|
[Previous entry: "Candidates"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "A matter of belief"]
04 February 2004: "A quick review of the British national press"
Recently, I've been watching Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister on DVD. It's a work which has stood the test of time to a remarkable extent, especially considering the end of the Cold War. I'd like to offer a little excerpt from the episode A Conflict of Interest, regarding the British national dailies.
For those not familiar with the series, in the following exchange, the cast of characters is as follows: - Sir Humphrey Appleby KCB, MVO, MA (Oxon); Cabinet Secretary (and thus head of the Civil Service); played by the late Sir Nigel Hawthorne
- The Right Honourable James Hacker MP, PC, BDc (Econ); Prime Minister; played by the late Paul Eddington
- Bernard Woolley, MA (Oxon); Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister; played by Derek Fowlds.
| Humphrey: | [...] The only way to understand the press is to remember that they pander to their readers' prejudices. | | Hacker: | Don't tell me about the press; I know exactly who reads the papers.
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country.
The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country.
The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country.
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country.
The Financial Times is read by people who own the country.
The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country.
And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think that it is. | | Humphrey: | Oh, and Prime Minister, what about people who read the Sun? | | Bernard: | Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits. |
Classic. Though arguably, these days it's the Telegraph readers who think the country ought to be run by another country, and the Independent readers who think that it is. I'm also left to wonder what the Prof's choice of newspaper says about him.
Still, Humphrey's point about newspapers pandering to their readers' prejudicies is a thought-provoking one. A given British newspaper will pander to a single set of prejudices, whereas I get the impression many American newspapers attempt to achieve "balance," particularly in their editorial pages, by pandering to a wide range of prejudices. Which is why the local paper, the Olympian alternates columns by conservative commentators with ones by liberal commentators.
|
Navigation:
home
archives
backgrounder
e-mail
Blogs:
au currant
Black Decaf
The Illiterati
Cointelpro Tool
Norman Geras
A Fistful of Euros
Harry's Place
Plastic Gangster
Blogfonte
Tim Newman
€urosavant
Crooked Timber
Gallowglass
Mr. McGillicuddy
eameljenet
Civax
101-280
Colby Cosh
Peaktalk
Mick Hartley
Oliver Kamm
Miscellanea:
Care to contribute
to the coffee fund?
|
