Unfair portrayal of British media
As an admirer of British news sources, I disagree with Scott Conroy’s anecdotal critique of the British media (“All the news that’s fit to ignore,” Voices, March 25). He chose various inane news titles and celebrity fixations to bolster his position, but failed to recognize that the BBC, The Times and The Guardian have all been hailed internationally as respectable and reliable sources of news.
He also downplayed the problems with American news by creating a dichotomy between “super market tabloids” and “the real news.” What about the New York Post? This is a paper that often has front page articles on celebrity scandals, while irresponsibly reporting the “real news.” I may consider this news source to be a tabloid, but sadly, even some of the most educated people here rely on such newspapers. The biases and irresponsibility of the American news media are well-worn issues and not worth addressing in this letter.
Conroy should look at the use of visuals in BBC coverage of international conflicts versus that of an American counterpart like CNN. The BBC is less hesitant to display graphic footage of actual traumatizing events. The Kerry-intern rumor may have fed into the appetites of scandal-hungry Britons, but when the United States army accidentally bombed an orphanage outside Baghdad last year, the British media covered it, and the American media didn’t. That was no scandal in the U.S., but maybe it should have been. Instead of focusing on rumors about John Kerry’s sex-life, he should pull up some recent articles on the war in Iraq. I think he would find that UK citizens received (and continue to receive) more precise coverage.
Sonia Mukhi
SFS ‘05
