Brian Edwards ‘blows the gaff’ on pretensions of the Fourth Estate
Brian Edwards, with whom I rarely see eye to eye, has an interesting article on the NBR website. He is writing about conflicts of interest in the media.
Adam’s eye was caught by these paragraphs, Adam has taken the liberty of bolding some especially pertinent, to his mind, text:-
There is actually nothing new about all of this.
So Edwards is saying that the NZ media have essentially always been compromised in this regard.
Then a key group of sentences:-
The list of television and radio broadcasters working in news and current affairs who are or have been simultaneously engaged in activities which conflict with their obligation to be and be seen to be utterly impartial in all matters relating to their jobs, is extremely long. They may well be in the majority. Conflicts of interest among such practitioners abound.
According to Edwards conflicts of interest in the news media are endemic and the majority of the media are essentially compromised in this regard. He highlights the area of media training.
The real trouble with the media training business is that some of its practitioners are still working journalists, reporters and interviewers. That makes them both gamekeepers and poachers, who can potentially end up reporting on or interviewing their own clients. Now that is as good a definition of ‘conflict of interest’ as you’ll find.
Edwards has ‘blown the gaff’ on the pretensions of the Fourth Estate. We have seen a lot of guff recently on how the duty of the press is to be impartial and objective and hold politicians to account. Yet myriad instances of ‘poor’ reporting or one sided articles come to mind. So the articles on perceived conflicts of interest in print and broadcast media, nearly always focused on National, are from the pens and mouths of ‘journalists’ who are in fact in many cases conflicted themselves. Now a number of words come to mind, but Adam will settle for two – sanctimonious hyprocrites.