It has kicked off massively with all this Jack Maynard stuff.
If you have been living under a rock basically a youtube vlogger who is the brother of a sort-of singer has been taken out of I’m a Celebrity for a series of tweets that contain racial/homophobic slurs.
(That’s how the tabloids have described him using the N-word anyway. *rolling my eyeeees*)
Anyway, he’s been pulled out of the jungle so he can defend his actions.
And then I was listening to my local radio station this morning and the presenter said something along the lines of what kind of “scummy horrible newspaper journalist” scrolls through someones twitter feed just to find a story.
Truth bomb, every single newspaper journalist.
I am far from offended by this comment. Last week I was called a tosser and a fat arse so to put me in a scummy-non-sweary category was a nice change to be honest.
I don’t think you can appreciate until you’ve worked in media how much pressure there is to create interesting content for people to consume.
I mean I am far from a tabloid reporter but I’ve looked through twitter feeds of new influential people in the area if its close to deadline and I haven’t written anything remotely close to a front page. Just as my colleagues have and will continue to do. And why? Because the public will read it, and the public have a right to know what is being published on social media. End of.
Journalist get a bad reputation for being vultures and negative but thats only because people spread negative things.
A lot of journalists do really brilliant work. For example this.
It’s an interactive report dedicated to victims and survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster.
This will have taken hours, days weeks of investigation to create such a personal report on each individual. I personally feel they have done a brilliant job of capturing the essence of these people and the sheer terror of that night.
Journalists are called scummy because the only thing that people remember is the bad, they don’t remember those happy pieces, the emotive pieces and they focus on the negative.
Journalists cater to the masses. I’m a celebrity has over 10million viewers and journalists know that the viewers will be interested to read anything to do with it. It’s common sense. They are going to run the story because it will sell papers.
I got into journalism because I wanted to communicate with the masses about things that matter, and amidst the press releases and twitter scrolling, I do get to do that.
I get to give charities a voice who otherwise maybe wouldn’t.
I am allowed to give someone and outlet to speak their opinion in a controlled environment.
Sometimes I feel I get to make a difference to someone.
And I do good work, I help the environment, I get involved in fundraising, I give to charity, I donate to food banks and charity shops. But sometimes in my job I scroll through twitter to find something that other journalists might have missed and I write a story.
Is it my fault that someone has previously written something controversial who is an influencial person to the masses?
So yeah, just wanted to put my two pence in. Doesn’t mean I will stop listening to that radio station, because I know that a lot of the listeners will have agreed and it’s the presenters job to appeal to the masses.
And on the same note a little tip is to know that everything that you put online leaves a footprint and it doesn’t matter how many times you delete it nothing stays erased for long. So be kind.