HIGHLY-PAID national scribes regularly produce a load of pap to fill the column inches but some bad journalism simply cannot be left without censure.
Indeed, two pieces published in the last few days are so cringeworthy that they merit a blog post.
The first load of rubbish comes, somewhat unsurprisingly, from the Daily Express. On Friday, it published a poll claiming that 99% of British people want to leave the European Union.
In the intro to the article which carries the findings, the Express laughably claims that the survey shows there is "a massive weight of public support surging behind the Daily Express's crusade to liberate Britain from Brussels".
But, as professional YouGov pollster Anthony Wells points out on the excellent UK Polling Report blog, the poll is a nonsense, referred in the industry as a 'voodoo poll'.
Mr Wells wrote: "There is unlikely to be any attempt to properly sample or weight the data, nor protections against multiple voting, nor preventing pressure groups organising people to ring up en masse.
"Yes, in this case it’s blindingly obvious that the poll is bunkum."
Of course, there is nothing unusual in the populist press publishing some sort of article based upon its own telephone poll.
Frankly, people who call up a premium rate number to declare their interest would seem to have too much time on their hands but that is besides the point.
The reason why the story probably provoked so much ire from Mr Wells was not so much the lack of caveats or weighting but the fact that the Express ran the story "in massive font on the front page".
This story was undoubtedly a case of irresponsible journalism, effectively presenting the opinions of Express readers bothered enough to pick up a phone as fact, then - worse - giving it wide exposure. Was there really nothing else to report?
Perhaps the only surprise in the wake of the Royal wedding announcement is that Prince William and Kate Middleton were not mentioned. Or, for that matter, Princess Di.
The other terrible item to turn stomachs and yet make it to the presses this week was written by the Guardian football writer Louise Taylor on Thursday. It came to light in this post on the FleetStreetBlues blog.
Ms Taylor has recently been to Doha in Qatar and, on her return, produced a sickeningly-sweet puff piece about the small Arab state's prospects of winning its bid to host the World Cup 2022.
She even attempts to suggest that Qatar's stance on the existence of Israel would soften in the event of the Israelis qualifying.
And, putting aside my personal distaste as a Newcastle fan towards Ms Taylor as a writer - she honed her dubious skills on Sunderland fanzine A Love Supreme and rarely fails to show her bias on Tyne-Wear matters - this article still stinks.
Sports blog editor Steve Busfield gave what he referred to as "full disclosure" when he explained that Ms Taylor "was on a press trip to Qatar with several other national newspaper and broadcasting journalists, ahead of the decision for the 2022 World Cup next week."
Mr Busfield added: "During the trip Louise wrote news stories about the Brazil v Argentina match and on Alex Ferguson. She was asked to write a comment piece about her impressions of Qatar."
However, when further comments queried who paid for her jaunt to the Middle East, Mr Busfield finally confirmed that "the trip was organised and paid for by the Qatar 2022 World Cup bid committee."
In other words, the original "full disclosure" was in fact the truth but not the whole truth and the whole truth shows a massive conflict of interest.
Oddly enough, the article now seems to have been somewhat buried - certainly, it is no longer visible on the football front-page of the Guardian website.
But this is nothing new for the Guardian which has fallen foul in the past to an expose in the comments box by its own readers.
In 2008, a rather dull travel blog by young Skins writer Max Gogarty was revealed in the readers' comments to have been written by the son of freelance journalist and regular Guardian contributor Paul Gogarty. Nepotism at its best.
The comments were scathing then and it is no different this time with heavy moderating showing the Guardian's 'Comment is Free' policy only applies so far.
Of the opinions which have been allowed through, the best are those which suggest Ms Taylor seeks alternative employment - as an official for the Qatari tourist board.
No doubt she would do a good job, and there would probably be plenty of money in it for her too.
Hat-tips: UK Polling Report, FleetStreetBlues
No comments:
Post a Comment