Hi there, I am looking into the idea that news is a maufactured
product to be sold in the marketplace.  I am looking for an in-depth
answer that I can use to help get my investigation started.  I am
based in the UK and so need lots of references and examples of using
UK news and worldwide stories that will back up any points made - I
was thinking maybe issues on Terrorism etc would be most apt in the
current world political climate.  Quotes from famous or infamous
individuals would also be amazing (people like Rupert Murdoch etc).  I
am looking to write around 3000 words on this one section so as much
detail as possible please - I will reward a good answer with a good
tip!

---

Request for Question Clarification by journalist-ga on 30 Nov 2002 11:40 PST

Have any of the comments below proved of value to your research?  Any
clarification you might provide would be of assistance to the
researcher who answers your question.

---

Clarification of Question by dontam-ga on 30 Nov 2002 12:28 PST

all this is excellent stuff everyone - thanks for the input!  

Has anyone got any stuff on the way the news has been used in the
terrorism war being staged at the moment by all sides involved?

also any more ideas and answers are most welcome - again with
references/sources/links

Thanks a bunch

Tamas

---

Request for Question Clarification by leli-ga on 01 Dec 2002 01:56 PST

Hi Tamas

This question interests me but I'm a little unsure about your thoughts
on manufactured news and terrorism. I wouldn't like to answer your
question without checking a little further with you.
There are some writers who think 'the war on terrorism' is presented
in a way that suits the (UK and US) government's purposes, but they
don't suggest this has as much to do with an actual 'marketplace' as
with political propaganda. If there is bias, it's not coming directly
from commercial interests.
I think there *is* material for you about British and US governments
putting their own spin on terrorism news, and I think there *is*
material about the British media offering readers and viewers a
manufactured product. I know you want plenty of ideas and links with a
British slant, but how specific do you need the connection between
'marketplace' and reporting on terrorism to be?
Also, am I right that you are writing a section on terrorism as part
of a much larger project, so that you are interested in other topics
too?

Leli

---

Clarification of Question by dontam-ga on 11 Dec 2002 06:42 PST

Sorry about the delay in clarification, I havent checked back for a
while.

I take your points Leli, about the terrorism news being more
propaganda than commercially led, and so will maybe put that aspect on
the investigation to one side for now.  Do I need to concentrate on
the commercial side of things.  T think that the hardest part of this
topic is to define the term product.  I think there needs to be
investigation on the idea that the news can be seen to be simply a
tool for commercial investors rather than a service to the public.  In
another way there needs to be some investigation ito the idea that the
news can be created from scratch, like a product, simply for revenue,
like a product.

I hope that this helps anyone to answer this question.

---

Clarification of Question by dontam-ga on 11 Dec 2002 06:45 PST

Sorry for the grammatical errors in that last clarification!  Anyway
it should read 'I DO need to concentrate on the commerical side of
things.  I think.....' etc.

Sorry!

Having been a newspaper journalist, my experience leads me to believe
that -as far as newspapers are concerned- the news is not a product
but a by-product filler (and it's probably the same with other news
media).  Newspapers seem to exist solely to make money from
advertising.  Period.  Though this may not have been the way the
meduim was originally intended, it is how it seems to be today and the
topic was even referred to at a press association banquet in my US
state.  The speaker remarked that the readers used to be the customers
of a newspaper but now the customers were the advertisers and, because
he was a writer, he viewed this as a very sad development.

In one newspaper for which I once worked, the employees were informed
that our newspaper content was to be made up of 60% advertising and
40% news and features.  The profit made on advertising is simply
phenomenal and was the reason the ad staff made $30-$50K a year and
the editorial staff made $18-$20K a year.  If you look only at
salaries in newspapers, you can see which employee positions are the
most financially valued.  The publisher made approx. $120,000 per year
(this included numerous ad sales bonuses) and the role of publisher
was to support the ad sales staff.  Much to my chagrin, my publisher
cared nothing for the quality of the editorial side of the business.

The newspaper mentioned above is in a very small US town and has a
print run of approx. 5,500 and a circulation of approx. 4,000 with
anywhere from 500 to 1,500 copies put in the trash bin after each run.
 The high print run was touted as the circulation but that was to
entice advertisers.  The actual circulation of the paper was 20% to
30% lower than claimed.  The phrase "we print and distribute 5,500
copies..." was inferred to advertisers as the circulation.  A bit of
bait-and-switch phraseology.

In my experience, the only reason newspapers exist today is to make
money from advertising.  I wanted to offer my experience to you in
case it somehow winds up being an offshoot of your research.

I highly recommend you read the book "Into the Buzzsaw - Leading
Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press"  Part of the synopsis
offered at Amazon.com reads in part "To the uninitiated reader, the
accounts of what goes on behind the scenes at major news organizations
are shocking. Executives regularly squelch legitimate stories that
will lower their ratings, upset their advertisers or miff their
investors."  You may find the book very helpful in your research and
it's available from Amazon at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1573929727/webwriternews0d
or at other online and offline bookstores.  It is an eye-opener in
many ways.

Good luck in your quest.

Fodder for your research:

In the Spanish-American War, newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst
was told by a reporter that there were no battles in Cuba to
photograph. According to legend, Mr. Hearst replied, "You supply the
pictures, I'll supply the war."
From: http://enquirer.com/columns/bronson/1999/06/06/pb_planet_of_pundits.html

websearcher-ga

P.S. - Quoted from one of the reviews at Amazon:

"Which story is the scariest? Well, everyone eats so Monsanto's push
to get bovine growth hormone into all our milk comes to mind. Jane
Akre details the process (i.e. the longest test for long-term human
toxicity lasted 30 days on 30 rats - and although the FDA was told
there were no adverse effects, one third of the rats suffered cysts
and lesions) and then the demise of her story, orchestrated by
Monsanto lawyers and abetted by her station's new owners, Rupert
Murdoch."

All three coments are reality. "Manufactured product for a market
place" is the result even if it is not the mechanism. A story that
offends an advertiser will be killed unless someone makes a mistake.
News that makes (subtilely) readers more likely to respond to the
advertisers is encouraged over news that is advertising nuetral. Try
Jeff Rince or Jeff Rinse in the google search engine. Neil

Jeff Rense was the first item. www.rense.com  You can listen to the
archived interviews; guests Jim Marrs and Len Horowitz may be best for
your purpose. Both have web sites, as do most of Jeff's guests. Jeff
Rense and Jim Marrs are both former main stream media.   Neil