Diabolical Media

planemad

I'm a Landsbroki Icesave customer and have 10k invested there,I'm just gonna wait and see what happens. (thats all I can do)
I have read lots post here over the last few day some I agree with some I don't.

What I'm most concerned about with this is the media continually scaremongering and causing people panic and confusion.

All reporting over the last few weeks has had words in the headlines like

Panic,Turmoil,aggressive,grief,crisis,fear,woe, despair,risk,crunch,plunge,gloom, bail out.
The list could go on. (please add to it)

I do like to know what is going on in the country but I'm fed up with being fed the same old scare words and very poor journalism.
I feel that our demand for 24hr news is biting us back.
The financial issues of the world as they currently stand would be a lot better if it was not for this panic and scaremongering news reporting continually pumping a crisis into our heads.

I really do feel for the people who have money in organisation that have defaulted/closed ops but lets try ever so hard to keep our heads up and fight this as humans in a diplomatic way using the law that is on our side.

At the end of the day we are humans and when we have air in our lungs we are OK and can survive.

Bernard_Coleslaw

Amen to that.

juicyjude

So true, could not agree more with you planemad. Things are bad at the moment but I feel the media are thriving on this and making things so much worse. Yes they have to deliver news but the way it is being done is just not helping the situation

Patr100

Indeed.
Journalists. especially lazy ones reporting what are actually complex not necessarily black or white issues love these sensationist headlines. Even as a Icesaver - I've been sick of them for a long time.
The Sun even reported with a straight face earlier in the week we would "have to travel to Iceland to claim under the passport scheme" What utter tosh.

beingjdc

Nonsense.

Nobody who has enough money to affect the market makes their decisions based on the headlines in the newspapers or the TV news.

With the possible exception of runs on individual banks by huge numbers of small savers - but even they wouldn't be a problem if the bank actually had a sane reserve ratio and was well enough run to be a good investment through tough times.

Patr100

beingjdc wrote: »

Nonsense.

Nobody who has enough money to affect the market makes their decisions based on the headlines in the newspapers or the TV news.

Er.. ..nobody has actually said the real big decison makers are actually influenced by the media in the way you imply. It's the reporting of those actions that are being criticised as superficial,speculative and sensationist.
-

Sasslan

Unfortunately the dramatic headlines are the ones that sell newspapers and make for 'good' TV news. Too many people want to just sit and watch the square box in the evening - or day - and hang on every word. People can't, or don't, think for themselves.

This said, using a bank means trusting that the bank will have your money for you to withdraw when you want it. So people are also free to think for themselves if they lose that trust and want to withdraw their money rather than wait and see.

beingjdc

Patr100 wrote: »

Er.. ..nobody has actually said the real big decison makers are actually influenced by the media in the way you imply. It's the reporting of those actions that are being criticised as superficial,speculative and sensationist.-

Yes they have.

"The financial issues of the world as they currently stand would be a lot better if it was not for this panic and scaremongering news"

Whereas I contend that things would be much the same if it were all being kept secret from the poor delicate emotional public.

Superheavy

From my point of view, it seems the media are really shooting themselves in the foot with their reporting of the credit crunch at the moment. They need a recession less than anyone else, because if companies and advertisers are cutting back, first to go are the advertising budgets...therefore, media suffers.

However, the numerous news channels need constant streams of new material, and with the credit crunch there's so many avenues to take. Also, with the public tightening their belts, papers need big headlines to sell them, thus leading to the dramatic over-exaggeration we see, but ultimately leading to their own demise.

I have a few contacts in the local/regional press, and everyone's saying they're cutting back to the bare bones, not sure on national/international media though.

Patr100

beingjdc wrote: »

Yes they have.

"The financial issues of the world as they currently stand would be a lot better if it was not for this panic and scaremongering news"

Whereas I contend that things would be much the same if it were all being kept secret from the poor delicate emotional public.

Not quite . Saying something would be a lot better isn't the same as saying " big decison makers" eg Govts etc are influenced by sensational reporting or should keep decisons secret.. Events, actions and facts may be the same - the reporting may not. There is a difference.
This member of the "poor delicate emotional public" wants more facts and analysis and less shock horror headlines.

yee_har

This element of "Pestonisation" (seeking to outdo your studio anchor &/or other channel) reached a new low yesterday morning when (I think) Daisy "Can you tell I'm going somewhere nice after this report?" McAndrew spoke of something being "credit crunched" or suffering from "credit crunching".
When I'm looking down the barrel of possibly long drawn out compensation claims, noun/verb confusion I can well do without.