Originally Posted by
hiflymk3
I'm surprised that the press haven't caught up with him already. Do journos ever monitor these pages?
I've been involved with the Press/Journalists a few times over the years and, while many journalists do seek to validate before going to print/broadcast, I've also personally seen here in the UK, journalists deliberately leading people on to sensationalise complete non-events to the extent I have struggled to reconcile what I know has actually happened with that subsequently reported in the media. Such antics (probably in a vast minority) have tarnished my general view of the Media - how do I verify something on the news? Often impossible to do easily for the humble reader/viewer with no experience in a given field. Most media outlets show a degree of editorial bias in some way shape or form.
Sadly, even when things which one suspects may be “not quite accurate” (let’s be kind to them) are pointed out to the Media, usually they have moved on and so nothing is changed – too busy chasing the next “scoop” to bother with the accuracy of past stories. That “Moneycontrol” article linked to in an earlier Post has not changed, even if only to more strongly suggest there may be serious questions to the reliability of the information (again being very generous to the media!). The thrust of that article remains positive - a saviour riding in. Sadly, it’s not helped where plagiarism seems rife in journalism – someone publishes some rubbish and, within hours, multiple news-feeds are repeating the same rubbish – almost verbatim!
It’s high time someone updated Wiki and added the “Disinformation Age” to follow on from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Age (other much more learned theses are available covering Information Age and Disinformation in case you are worried!!). As David J Rothkopf (sorry about my pop at journos Dave) sagely put it in the 2nd line of his Paper “The Disinformation Age”, “In today’s volatile global markets [read any topic really – he was talking specifically about the money markets in the article but same holds true for anything] deception, misrepresentation, and outright dishonesty are among the few constants. So are incomplete information, inadequate reporting, and biased or otherwise egregiously faulty analyses.”
Forty years ago the Unsworth types would simply not feature – today such cases are propelled by an Information “Firestorm”, which means that David’s observation is propelled outwards at light speed when it exists. While cynics like me, for the most part (I hope!!), can smell a rat or at least if something has a rat-like odour, sadly many can’t and will read what the Press say as gospel. There is little (no?) legal redress to those hoodwinked – it's very much a case of “caveat lector”! You may have worked out that I really don't trust the media, nor their sources, much!
As for Mr Unsworth - not even worth commenting further on him or his cronies!