Sunday, April 07, 2002

Someone asked me today what it is I have against journalists. Easy. Nothing. Good ones fill a necessary and vital void - they tell what's going on in the world, bring in a series of views, provide perhaps a balancing view. Bad ones look for something/someone to exploit in a story; they look for a way to unpick what's been done with classic "told you so" logic aka perfect hindsight. They are necessarily smarter than us because they can see what we've done and apply today's knowledge to the problem. They can also spot a bigger picture playing out when others closer to the action may not see it. So, on slow news days like the few we had last week when then only story was about an NAO report that was (actually) broadly positive with some good recommendations for what we need to do, it's a shame to see only certain sections being picked out, but that's doesn't change what we do, but it does renew our focus on doing things right and doing the right things. So, nothing against journalists. The good ones are great, the bad ones are just out there doing what they do. Telling them apart is something that you can see with experience alone. Fortunately, that's not my job.

No comments:

Post a Comment