« Public goods & world government | Main | Self-ownership vs utilitarianism »

October 25, 2007



Do you reckon the reason that they report Iraq more than The Congo is because that's where they happen to have reporters? Or is it because they (the news orgs) see themselves as having to participate in the big issues of the day - to be players - rather than just to be reporters?


Journalists are in the enterainment business.


Huh? Surely reporters are not just randomly sent out in the world (Paulie - you can't believe he meant it that way)??

Nor are news organisations players in (most) world events - at least not more than the long term effect that they may have on public perceptions and hence public opinions.

No the Iraq war versus Congo war is a lot to do with public interest (particular since "our" side is directly involved in one war and not in the other). But once reporters are there because it is seem as interesting, they inevitably produce stories that are "news" rather than news being objectively important new events. I guess that is the point. This sounds a bit like the idea of "work expanding to fill the available time" - Parkinson's Law. You could create a respectable "the myth of services productivity" on this basis - arguing about all the extra and relatively unrelated sales activity that go on in hotels or banks. People are held captive while receiving certain services and are marketed other services at the time. It looks like productivity but in fact is disguising the unproductive time the consumer is forced to endure (like waiting for interesting news on CNN).

Chris Williams

Holiday in Melton? _That's_ news.

Adrian Monck

Chris - news channels are obliged to fill time to cater for changing audience. The very fact that it obliged you to continue viewing before learning enough to dismiss what was on offer is a small victory for Sky News.

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad