on media Raymond Snoddy bemoans the media’s lack of objectivity
Propaganda beats facts in EU coverage
W
e are in the middle of a complex multiparty campaign that will define for a generation the UK’s political,
economic and legal structures – its place in the world and sense of self. There is uncertainty in many people’s minds, and newspapers are well placed to inform and influence the debate on whether the UK should remain a member of the European Community.
Tweets, Facebook postings and perhaps even television news reports, given their typical brevity, are little suited to the cool examination of facts and enabling voters to make a rational choice in the referendum. The BBC, in particular, has a duty to make a complex dilemma comprehensible. By 23 June, there is a good chance it will have done so. This is still a great opportunity for newspapers, unshackled from traditional party political loyalties, to play a crucial role.
Will they rise to the occasion? Probably not.
The battle lines have long since been drawn and much of the coverage already carries more than a whiff of propaganda.
This has intensified since Jeremy Corbyn finally came out in support of the “remain” case, albeit warts and all. It gives the Tory-leaning press another stick for beating the Labour leader. Which papers are likely to provide anything like enthusiastic support for staying in the EU and basic fairness in their reporting of the remain case? The Guardian, Observer and Daily Mirror are the only ones that can be relied on, apart from the
Financial Times. In the days when The Independent was a newspaper, it would have provided a more international, objective outlook. The new online Indy has changed utterly, not least because 100 out of 175 journalists have lost their jobs. With lists of six toilets with the best view, the 20 best countries in which to bring up a family, people banned from Half Moon pub in Herne Hill in south London, then nine puzzles that only smart people can solve, clickbait rather than journalism is the order of the day. It would be funny if it were not so sad. On the other side of the fence, you can rely on The Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Sun and Daily Star to face blatantly in the Brexit direction.
“ 8For the latest updates from Raymond Snoddy on Twitter go to @raymondsnoddy ” theJournalist | 21
The Times and the Sunday Times will be more even-handed although before the end – unless remain is far ahead in the polls – you will see the influence of owner Rupert Murdoch heading for the exit.
The battle lines have long since been drawn and much of the coverage already carries more than a whiff of propaganda
Sun editor Tony Gallagher will have little choice. He has already boasted more than 50 anti-EU leaders and he notes the majority of Sun readers are for Brexit. Take one day – the day when the Corbyn speech was covered – as an example. Apart from Corbyn, there were two significant referendum-related stories. One was a report for TheCityUK by consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers predicting the loss of up to 100,000 City jobs if the UK left. PwC had earlier suggested the loss of up to 950,000 British jobs
overall. The second was a warning from the Bank of England that current uncertainty could weaken growth and suffer further in event of Brexit. The Mail covered neither story, although an Alex Brummer column attacked both the IMF and the World Bank for daring to “support” the remain campaign. The Times covered only the Bank of England story. It’s not too late for newspapers to provide more honest coverage on how Brexit might affect their readers’ lives. If they fail, then we will just have to rely on the journalists of the BBC for balance and objectivity.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28