In my commentating on media coverage of the Napier seige story, I remarked upon the sensational tone of a lot of the coverage. Since then we've had the Christine Rankin and Melissa Lee sagas also reported on at fever pitch. And maybe it all began with the Tony Veitch case, which attracted an extraordinary amount of frenzied coverage that still festers on.
A journalist friend of mine, Zara Potts, remarked on Twitter that she felt our media was getting more hysterical every day. I think I agree with her. I've never been a purist in my media commentating. I accept that in these commercial times, there will be lighter stories, and showbiz stories and a sometimes populist approach to journalism. But at the moment things feel a little out of control.
Is it the result of increasingly tough economic times for our media outlets, and the added pressure of mainstream media fighting something of a losing battle with the online world? Are we breeding a new wave of young journalists who think that breathless sensationalism is the normal way to go? It's getting scary. If someone with fairly populist taste like myself is getting turned off by it all, I hate to think how people with more classic taste in journalism are feeling.
Sadly, one little oasis of calm in our local media landscape made its final appearance last Sunday. Finlay McDonald and Andrew Patterson's excellent Sunday Live show on Radio Live has ended to make way for sports programming. The show was a fine mix of pop culture and current affairs. It was informative and entertaining - intelligent but never elitist. It was a soothing Sunday morning listen and I will miss it. I hope Radio Live has plans for it to come back in some form or other.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Sunday, May 10, 2009
MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE NAPIER SIEGE
The Napier siege has been a huge news story and a lot of journalists have done a lot of hard work, in some cases in quite scary circumstances. As I have said before in my media commentating, we tend to be reasonably good at on-the-spot news reporting in New Zealand, and coverage of this awful incident was generally strong.
But one thing I would criticise is the rather sensational tone that crept into a lot of the coverage. In these very competitive commercial times for our media outlets that does seem to be the way of things - to be sensational - and the language a lot of reporters used was rather over-the-top at times.
A mate of mine who knows a thing or two about guns and the military - from a historian/collector point of view, I hasten to add - says not only was a lot of the reporters' language sensational, in some cases it was also inappropriate and inaccurate.
He says: "They talked about the gunman firing a 'volley of shots' at police. A volley is fired by a number of shooters firing at the same time. What the gunman fired was a 'burst' or 'series" of shots."
The New Zealand Herald made an interesting call for its Saturday morning edition when it came out that morning with the banner headline Gunman Dead - something that was not confirmed at that time. Maybe a question mark at the end of the headline might have been a better, more accurate option.
Talkback radio has been an interesting part of the media coverage of the siege. On the plus side, it was an opportunity for some really strong and immediate first-hand eyewitness reports as events unfolded, and also a good chance for people who knew him to paint a picture of the gunman. But on the downside, as usual there were all the same old armchair experts who knew what they would do if they were there and doing the job of the police. Yeah right.
It was a hell of a situation, and it seems to me the cops handling it were doing okay. Especially when they were knee-deep in journalists at the time!
But one thing I would criticise is the rather sensational tone that crept into a lot of the coverage. In these very competitive commercial times for our media outlets that does seem to be the way of things - to be sensational - and the language a lot of reporters used was rather over-the-top at times.
A mate of mine who knows a thing or two about guns and the military - from a historian/collector point of view, I hasten to add - says not only was a lot of the reporters' language sensational, in some cases it was also inappropriate and inaccurate.
He says: "They talked about the gunman firing a 'volley of shots' at police. A volley is fired by a number of shooters firing at the same time. What the gunman fired was a 'burst' or 'series" of shots."
The New Zealand Herald made an interesting call for its Saturday morning edition when it came out that morning with the banner headline Gunman Dead - something that was not confirmed at that time. Maybe a question mark at the end of the headline might have been a better, more accurate option.
Talkback radio has been an interesting part of the media coverage of the siege. On the plus side, it was an opportunity for some really strong and immediate first-hand eyewitness reports as events unfolded, and also a good chance for people who knew him to paint a picture of the gunman. But on the downside, as usual there were all the same old armchair experts who knew what they would do if they were there and doing the job of the police. Yeah right.
It was a hell of a situation, and it seems to me the cops handling it were doing okay. Especially when they were knee-deep in journalists at the time!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
