FAIR COMMENT ?
Many many years ago whilst in the grip of youthful innocence, I was interviewed for a job in local government. One of the questions I was asked was, "Which newspaper do you read?" I think I confessed to reading the Guardian as, at the time, it appeared rather chic to do so. In reality I didn`t really `read` any newspaper very much and then only to catch up on the football news. My answer, it seemed, was the wrong one. I didn`t get the job which on reflection should not have surprised me unduly, as the local authority involved was staunchly Labour.
Some years later, my lesson having been learned, I was interviewed for another job with another local authority, this time one which did not appear to have any particular political leanings. Mind you, in those days it was more common for local councils, especially in rural areas, to at least give the appearance of political neutrality, independence even. Strange how perceptions change once innocence is lost in the storm of experience. Anyway, I was asked the same question again and, in a flurry of bet hedging, this time I proclaimed that I read the Telegraph, the Guardian (of course, as it was still rather hip,) the Mail, the Sun and the Daily Mirror. At least it gave the illusion of being up to date with things and left my interviewing panel either satisfied or perplexed. You can imagine my astonishment when I was offered the job.
The whole experience ignited a weird kind of interest in newspapers and even these days I try and watch the TV Paper Review slots that come on late in the evening when `guests` either of the BBC or Sky are invited to discuss the main issues covered by the papers. And what surprises me perhaps more than the content of the papers is the bizarre choices made for the reviewers. On any given evening, we are treated to the biased musings of the likes of Jacqui Smith, Bonnie Greer and the inescapable Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, along with assorted failed politicians, opinion formers and self-styled social commentators.
They all have common denominators - an agenda, a tub to thump, an axe to grind. an inability to offer objective, constructive criticism - as exemplified by the aforementioned Ms. Greer, who was quick last evening to condemn the Daily Mail as `the worst paper in the country,` presumably as it claims to speak for middle England which is, of course, a very long distance and a lifetime away from the dark recesses of Chicago, Illinois.
What`s needed to bring any kind of legitimacy to these time-filling late night slots is for the papers to be reviewed by genuinely objective observers, such as those who might proclaim to read the Telegraph, the Guardian (as it`s still `cool`) the Mail, the Sun and the Daily Mirror; in short, it`s time to review the reviewers.
Some years later, my lesson having been learned, I was interviewed for another job with another local authority, this time one which did not appear to have any particular political leanings. Mind you, in those days it was more common for local councils, especially in rural areas, to at least give the appearance of political neutrality, independence even. Strange how perceptions change once innocence is lost in the storm of experience. Anyway, I was asked the same question again and, in a flurry of bet hedging, this time I proclaimed that I read the Telegraph, the Guardian (of course, as it was still rather hip,) the Mail, the Sun and the Daily Mirror. At least it gave the illusion of being up to date with things and left my interviewing panel either satisfied or perplexed. You can imagine my astonishment when I was offered the job.
The whole experience ignited a weird kind of interest in newspapers and even these days I try and watch the TV Paper Review slots that come on late in the evening when `guests` either of the BBC or Sky are invited to discuss the main issues covered by the papers. And what surprises me perhaps more than the content of the papers is the bizarre choices made for the reviewers. On any given evening, we are treated to the biased musings of the likes of Jacqui Smith, Bonnie Greer and the inescapable Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, along with assorted failed politicians, opinion formers and self-styled social commentators.
They all have common denominators - an agenda, a tub to thump, an axe to grind. an inability to offer objective, constructive criticism - as exemplified by the aforementioned Ms. Greer, who was quick last evening to condemn the Daily Mail as `the worst paper in the country,` presumably as it claims to speak for middle England which is, of course, a very long distance and a lifetime away from the dark recesses of Chicago, Illinois.
What`s needed to bring any kind of legitimacy to these time-filling late night slots is for the papers to be reviewed by genuinely objective observers, such as those who might proclaim to read the Telegraph, the Guardian (as it`s still `cool`) the Mail, the Sun and the Daily Mirror; in short, it`s time to review the reviewers.
No comments:
Post a Comment