news reports etc) that shows us the truth.