Stop Demanding Timescales
The obsession with timelines is a direct consequence of a few things - the 24-hour news cycle, Social Media expectations and cults of personality/populism.
Recommended Listening: Bad News - "O Levels" (YouTube)
There is one thing that has become increasingly jarring in the UK news media, and that is the addiction of news presenters to insisting politicians put a date on achieving anything, as if they have some sort of superpower to make the world dance to their particular tune. They will claim it is about holding politicians to account, but is it really? News commentators need to stop demanding timescales to suit their own agenda rather than ours - let's have an unreasonable debate...
Before I made my Sunday pilgrimage to the coffee shop (breakfast brownie - spiced citrus tea - favourite table) I decided to brave a bit of Laura Kuenssberg's Sunday politics show. I lasted till the end of the interview with Yvette Cooper before having to switch off for the continued health of my ground down teeth and bitten tongue - it's really not healthy to get annoyed so early in the morning. Yvette Cooper, current Head of Stemming the Tide of Humanity in a Humane Way had to chip in pointedly early on as Laura, still relying on sympathetic lighting to hide the tear tracks from the loss of her top-fave boosterism Tory mates, tried to absolve the previous government of any blame by declaring the utterly bonkers Rwanda Deportation scheme was not a part of the debate as we would never know if it was good or not by virtue of not actually starting. It was icily pointed out that it had run for two years, cost a gazillion pounds and had 'deported' four people who volunteered to be paid to move to another country. According to Laura, the former Political Editor at the BBC, this could in no way indicate failure - so come on Yvette, give Laura a TIMELINE for SUCCESS!!!
There then followed an odd interview of Laura fighting to not take her true-blue final form, live on telly. "Small boat crossings have INCREASED dramatically under your government!" she asserted, even after Yvette calmly reminded Laura that the General Election happened in July and since that time, they had started to take action after the previous government all but gave up on maintaining an asylum system worth a damn because the optics of desperate people 'stealing jobs' played better to their base. Laura had no truck with increased numbers between January and July not being the fault of Labour while in opposition. While ignoring this assertion of reality, it was then demanded that Yvette give a TIMELINE for things to Get Better (tm). The reasonable response that fixing a broken system, negotiating with other countries and collaborating with other policing jurisdictions meant you can't just give a timeline didn't cut it with Laura. As an intelligent woman, does she really think Great(ish) Britain has such a huge sway on the world stage that we can demand other countries do what we want? Tempting to believe she has become that swivel-eyed but, in her defence, the answer is much more irritating.
She is catering to us, the social media-sucking, slack-jawed, rage-baited public.
The obsession with timelines is a direct consequence of a few things - the 24-hour news cycle, Social Media expectations and cults of personality/populism. When you have to loop 'interesting' news into people's eyeballs 24 hours a day you need pointed questions and setting a timeline ensures you have a hook to build attack lines around over and over again - it's a dream when any grudgingly given timescale fails and news commentators can fill the 24-hour 'news sausage' with more pointed reminders of said failure. The news output has to fit the current 'mood of the people', otherwise known as whatever algorithms TikTok, Instagram, Twitter (just been sick in my mouth) are showing news editors to be popular with the shortened attention span doom-scrollers. Algorithms that are so openly and wildly manipulated by those with enough cash to bathe in Bitcoin with their political connections, would be hilarious if it didn't so directly impact our lives. When you have billionaires deciding the news agenda for the rest of us based on whatever their agenda is, we need proper investigative journalism to challenge the narrative, and mainstream media outlets don't have time for that.
Journalism feels like an endangered art in the face of 'news sausage' output and AI. BBC news presenters (I am picking on them here as it tends to be the service I watch out of habit, though it feels like they are the best of a bad bunch) are exactly that - presenters. There are some that get involved in causes 'close to their heart' as they build their profile or stand in gale-force winds doing pieces to camera while emphasising 'they are working' and not trying to give themselves some sort of action hero persona during 'not safe to travel' warnings. Looking at them, you couldn't imagine them reporting on anything outwith a two-mile radius of a skinny latté. The news cycle is entirely risk-averse, doesn't acknowledge its mistakes in any meaningful way and lets politicians and populists dodge proper scrutiny as it covers their necks in slobber from its gummy, toothless nibbles at their jugulars. Gone are the days of refusing to let people dodge awkward questions like the famous Jeremy Paxman -vs- Michael Howard interview in 1997 - if someone questioned Elongated Muskrat like this, the man-baby would have left the stage in seconds to seek comfort in ionic mineral water, white linen clothing and alpha-wave enhancing mood music.
Proper Journalism
Philomena Cunk, in the above hilarious collection, reflects the current lack of self-awareness our news media demonstrates day-in, day out. Their focus on timeline specific agendas turns news presenters into glorified circus ring-masters, hustling the high-wire act out to get the knife throwers into the spotlight before the audience get bored and leave the tent without buying any popcorn. Seek out good journalism and embrace it. Do your own investigation. Turn off the noise of daily news-feeds that exist only to justify their own existence and amplify the whims of billionaires. I think you'll be more informed and happier. Sure, you might be out of step with your rage-baited neighbours or gaggle of commentariat down the pub or in your workplace but, honestly, who cares? Bring back interviews that actually have a point and share news that is, you know, news. Populists and liars despise scrutiny and being shown to be stupid and/or dangerous, so let's all get curious and spread our wings.
Global Investigative Journalism Network
