Distorted news value

[Pervert]

It says more about how cynical and jaded I've become that I can't recall that one, mate.

[Officer Dibble]

It seems a little odd, perverse (and I fear pretentious) that you claim to be troubled about us affording more weight to news stories about people like ourselves - about people we feel we know, about people we can identify with, e.g., Brits, Americans, Australians and similar. People who come into our homes everyday, via television and internet. People who live lives similar to ours, people with similar desires and values. They are our people, 'our tribe'. Of course we are more concerned about what happens to them than what might be going on with the Huba, Huba, tribe in down darkest Umbongo Land. It?s just human nature.

You know very well what I'm talking about, Carac. You just wanted to do a bit of gratuitous hand-wringing and stoke up that warm cosy glow of moral concern that supports and sustains you. You can?t kid the Officer.



Officer Dibble

[Officer Dibble]

"Well done for finally getting Video angels up and running by the way. You took your bloody time didnt you?"

Whayhey! Yes, it did take a while, but that was because of the necessity to spend time actually earning a living and making some dosh than fiddling about with wmv, jpegs, and HTML for comparatively little return.




Officer Dibble

[Trumpton]

Caractacus wrote:

> Conspiracy theory warning: there's a group up here that
> believes Thomas Hamilton was allowed to keep his gun licence,
> even though junior police officers who visited him as part of
> the inspection process recommended it be removed, because he
> was a senior mason and top officers and even the local MP (one
> George Robertson) were junior to him in the lodge.

I read about this theory. True or false?

The fact is that the files about this case will remain top secret until their declassification in 2097.

[Peter]

Caractacus wrote:

> If I knew it, I wouldn't be asking. Ossifer. It bothers me that
> the relevance of a news story seems to be:
>
> 1) Brits involved
> 2) US involved
> 3) English speaking ex-colonies with a lot of whites involved
> 4) Who cares?

I saw something in a newsroom once (assumed it was one of those amusing, but based in fact things) It read along the lines of

1 Brit
4 Americans/Aussies
10 Europeans
50 Africans/South Americans

As a hierarchy of newsworthyness of death tolls.

[Trumpton]

Peter wrote:

> I saw something in a newsroom once (assumed it was one of those
> amusing, but based in fact things) It read along the lines of
>
> 1 Brit
> 4 Americans/Aussies
> 10 Europeans
> 50 Africans/South Americans

1,000,000 Rwandans!