News reporting has became a very strange business, both at a national, (main stream media) or local level.
As I sat in the press office at the Reform UK party conference, you could overhear conversions of journalists desperately trying to link Nigel Farage with quoting “fake news channels” or saying that he endorsed Andrew Tate. Following the event I looked at some of the news reports and it reinforced that the reporting on Reform UK was rarely balanced.
If someone in the public eye has spoken about something, then it’s fair that it is a subject for being reported upon. However non of the subjects, along with others you could see in reports, were mentioned at the conference, but many news outlets were desperate to get a critical angle.
It’s true that people will tend towards reading things that they agree with, so they were playing to anti-Brexit and anti-Farage sentiment. But that is a poor excuse as a way for gaining hits.
But here’s a radical thought, how about just telling people about something, rather than trying to influence what they think about something. That’s a truly radical concept, as we don’t have online informers, but online influencers.
The aim of Reform UK Watch is to develop informative news items, promote debate, and develop true understanding of the party. It isn’t about being supportive or critical, but about being objective. As an approach that should help widen the readership of Reform UK news items, and help (to a degree) people to understand further about the party.
How does that approach square with the members or with the party leader team themselves ?
As a party they have been subject to criticism over the relatively short time they have been running. At a party level initially they were either ignored or received coverage from only the newer media outlets. But the party developed into a presence that could not be ignored, so most now report on the party, but apparently most look for a critical angle. That has led to criticism-averse approach at a local level, or general negativity towards the press. I think that it is understandable, but not all news outlets or reporters are the same.
I think it is fair to say that there is some scepticism in what this site is about, and that will possibly only change over time.
If the party gets things wrong, and receives criticism in the press, it should expect that to be reported in a fair and honest way. That could also be in a solutionistic way, meaning reporting on something that wasn’t right, and something has happened to sort it out – what the party shouldn’t expect is media circling like buzzards for any possible mistake.
I don’t think we will always get things right, and we would welcome all feedback, now, and along the way.
admin