Browse > Home / Point Of View / Of What News Stands For. And Of Politicians Switching Off Their Conscience

Of What News Stands For. And Of Politicians Switching Off Their Conscience

October 10, 2009

Of What News Stands For. And Of Politicians Switching Off Their ConscienceThomas Mathew writes: I sometimes despair when I see the news programmes of today. Gone are the times when they were actually about news, with the highest possible standards of accuracy, integrity and honesty when reporting about events, both at home and across the world. Now it is all about breaking news, irrelevant stories and hastily conjured analysis.Commercialism has hit the news hard. We have now come to a point when news presenters read out comments sent to the studio by the viewers, who seem to have nothing else better to do. This alone tells me that the editors and presenters do not even know the origin of the words ‘news’. The letters of this word are the first letters of the four points of the compass – North, East, West and South – meaning information is gathered from around the world to a central point and is then presented to the viewers, with accuracy and honesty. So why on earth do people who make and present news bulletins think that the thoughts of some ignorant members of the public would be of any interest to anybody? The answer is that TV news bulletins are now involved in a battle for higher ratings, a battle in which all methods are deemed acceptable.

Politicians have long ago realised the value of television and that is why they try to appear on it as often as possible. Especially when elections approach. They use the news programmes not to inform people of what they are doing but rather to promote and publicise themselves, and say things that are of no interest to anyone. Many of them simply switch off their conscience for a time and, if asked tough questions, avoid answering them and continue banging on about totally irrelevant subjects.

Yesterday, we witnessed a classic example of a politician who has clearly mastered the ability to switch off his conscience. Yes, it was no one other than our former Prime Minister Tony Blair. This is a man who is known for his amazing vanity and total lack of manners. Mr Blair had shown up yesterday at the service of remembrance in St. Paul’s Cathedral for the servicemen who died in the illegal war in Iraq. During the service the Archbishop Bishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, who, by the way, had been appointed as head of the Anglican Church on Blair’s recommendation, criticised ‘policy makers’ for failing to consider the human cost of the Iraq conflict.

Dr Williams used his address to remind everyone that the conflict remained highly controversial. He said: ‘Many people of my generation and younger grew up doubting whether we should ever see another straightforward international conflict, fought for by a standing army with conventional weapons. We had begun to forget the realities of cost. And when such a conflict appeared on the horizon, there were those among both policy makers and commentators who were able to talk about it without really measuring the price, the cost of justice.’

You would be mistaken if you thought that Mr Blair, who claims to be a deeply committed Christian, having listened to such a damning criticism from the leader of his former church, would have buried his head in shame and very discretely left the Cathedral by the side door.
No, nothing like that happened. Blair simply switched his conscience off and went to the reception following the service to meet members of the families, who had lost their loved ones in Iraq. Being a vain man, he probably believed that they would be pleased and honoured to meet the future President of the European Union in front of TV cameras.

Well, in fact he got quite a shock when he offered his hand to Peter Brierley, the father of one of the soldiers killed in Iraq. ‘Don’t you dare,’ roared Mr Brierley.’ You have my son’s blood on your hands.’ Three of the former Prime Minister’s bodyguards ushered a visibly shocked Mr Blair away.

For a very brief moment Blair’s conscience switched on. But soon it was off again, as his silly grin was back on his lips.

– End –

Related posts:

  1. On Money Having No Conscience. And On Child Poverty

    Thomas Mathew writes: In the past year we have been able to finally realise that the people who run our banks and credit card companies...

  2. ITV’s News At Ten Hasn’t Done Well. That Figures

    I hear ITV’s News At Ten is not doing well in attracting viewers. It seems that BBC’s Ten O’Clock News has been getting more people...

  3. Hot News From Copenhagen Summit: The Offer Of Free Sex Still Stands

    Dan Majestic writes from Copenhagen: The big news here, folks, is that the local hookers, or sex workers, as they are more commonly known among...

  4. The Labour Government Stands Accused Of Breaching The Treason Felony Act 1848

    Thomas Mathew writes: The Labour government stands accused of treason for banning the hereditary peers from the House of Lords 9 years ago – in...

  5. Of One Conversation That Gordon Brown Might Have Had Recently. Or Might Have Not

    Dan Majestic writes: Do politicians have a conscience? Some people say they don’t. Others say that on very rare occasions their conscience talks to them....

Category: Point Of View  · No Comments »
Tags: , ,

Would you like to add a comment?