|
Post by roverpup on Oct 14, 2017 1:12:33 GMT
Yes it does. But the media also loves to spread the dirt as wide as possible and drag as many famous people in as possible no matter how tenuous the link to increase interest. It’s not just about profiting from the public,s love of scandal but that does play a part., I think we are mixing a couple of things up. A news organisation is a multi-departmental entity and there are investigative reporters who are supposed to report on crime and go after stories without “prejudice or influence” and hopefully they are doing just that and getting to the truth of the matter. But as far as spreading dirt and living of the proceeds of scandal - that would be in reference more to the nefarious NY Post Page Six (or in some papers like the DM the entire paper) kind of thing that isn’t in the business of seeking the truth but produces salacious material because it is consumed with such an appetite by the public at large. Scandal rags (including those on TV and the internet) are definitely NOT news gathering institutions and couldn’t care less about seeking the truth or reporting the facts. And I think in this thread (if I understand correctly) we are discussing the publicity of a movie and any fallout from the HW scandal that would affect that publicity - something very different from the actual reporting of the crimes done by someone or some organisation. I think it is beneficial to separate those two entities when discussing “the media”.
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on Oct 14, 2017 1:21:43 GMT
But even the “regular” news skirts close to talking about certain stories and issues because of salaciousness. Look at CNN. It’s a continuum, isn’t it? From tabloid rags peddling pure gossip on one end, and pbs news hour or some other, strictly boring news on the other. I understand why Trump calls them fake news. It’s a stupid attribution, but I get it. I don’t know exactly where a line gets drawn.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Oct 14, 2017 1:35:50 GMT
I have personally known many, many reporters (from radio, TV and newspapers - including my husband who was a reporter/editor for over 40 years) all my adult life and I have never come across even one who is just into salaciousness. But then I only know people who work for actual, real news organisations.
I haven’t watched CNN in a long time but I don’t really classify it as a “regular” news channel. At least not the American version of CNN. When we were in France we watched the international version of CNN and found it very, very different from the American version - it was much more like Al Jazeera which I always found very informative in a straightforward manner.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 14, 2017 2:07:37 GMT
I guess treated improperly could be “just” to bully someone and not necessarily sexual assault. He was famous for that! Of course it’s still bad and make me wonder about SAG, where were they? I mean it’s not that bad compared to what he did to those women but I guess the “bad moment” BC talked about in that podcast should had been in public in a room full of not just celebrities and press but also SAG representatives! He bullied an actor at the SAG awards!
Actresses and even bullied actors surely went to SAG with complains. Are they so powerless?
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 14, 2017 2:15:13 GMT
I have personally known many, many reporters (from radio, TV and newspapers - including my husband who was a reporter/editor for over 40 years) all my adult life and I have never come across even one who is just into salaciousness. But then I only know people who work for actual, real news organisations. I haven’t watched CNN in a long time but I don’t really classify it as a “regular” news channel. At least not the American version of CNN. When we were in France we watched the international version of CNN and found it very, very different from the American version - it was much more like Al Jazeera which I always found very informative in a straightforward manner. I guess they are talking about entertainment journalism. The New York Times and The New Yorker did a good work. It’s perplexing why it take so long and it seems he had a huge influence everywhere! Everybody is is saying it helped he is much more weaker now so it would be interesting to see what happens not just with him and his company but also with Amazon. Today a journalist published an article narrating how she and various publication (including NYT) were threatened by lawyers so they didn’t published the piece accusing their CEO of harassment. They suspended the guy yesterday and apparently cancelled the premiere of the new Woody Allen film. EDITED: About the movie: I guess it’s still possible that it’s released in non-American territory.The rights of indie movies are usually sell to international companies months before the release.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Oct 14, 2017 3:31:23 GMT
And why did the influence suddenly end this week? Was his brother the real power behind the throne, and decided to kick him out? I mean, Sharon Waxman researched this and wrote an article that the NY Times refused to print over 10 years ago, when HW found out about it. So what changed?
I'd be more sad about TCW if the reviews had been better, but as it is, I don't really mind waiting longer or not seeing it at all.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Oct 14, 2017 11:24:07 GMT
Yes it does. But the media also loves to spread the dirt as wide as possible and drag as many famous people in as possible no matter how tenuous the link to increase interest. It’s not just about profiting from the public,s love of scandal but that does play a part., I think we are mixing a couple of things up. A news organisation is a multi-departmental entity and there are investigative reporters who are supposed to report on crime and go after stories without “prejudice or influence” and hopefully they are doing just that and getting to the truth of the matter. But as far as spreading dirt and living of the proceeds of scandal - that would be in reference more to the nefarious NY Post Page Six (or in some papers like the DM the entire paper) kind of thing that isn’t in the business of seeking the truth but produces salacious material because it is consumed with such an appetite by the public at large. Scandal rags (including those on TV and the internet) are definitely NOT news gathering institutions and couldn’t care less about seeking the truth or reporting the facts. And I think in this thread (if I understand correctly) we are discussing the publicity of a movie and any fallout from the HW scandal that would affect that publicity - something very different from the actual reporting of the crimes done by someone or some organisation. I think it is beneficial to separate those two entities when discussing “the media”. Roverpup. I am well aware of what the media is, having worked in and with it for over 25 years in Ireland, the UK and further afield on international issues (including in the US). So I'm very familiar with the different disciplines of journalism and the varying editorial focus and ethos of different outlets. However, as you yourself have pointed out this thread is about TCW. And my posts were in relation to whether it is a good idea to cease promotion of the movie and postpone or abandon release depending on how things go. The fact is the journalists covering TCW promotion would be entertainment correspondents and they would likely be joined by general news tabloid journos seeing an opportunity for headlines. Therefore, I stand by what I said. That said I feel that in an effort to combat the ever growing dominance of social media where pretty much anything goes, serious outlets are becoming increasingly tabloid in order to compete. And alas the audience for that type of journalism far outweighs those nterested in serious analysis.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 14, 2017 12:49:18 GMT
And why did the influence suddenly end this week? Was his brother the real power behind the throne, and decided to kick him out? I mean, Sharon Waxman researched this and wrote an article that the NY Times refused to print over 10 years ago, when HW found out about it. So what changed? Some people, apparently Harvey himself are blaming his brother but others are mentioning the question that his company is in financial problems since a few years ago. Random hits maintain it had keep it afloat but it’s not the same that 10 years ago. And there are people mentioning his age and how he don’t “look” so physically stronger like he was. That's why I said it would be interesting to see what happens with Amazon because that is a strong company. We will see if there is an actual change there or if it’s framed just like a story of an evil monster and how without him everything is alright. More about Harvey, the bully: www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/felicity-huffman-says-true-harvey-weinstein-threatened-her-career-she-didnt-wear-marchesa-1048760
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Oct 14, 2017 14:17:50 GMT
Actually I agree with you Ellie so maybe I wasn’t expressing myself clearly.
I only meant to say that in this thread the focus is on the entertainment/publicity/awards aspect of the movie (if it were to come out - which is kind of moot now) which is entirely different to investigative journalism concerning the details of the crimes committed by HW (which is more the focus of the other thread - which honestly I think shouldn’t be in TCW section now, seeing how most of the posts seem to have very little to do with the actual movie).
I agree that, unfortunately, because of social media, even more reputable news organisations have to dabble in the sordidness of internet gossip on occasion. But hopefully those outlets will at least try to vet sources and information to a certain standard that lesser “rag” operations don’t.
I guess I am just preternaturally touchy about the use of a blanket term like “the media” when there is a definite divide in my mind between real news gathering organizations with actual standards of conduct when doing stories (even when doing entertainment stories), and the gossip media outlets that have no integrity at all when going after fodder to fill their pages/screens.
Sorry if I seemed hyper about this.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 14, 2017 16:55:18 GMT
|
|