Rank: Forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Wish I could just make things up as part of my job! Newspapers appear to be able to misrepresent with relative impunity. Still if there is a relaxation of GENUINE H&S adherence following the Lord Young review, mark my words, watch the press change tack and start calling for tougher action on workplace injuries and fatalities!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I think the main point here is what the Chief Constable says at the end of the piece 'people seem to want it both ways'. That's one of the greatest faults of our newspapers, we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't. The media have power without responsibility (Disraeli said that), and until they have to carry the can for some of the things they do and say I'm afraid we have to live with it. All I can say is that given that journalists and editors apparently know everything, it's a real wonder they're not running the world by now,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
JWK, I think they largely are as politicians in a democracy pay very close attention to "public opinion" as printed in the papers and broadcast on TV, particularly when elections are looming.
The alternative is totalitarian states or anarchy, so we are are all doomed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I’m glad to see we are all being positive and upbeat!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Ah, stuff (hope you don't mind me calling you stuff?), do they follow 'public opinion' or do they mould it? Not an easy question to answer. And unlike politicians there's absolutely no way to call them to account, at least we have elections for MPs; who elected the editor of the Daily Mail? Or the Guardian? We don't need either censorship or state control of the media, we need some way of making them accountable. Rather like you or me, really,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Just for once I think the DM got it about right. Now if they hadn't given the police side of the coin then I'd agree it's over the top.
The Police risk assessment is probably also right - a £7k bike vs a life - I know what I'd choose. And I'm a biker!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Wish I could just make things up as part of my job! Newspapers appear to be able to misrepresent with relative impunity. Still if there is a relaxation of GENUINE H&S adherence following the Lord Young review, mark my words, watch the press change tack and start calling for tougher action on workplace injuries and fatalities
I think your right there purplebadger. I can see the headlines now "call for tougher H&S regulations etc etc"
still, I can't really see how much our mate lord young can change . As welll all no it's not the regulations that are the problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The job of newspapers is to sell newspapers, a fact some people forget. Stories which attract readers sell newspapers so papers will try to find the most controversial angle to any story. The Daily Mail just likes to use H&S as whipping boy, but just wait until something serious happens like the Buncefield fire/explosion. Go back a look at the stories that papers ran then- they all but called for the use of petrol to be banned, as it is sooo dangerous.
As for Lord Young, well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
jwk wrote: And unlike politicians there's absolutely no way to call them to account, at least we have elections for MPs; who elected the editor of the Daily Mail? Or the Guardian? John There is a clear way to make journalists / editors accountable for their stories. If they cannot sell newspapers, they will be out of a job. Effectively they are elected as purchasers are endorsing their views. No endorsement, no sales!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Colin,
I think that that way of electing newspaper editors is part of the problem; it encourages the exact opposite of responsibility and accountability. Everybody knows that people prefer juicy speculation rather than dry facts, of course scandal and lies sell newspapers.
It was Baldwin who used the power and responsibility line, not Disraeli, sorry about that. Baldwin took it from Kipling, and it's that power which is the problem. I know that newspapers exist to make money, and that their proprietors are much more concerned with that than with the consequences which can arise in the pursuit of profit. But suppose Lord Young does scale H&S back, and suppose because of this people die. Who will carry the can? Not the media, bet your bottom dollar. But who will be responsible? In part at least it will be the media.
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.