Omg ott! DNA for dogs - Page 5

davemac · 18-03-2012, 12:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Thought bizzy was a cop in Liverpool Dave

it is , but I used in the context of "bizzed me pants" if im allowed to say that

garinda · 18-03-2012, 12:26

Here's two more recent front page non-stories, which were published, after receiving the information from someone at H.B.C.

£2m bid to bring back 'heritage look' to Accrington town centre street | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk

£2.5m plan to restore Accrington Arcade | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk

When you wade through all the guff, basically a bid has been put in for Lottery funding, which means that unless the bid is successful, the schemes are just pie in the sky.

If you're going to use the press to try and create positive public relation stories, from which you hope to gain politically, you must also be prepared that they'll sometimes use you for their own ends. Which is to sell papers.

It's risky.

Especially for an amateur.

You sometimes end up with egg on your face.

Or in this case, dog crap.

Neil · 18-03-2012, 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

It looks as though Ken is being targeted by this misreporting.

I wonder which member of the opposition he most upset, and is malicious enough to encourage the Observer to publish such stuff

You should be a reporter, planting the seed in peoples head so they go off thinking all sorts of nonsense.

I think Ken handled the story very well. He told them what he knows and the reporter wrote the story from that.

Neil · 18-03-2012, 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

When you wade through all the guff, basically a bid has been put in for Lottery funding, which means that unless the bid is successful, the schemes are just pie in the sky.

These bids always need community consultation and involvement and this usually has to be demonstrated in the bid. The downside of over publicising these bids is that the public start to think you are useless when they don't succeed.

What many people don't realise is that a successful bid is by no means a certainty. As an example, one of the groups I am involved with has just been offered some extra money on the back of a recent project. Only 40 out of 1000 were offered this so 960 were unlucky.

jaysay · 18-03-2012, 17:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Here's two more recent front page non-stories, which were published, after receiving the information from someone at H.B.C.

£2m bid to bring back 'heritage look' to Accrington town centre street | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk

£2.5m plan to restore Accrington Arcade | Accrington Observer - menmedia.co.uk

When you wade through all the guff, basically a bid has been put in for Lottery funding, which means that unless the bid is successful, the schemes are just pie in the sky.

If you're going to use the press to try and create positive public relation stories, from which you hope to gain politically, you must also be prepared that they'll sometimes use you for their own ends. Which is to sell papers.

It's risky.

Especially for an amateur.

You sometimes end up with egg on your face.

Or in this case, dog crap.

Using the press for political purposes always has a plus and minus to it, can't say it makes much difference now, well not with the obs, but in the old days when Murvyn was the editor, the journalism at the obs was quite good and there were reporters that were prepared to go out into the community to gather news stories and not just sit at the end of a telephone waiting for it to come to them, that why we're getting a lot of none stories, because nobody cares about the truth anymore, never has the saying Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story, been more relevant than today

Neil · 18-03-2012, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Using the press for political purposes always has a plus and minus to it, can't say it makes much difference now, well not with the obs, but in the old days when Murvyn was the editor, the journalism at the obs was quite good and there were reporters that were prepared to go out into the community to gather news stories and not just sit at the end of a telephone waiting for it to come to them, that why we're getting a lot of none stories, because nobody cares about the truth anymore, never has the saying Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story, been more relevant than today

I think thats a very unfair comment. How many reporters were there in the old days as you put it? I suspect more than now.

garinda · 18-03-2012, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

These bids always need community consultation and involvement and this usually has to be demonstrated in the bid. The downside of over publicising these bids is that the public start to think you are useless when they don't succeed.

What many people don't realise is that a successful bid is by no means a certainty. As an example, one of the groups I am involved with has just been offered some extra money on the back of a recent project. Only 40 out of 1000 were offered this so 960 were unlucky.

Oh I quite agree.

I think it's daft for it to be announced to the press, at this stage, when nothing's happened, other than a bid for funding has been made.

The press then run with this 'good news' (non-) story.

I don't blame the press.

They work with information that's been fed to them.

It's as pie in the sky as someone announcing they're buying a yacht, because they've just purchased a lottery ticket.

If you use the press to garner political advantage for yourself, don't be too suprised if they sometimes use you.

Even an 'off-the-cuff', unguarded remark, can prove profitable.

As with the front page story about Ken, and his DNA doggy plop-plops.

garinda · 18-03-2012, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

I think thats a very unfair comment. How many reporters were there in the old days as you put it? I suspect more than now.

That's what he's saying.

No disrespect to today's reporters.

They do the best they can, with limited time, and resources.

The days of a busy Observer newsroom, with investagtive reporting, has long gone.

garinda · 18-03-2012, 19:34

The press, on the whole, does still print the truth.

They can face legal action, when they don't.

Even if we think something's really not very newsworthy.

As in this case.

What they ran with, is basically what Ken Moss posted on here.

Just with a bit of spin.

Though apparently still the truth.

cashman · 18-03-2012, 21:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

The press, on the whole, does still print the truth.

They can face legal action, when they don't.

Even if we think something's really not very newsworthy.

As in this case.

What they ran with, is basically what Ken Moss posted on here.

Just with a bit of spin.

Though apparently still the truth.

Well if they want real bull, they should try kestrelx posts.

jaysay · 19-03-2012, 08:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

I think that's a very unfair comment. How many reporters were there in the old days as you put it? I suspect more than now.

Its not about numbers Neil, the old school Observer ALL the reporters went out into the public they didn't just site on their hands waiting for news to come to them, the nearest you get to a reporter these days is if they send out a photographer. I can remember the deputy Editor coming round to see me a number of occasions back in the nineties, to follow up a story, that wouldn't happen today

Neil · 19-03-2012, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Its not about numbers Neil, the old school Observer ALL the reporters went out into the public they didn't just site on their hands waiting for news to come to them, the nearest you get to a reporter these days is if they send out a photographer. I can remember the deputy Editor coming round to see me a number of occasions back in the nineties, to follow up a story, that wouldn't happen today

It is about numbers, they don't have the time to do that now.

jaysay · 19-03-2012, 17:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

It is about numbers, they don't have the time to do that now.

Well lets put it this way if you were a self driven journalist, would you be happy just to sit at the end of a telephone waiting for somebody to ring you with a story, you can't research any story sat on your backside that's why the Obs is now a waste of space