About turn
16/12/04 12:40 Media
issues Permalink
Enough has been written about the resignation of
David Blunkett to fill several books by now; nobody
needs another commentary from someone who doesn't
specialise in politics attempting to add his
ill-informed ha'pennyworth.
But the press coverage has been fun. Yesterday the Mail, the Express and all the other right-wing rags were baying for his blood. Today now that he's gone they're all saying what a decent, principled man he was and will remain.
They honestly seem to think their readers won't notice.
But the press coverage has been fun. Yesterday the Mail, the Express and all the other right-wing rags were baying for his blood. Today now that he's gone they're all saying what a decent, principled man he was and will remain.
They honestly seem to think their readers won't notice.
|
Evening Standard lite
14/12/04 12:39 Media
issues Permalink
Today sees the launch of the 'Evening Standard Lite',
the free version of London's evening paper. Most of
the commentators are saying it's there to boost the
sales of the evening paper which have been flagging
for a while - no doubt that's true, but it's also
true that Express Newspapers has been mulling a rival
launch for a while now.
Myself, I find it inconcievable that if there isn't room for one viable evening paper in the market. putting a freebie and a rival out there will help much. I do think something has to be done about commuter reading, which must account for a large per centage of periodical sales. If nobody's buying the papers that means they're stuck with the magazines instead. This might not sound disastrous for the publishing industry, but consider this: many magazines cost a figure north of £3. Many paperbacks, after a little discounting, come out at around £4-£5. So the mags, nowadays, are competing with the handier-sized, keepable and more durable book as something to buy and read on the train.
There's got to be a major shakeout sometime, and my money's on 2005 for a price war among the quality monthly mags...
Myself, I find it inconcievable that if there isn't room for one viable evening paper in the market. putting a freebie and a rival out there will help much. I do think something has to be done about commuter reading, which must account for a large per centage of periodical sales. If nobody's buying the papers that means they're stuck with the magazines instead. This might not sound disastrous for the publishing industry, but consider this: many magazines cost a figure north of £3. Many paperbacks, after a little discounting, come out at around £4-£5. So the mags, nowadays, are competing with the handier-sized, keepable and more durable book as something to buy and read on the train.
There's got to be a major shakeout sometime, and my money's on 2005 for a price war among the quality monthly mags...
Non-responding editors
13/12/04 12:38 Media
issues Permalink
It may be unseasonal but I'm in the mood for a rant.
I've seen a number of articles recently, in the press
and online, from freelances like me. They all seem to
centre around how dreadful it is that editors don't
respond when someone is pitching a useful article.
Myself, I don't take it personally. I think it pays to bear in mind that the freelance journalist is effectively cold-calling people with story ideas, and like any cold-calling sales activity (and we are selling, please don't kid yourself otherwise) the odds are against a positive response. There's certainly no given right to a personal reply.
I don't have any figures on journalism to hand, but I do know that the average return on a mailshot in most industries is 2-3 per cent. I can't help but wonder how many of the freelances who complain so vehemently are actually making several times that ratio of sales - and still moaning like anything...
Myself, I don't take it personally. I think it pays to bear in mind that the freelance journalist is effectively cold-calling people with story ideas, and like any cold-calling sales activity (and we are selling, please don't kid yourself otherwise) the odds are against a positive response. There's certainly no given right to a personal reply.
I don't have any figures on journalism to hand, but I do know that the average return on a mailshot in most industries is 2-3 per cent. I can't help but wonder how many of the freelances who complain so vehemently are actually making several times that ratio of sales - and still moaning like anything...
Jolly important stuff
08/12/04 12:37 Media
issues Permalink
Of course in my area, the media, the BBC is
important. Even so, I can't help but wonder at the
wisdom yesterday of putting the Corporation's
restructure at the head of the news in the morning -
when the Northern Ireland talks were in danger of
collapsing, when soldiers were getting killed in Iraq
- is this another sign of the media assuming everyone
else is interested in its internal meanderings? I
think it is. Over the last year we've had the
resignation of Greg Dyke and his chairman, all very
public, the appointment of Mike Jackson and Michael
Grade - once more, thrust right into the public eye,
the high-profile sacking of Piers Morgan and now
this.
Does any other industry merit this sort of public scrutiny? Come to think of it, if the headline writers weren't employed in it, would this?
Does any other industry merit this sort of public scrutiny? Come to think of it, if the headline writers weren't employed in it, would this?
Bond, James Bond..?
03/12/04 12:36 Coffee machine moments
Permalink
Corrie controversy
Now this is an odd one. Representatives of the Hindu
community have complained to the producers of
Coronation Street about a scene in which a deranged
woman wields a Hindu icon as a weapon
(see story here).
Hindu leaders, it seems, want an apology. I'm not so sure it's appropriate. Have the producers of, say, The Exorcist, apologised to Christian communities? Have the producers of any number of 1970s comedies apologised to Jewish or black communities? And more to the point, if the woman in the scenario was as ill as that, was the scene gratuitous or unlikely? Personally I think not.
I'm all for not offending people when you're broadcasting, but if you're going to present events in a drama that will and should include bad things happening.
On the other side of soaps, I saw in the press yesterday that Christopher Parker - Spencer Moon in EastEnders - has quit, partly because of press tittle-tattle about his sexual orientation (which he denies anyway). It's a rotten shame, he was a good actor. I wish him well for his future and hope he doesn't get too jaundiced about the public and above all the press - the people who publish this tripe don't speak for us all.
Hindu leaders, it seems, want an apology. I'm not so sure it's appropriate. Have the producers of, say, The Exorcist, apologised to Christian communities? Have the producers of any number of 1970s comedies apologised to Jewish or black communities? And more to the point, if the woman in the scenario was as ill as that, was the scene gratuitous or unlikely? Personally I think not.
I'm all for not offending people when you're broadcasting, but if you're going to present events in a drama that will and should include bad things happening.
On the other side of soaps, I saw in the press yesterday that Christopher Parker - Spencer Moon in EastEnders - has quit, partly because of press tittle-tattle about his sexual orientation (which he denies anyway). It's a rotten shame, he was a good actor. I wish him well for his future and hope he doesn't get too jaundiced about the public and above all the press - the people who publish this tripe don't speak for us all.