IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Blatenet Pro-Hunting Reporting by the NWN
Biker1
post Dec 28 2010, 12:27 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,040
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



May I start by stating quite categorically here that I DO NOT want to start a debate about Fox Hunting. It is banned and that is that.

What I am highlighting here is the blatant pro-hunting reporting that we have every year by the NWN as shown here and will, no doubt, be repeated in the newspaper.

Whatever happened to balanced, impartial reporting?
Not ALL of the readers of the NWN or these pages or indeed the inhabitants of the circulation area, are quite so enthusiastic and some may find this kind of reporting offensive.

(Sorry about the typo in the title - can't edit it now).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rachel
post Dec 28 2010, 12:53 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 151
Joined: 7-August 09
Member No.: 258



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 01:27 PM) *
May I start by stating quite categorically here that I DO NOT want to start a debate about Fox Hunting. It is banned and that is that.

What I am highlighting here is the blatant pro-hunting reporting that we have every year by the NWN as shown here and will, no doubt, be repeated in the newspaper.

Whatever happened to balanced, impartial reporting?
Not ALL of the readers of the NWN or these pages or indeed the inhabitants of the circulation area, are quite so enthusiastic and some may find this kind of reporting offensive.

(Sorry about the typo in the title - can't edit it now).


I have to agree with you, Biker 1, the whole report was in support of fox hunting, going so far as to mention at the end a "rumour" that the anti-hunt lobby might attend, as though they are considered the Devil's own party! Having read the piece, I was left wondering exactly how many people were there in Lambourn...it said hundreds, but I can't believe that that many people tipped up to see what was always going to be a minor event due to the current laws & the weather conditions. This kind of biased reporting will, at the very least, lead readers to doubt the factual content. I certainly wouldn't bother to spend hard earned cash on a paper that I thought would be reporting so impartially.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 28 2010, 01:00 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



Yes Biker1, I quite agree.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 28 2010, 01:25 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 12:27 PM) *
Whatever happened to balanced, impartial reporting?

The Vine and Craven Hunt is the local hunt, and as with any organisation, it wouldn't do for a local paper to write negative about a legal hunt provided the said organisation was operating with in the law, and not to the detriment to the townsfolk. I would imagine, however, if there were any anti-fox hunting members in attendance that day, there would have been a comment from them. Equally, as this was not an official fox hunt, and hunting with hounds is almost illegal, there's little else to report.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 28 2010, 01:33 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Iommi @ Dec 28 2010, 01:25 PM) *
The Vine and Craven Hunt is the local hunt, and as with any organisation, it wouldn't do for a local paper to write negative about a legal hunt provided the said organisation was operating with in the law, and not to the detriment to the townsfolk.

A story about a hunt has more dimensions to it than just a traditional social event, and though you may be right that it wouldn't benefit the NWN to cover those other dimensions, the criticism of bias and impartiality appears to me to be well made, and that can't be healthy in a newspaper.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Dec 28 2010, 01:35 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 12:27 PM) *
I DO NOT want to start a debate about Fox Hunting. It is banned and that is that.

LOL - banned is it!?!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Dec 28 2010, 01:39 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,040
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Dec 28 2010, 03:35 PM) *
LOL - banned is it!?!


Yes I know wink.gif - but legally it is!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 28 2010, 01:44 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Dec 28 2010, 01:33 PM) *
A story about a hunt has more dimensions to it than just a traditional social event, and though you may be right that it wouldn't benefit the NWN to cover those other dimensions, the criticism of bias and impartiality appears to me to be well made, and that can't be healthy in a newspaper.

The NWN appears to have given some air time to a pro-hunt lobby, however; there was no anti-hunt in attendance for comment, but had there had been and they had been ignored, then I would have had a different opinion.

I see this more as anti-hunt people being ruffled by the pro-hunt content, more than anything. Although I think one of the comments by Peter Walwyn makes him look daft: “I don't like football very much but I won't ask for it to be banned, this is our thing and they can’t stop us from going out.” What sort of logic to support hunting is that? rolleyes.gif

QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 01:39 PM) *
Yes I know wink.gif - but legally it is!

Fox hunting isn't banned; hunting with hounds, under certain circumstances, is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Dec 28 2010, 03:07 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



I think Iommi is the voice of reason here. If there was anyone present who was anti-hunting, I'm sure they would have been asked to comment on the matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
oldharry
post Dec 28 2010, 04:33 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 4-May 10
Member No.: 877



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 12:27 PM) *
May I start by stating quite categorically here that I DO NOT want to start a debate about Fox Hunting. It is banned and that is that.

What I am highlighting here is the blatant pro-hunting reporting that we have every year by the NWN as shown here and will, no doubt, be repeated in the newspaper.

Not so much pro-hunting as sucking up to the racing trainers, landowners, the monied, and the members of the local Mafia in general.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post Dec 28 2010, 04:52 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,927
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



Strikes me as positive report about a local event. Why are the fun police on here whining because some people had a good time?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Dec 28 2010, 05:33 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,040
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Strafin @ Dec 28 2010, 06:52 PM) *
Why are the fun police on here whining because some people had a good time?

Sensitive subject, biased reporting - not about people "having a good time" if that's what floats their boat.

The report could simply have stated the facts without sensationalising the event which, as I said, could be offensive to some.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Dec 28 2010, 05:52 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



Since when have newspapers ever been totally balanced and impartial? Don't they all reflect to some degree the views of their owners, and why shouldn't they?

Newspapers' main priorities are, in order of importance

1) To make money
2) To represent the views of their owners
3) To report the news
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 28 2010, 10:15 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Dec 28 2010, 05:33 PM) *
Sensitive subject, biased reporting - not about people "having a good time" if that's what floats their boat.

The report could simply have stated the facts without sensationalising the event which, as I said, could be offensive to some.

But then we would have to discuss/argue the hunting debate, wouldn't we?

So yes, it was a nice little piece about people going about their way. Not that I would for a second want to go and do what they would 'realy' want do, at all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gardeb
post Dec 29 2010, 05:33 PM
Post #15


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 19-December 09
Member No.: 570



Surely the point of a local paper is that it reports things that the local people are up to.
Whether the "anti's" were there or not it correctly reported a large public gathering of people out to enjoy themselves.

Surely its as locally interesting as Mr Smiths curliest carrot competition winning five foot carrot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Dec 29 2010, 07:13 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (gardeb @ Dec 29 2010, 05:33 PM) *
Surely the point of a local paper is that it reports things that the local people are up to.
Whether the "anti's" were there or not it correctly reported a large public gathering of people out to enjoy themselves.

Surely its as locally interesting as Mr Smiths curliest carrot competition winning five foot carrot.

Sure, it's right that a traditional social event as colourful as the hunt gets reported, and that isn't in dispute, the problem was the fauning tone of the report, and the pro-hunting rhetoric which was not balanced with an informed counter-comment.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gardeb
post Dec 29 2010, 07:36 PM
Post #17


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 19-December 09
Member No.: 570



[quote name='Simon Kirby' date='Dec 29 2010, 07:13 PM' post='30394']
Sure, it's right that a traditional social event as colourful as the hunt gets reported, and that isn't in dispute, the problem was the fauning tone of the report, and the pro-hunting rhetoric which was not balanced with an informed counter-comment.
[/quote

Why should there be a counter comment ?
Hunting always has been a rural event supported by many despite what the the Labour party claimed. Everyone wonders why rural events and traditions have been pushed aside in the interests of party politics and when such an event is brought to the fore there are negative comments about impartial reporting.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Dec 29 2010, 07:48 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Dec 29 2010, 07:13 PM) *
Sure, it's right that a traditional social event as colourful as the hunt gets reported, and that isn't in dispute, the problem was the fauning tone of the report, and the pro-hunting rhetoric which was not balanced with an informed counter-comment.

I would agree, IF representatives of the 'opposition' were present but were not spoken to or their views not reported.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Dec 30 2010, 07:31 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,040
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (gardeb @ Dec 29 2010, 09:36 PM) *
Why should there be a counter comment ?
Hunting always has been a rural event supported by many despite what the the Labour party claimed. Everyone wonders why rural events and traditions have been pushed aside in the interests of party politics and when such an event is brought to the fore there are negative comments about impartial reporting.

Because it WAS NOT impartial reporting and has been duplicated in the NWN to the same degree of bias as predicted.

The reason why Hunting with dogs was banned is because so many found it unacceptable and offensive.
This style of report is an insult to all those.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gardeb
post Dec 30 2010, 07:42 PM
Post #20


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 19-December 09
Member No.: 570



"The reason why Hunting with dogs was banned is because so many found it unacceptable and offensive.
This style of report is an insult to all those."

Its not insulting at all simply reporting events.
Take a look at the vote - a complete split along Party lines with little dissent either way.
Most people didn't care but a loud anti movement made it a political winner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 9th April 2020 - 09:26 PM