do this, don't do that - media edition
Jul. 7th, 2011 10:43 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So I'm far from fully knowledgeable on either of these, but a couple of media things from the week on which I'm allowed an expert opinion ...
1. My initial, gut reaction to News of the World in the UK being shut down was probably like a lot of people's - "If you're going to practice that kind of 'journalism,' good riddance." Five seconds later, though, you realize the truth of the matter: Lots of people who had nothing to do with the phone hacking are going to be losing their jobs so Murdoch can suck up to the British government enough to be allowed to take over yet more media outlets.
All I can say is, Rebekah Brooks must've sucked a LOT of wrinkly old-man cock.
2. Jurors in the Casey Anthony case are talking about their deliberations, how they couldn't convict on the evidence as presented. And, they're likely correct. I find these interviews interesting as a reader and a journalist - unlike what the News of the World reporters did to get their information and their judgment, these are valid stories in the public interest. It's telling to see how and why 12 people could go against overwhelming public opinion.
..... And my opinion two minutes later is still that that (bad swear word for someone pretending to be in the same profession as me) redhead sucked a lot of cock. (This of course, has nothing to do with her gender - it's all about her ethics.)
1. My initial, gut reaction to News of the World in the UK being shut down was probably like a lot of people's - "If you're going to practice that kind of 'journalism,' good riddance." Five seconds later, though, you realize the truth of the matter: Lots of people who had nothing to do with the phone hacking are going to be losing their jobs so Murdoch can suck up to the British government enough to be allowed to take over yet more media outlets.
All I can say is, Rebekah Brooks must've sucked a LOT of wrinkly old-man cock.
2. Jurors in the Casey Anthony case are talking about their deliberations, how they couldn't convict on the evidence as presented. And, they're likely correct. I find these interviews interesting as a reader and a journalist - unlike what the News of the World reporters did to get their information and their judgment, these are valid stories in the public interest. It's telling to see how and why 12 people could go against overwhelming public opinion.
..... And my opinion two minutes later is still that that (bad swear word for someone pretending to be in the same profession as me) redhead sucked a lot of cock. (This of course, has nothing to do with her gender - it's all about her ethics.)
no subject
Date: 2011-07-08 04:26 am (UTC)As for the Casey Anthony verdict, I'm just tired of reading it on people's Facebook walls. I get it - yes, someone should pay with jail time for the fact that that little girl's body was left to rot without a proper burial. But I guess that wasn't part of the charges. I will say this - a jury of 12 of her peers was presented with the evidence and they listened to the judge's instructions and decided they could not convict her without a reasonable doubt. That is all we should ask of any jury. I'm glad they've decided to explain their decisions, but many people are never going to accept that maybe our justice system got it right for once.
I blame the media for that too. Maybe we should fire some more media people. How about starting with Nancy Grace? And the Entertainment "news" shows. What really makes me sick is that these kinds of trials are apparently considered "entertainment."
no subject
Date: 2011-07-08 12:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-17 01:50 am (UTC)