Reading this you are getting my thoughts, but these are obviously subject to interpretation. A slant can be applied to anything to impress the writers views without changing the facts.
- He did not pay any tax
- There wasn’t any tax due
- He manipulated the system to avoid paying tax
All three examples lead to the same result but your judgement of the person in question varies depending on which version you are given.
It could be, therefore, that everything we read, in the written press, is true, to a certain extent (some tabloid stories beggar belief). They can often be cutting and hurtful, or even spiteful, but nevertheless the facts are all there (if not the editor is not doing their job and are subject to libel). It is then, the way that articles are written that determines the mood with which we view it.
I guess that if all stories were written a bland way then the reader would soon get bored, stop reading and never read that persons articles again.
At this point if you ARE still reading this, thank you…
But, to make an article interesting, surely doesn’t mean you have to disgrace that person, hound that person ‘out of town’ or ruin their life. To do so, in my opinion, is a step too far. It is obviously right that people are held to account for their actions and as a public we probably have a right to know. In our society nobody should have the right to tell us what to say, or write, but there has to be a line and nobody should step beyond it.
I have over the weekend been commenting to anyone who would listen/read my disappointment in the treatment of David Laws. I feel that this is one occasion when some commentators in the media have gone too far. They have broken a good man, for what? political gain! The facts were presented in such a way that there was only going to be hurt. Figures were used that could have been presented very differently i.e £40,000 which could have been put as a yearly average, or even a monthly average. The figure would have been much smaller and less aggravating . It’s that old cliché that you can say anything with statistics. Not to mention the homophobic way his sexuality was ‘outed’
There were some in the media that sought to redress the balance, for which I applaud, there was a brilliant article by Matthew Parris in the Times which I urge you to read http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article7140642.ece
Others were not so repentant and not only continued their tirade, but started on David Laws successor too. This has got to be another step too far.
I can understand that newspapers hold a political allegiance and it is to that end that they put a slant on their articles but at the moment it seems more like a vendetta than a stance.
For the sake of the Country, to protect the economic stability, the Coalition needs to be seen to be strong (whether you agree with it, or not) and everyone, including the press, need to remember that. The shooting down of Liberal Democrat Treasury Chiefs is not just an attack on LibDems or Coalition, it is an attack on the economic survival of the U.K.
Please stop it NOW before it’s too late.