主播大秀

The very fact that you even have to consider whether to drop an interview with the PRIME MINISTER for a story from a musician, whatever their state of health or inebriation, speaks volumes.

Quite, sanbikinoraion, quite.

Could the announcement by Miss Winehouse be with regards to the deployment of British troops in Iraq or Afghanistan? Oil prices? The Prime Minister's embattled premiership? Tumutuous events in Scottish politics or a solution to the West Lothian Question? Her thoughs on the EU?

One doesn't have to be a supporter of Gordon Brown in any way shape or form to regard this as a 'no-brainer'.

Please, pretty please, tell us which way you voted. I think it's rather important.

...'proper news' beats 'celebrity gossip'. Or at least it oughta.

Having said that, it could be a trick question. You didn't say it was Prime Minister Gordon Brown... it could be some other bloke called Gordon Brown :-)

I have a counter question - would 主播大秀 risk its reputation as the most respected global news corporation by recording Amy Winehouse's statement instead of Gordon Brown's interview?

It sounds unrealistic that the 主播大秀 should somehow have a news black out on Amy Winehouse whilst she is so heavily reported elsewhere.

I do find the balance of the reporting interesting.

For example...recently we got lots on the alleged punch but little on the alleged poor quality of the singing.

If people are paying to see a singer shouldn't we be told more about her performance on that front rather than her private life or minor altercations?

People are so interested in celebrities because the MEDIA generated that interest, in the same way the media controls the public interest in every other story. If you devote column inches to something then people will take notice.

A serious pre-scheduled political interview versus an entertainment scoop? Well unless the 主播大秀 has turned into Smash Hits magazine, isn't it obvious which you should do?

I would be furious if you cancelled Brown for Winehouse. You don't know if her "very important announcement" could turn out to be any more than a new album/boyfriend/etc.

But I await your reply with interest!

I don't particularly hold the 主播大秀 responsible for 'pornographic' coverage of Amy Winehouse, but it is certainly out of hand. I honestly can't see any justification for it - the fact that the public are interested doesn't make it public interest.

As for the Gordon Brown v Amy Winehouse decision - boring though he may be, Brown has to take priority

It's a no-brainer. Cancel both Brown AND Winehouse and send the reporter out to cover a real story!

"We have an interview with Gordon Brown at Downing Street - it's one to one - pre-arranged and ready to be done. Suddenly, the newsdesk gets a call from Amy Winehouse saying she has a "very important" announcement to make but that we must send a reporter immediately to her home. Our only available reporter is at Downing Street...so do we cancel Brown for Winehouse?"

No, you hire some more reporters, or, God forbid, get out from behind your desk and do it yourself.

Surely, not even in these cash-strapped times, does the 主播大秀 use the same hack to cover an interview with a rather tragic train-wreck of a person. Or Amy Winehouse.

To even ask that question really sheds light on something that is substantially worng with this society. In terms or the ruthelssness and utter stupidity of the media, the UK is miles ahead on everyone else.
What kind of a society are we promoting if we are continually exposed to and support people such as Amy Winedhouse? All it does is feed the destruction of the woman, as well as her drug habit.
I am not saying that I am not a fan of her music, but i am not prepared to buy into this utter nonsense of supporting someone who is so intent on self destructing infront of the world.
The media ought to be ashamed of themselves, though we know they really have no conscience. I just refuse to buy newspapers, magazines or any kind of tabloid that promotes/ advertises celebrites.

And that problem written in the blog, shouldnt even be a problem, no one who is that unstable should be given that much media attention. Your priminister is far more important than someone who has no actual contribution to society as a whole.

Amy Winehouse is a singer. Whether you love her or loathe her is irellevant, she is a singer.
There is nothing she might have to say that can in any way be construed as 'very important' unless you are one of her fans.

Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister. Whether you love him or loathe him is also irellevant, he is the Prime Minister.
Virtually everything he has to say is important because it impacts on all our lives.

Amy is tedious. My life would be much fuller if I didn't have this woman plastered all over the papers purely because she is plastered.
Stop it now.

Oh come on people, do you not understand what you are reading and what the tone is in the last question??? Of course they are going to send the reporter to Amy...Ha ha :)

If you only had one reporter available you would resumably take a feed on the Winehouse from AP. Unless, of course, you were after some juicy exclusive footage of a star in a state of pyschological meltdown - perish the thought.

Simple, just carry on with the interview with Gordon Brown and tell Amy you'll be right over.
I'm sure her 'very important' announcement will wait a few hours.

Ever since I was a teenager myself I've thought that Newsbeat was dreadful, and I'm afraid to say that I still feel the same. It's coverage is weighted hugely towards show business, with very little consideration or time given to real news.

I would certainly not agree with the statement "to ignore the off-stage antics ... would be extremely odd, to say the least." in any way at all. I do not think that it would be "very odd".

As for the dilemma 鈥� seriously? You are the man in charge of providing "news" to the younger generation, and you are seriously considering this. Shame on you.

Its not just amy that the 主播大秀 goes over the top with. I have just sat theough a 主播大秀 news bulletin where the presenters kept interupting interesting news reports to see if Kyle had emerged from the palace yet. It was a lot of breathless "is she here..yes...no". It made the reports seem like fillers rather than genuine stories. Kylie getting an OBE is a news item but not a significantly important one.

I have to say, it is nice to be able to read a few stories from the 'entertainment industry' without having to filter out loads of inane gossip and speculation. I really have no interest in who kissed whom at whoever's party last night, and so on.

I think that some areas of the media do use celebs as a form of 'porn' - naughty titiliation at the expense of some moral decency, especially the red-tops and of course the millions of trashy "coffee break" magazines. This coverage damages our self respect as well as respect for those around us, as people are trivialised by it. It must be terrible to know that people are talking about you all the time, all across the country, about something that may be untrue but is certainly embarassing. In this way, we can damage the people that are being reported about.

regarding the Brown/Winehouse issue, wasting the PM's time to pop out to a press conference of a performer would be a big mistake. Sure, you might miss out on a lot of coverage that every other news service gets of Amy, and it may be popular, but frankly the interview with the PM is more important. Especially right now.

Shame the same editorial vigour couldn't be applied to more meaningful areas such as corruption in government, war crimes committed by certain nations, the embrace of openly torturing people by America, the truth behind WMD II Iran... the list is endless.

In my opinion the 主播大秀 lost a lot of kudos and respect by bowing down to the lowest common denominator, by becoming a voice piece for Bush and Downing St and this is why we see more on stories like Amy's rather than real news highlighting such issues as listed above that are real issues and either misreported or ignored in entirety.

After all it was a 主播大秀 man that warned of creating opiate for the masses through media manipulation... stories such as those on Winehouse are very much in that vein, designed to keep us focused on such and ignoring the real stuff going on behind the scenes.

"Jeff Zycinski, head of radio at 主播大秀 Scotland said he had been reduced to tears"

For goodness sake - is he five-years-old or what?

He needs to grow up or get a job in a different industry.

As for Amy Winehouse's problems - self-inflicted. Don't expect me to feel sorry for a drug addict.

Mr Mckenzie

Your final question is a joke isn't it?

First off I can't imagine Newsbeat interviewing the Prime Minister, that sounds too much like a "real" story to me..... although you don't say what the interview is about.... maybe you're just asking him what his favourite band is, or if he's seen any good films lately.

Unfortunately I'd guess that you'd get the reporter to run to Amy as fast as his little legs could carry him, and then have the gall to say that the only reason you chose that option was because "that's what the public want."

Storys like this are not / never have been / never will be what I want to know about

I can definitely understand that you need to report on some level of Entertainment news, because not reporting on any wouldn't accomplish much, and it might make you seem quite out of touch.

Regarding the making the arranged meeting with Gordon Brown vs. Amy Winehouse, there is no way you should choose her over him, even if she has an "important announcement" to make and he does not.

"For younger audiences across Britain - like it or not - the lives of celebrities are a daily talking point: across offices and shops in Britain: these are water-cooler moments from which a modern 主播大秀 can no longer stay stuffily aloof."

It's a self-fulfilling prophesy; newspapers and magazines choose someone to be flavour of the month - usually someone going though a bad relationship, a court case, or substance abuse and provide gleeful wall-to-wall coverage of their unravelling lives. These "younger" people cannot escape the coverage even if they wanted and become sucked into the minutiae of complete strangers lives.

But, hey, that's why people are obsessed with soaps, too - it's a form of escapism from dreary politics and their own dull lives. However it also illustrates the rather nasty, voyeuristic side of the general public, almost willing Amy to destroy herself for our entertainment.

I don't particularly think the 主播大秀 is guilty of any of this, but by acknowledging Amy and her problems you are effectively following in the wake of the tabaloid media.

As far as it goes, Rod, neither Amy - nor indeed any other celebrity - makes it to the "water-cooler" in our late-20s office - we have more interesting, fun things to talk about. But if you want to make the news more palatable for 15 year olds, just go ahead.

This just highlights how far along some parts of the 主播大秀 are with focusing on ratings over quality. Amy Winehouse may be interesting to some, but is she important? Of course not. If I want to find out about what she is up to I will watch GMTV or read Heat. I expect the 主播大秀 to rise above the obsession with celebrities and not follow the crowd, but to provide intelligent analysis on what IS important (politics, war, rising food/oil prices etc).

In answer to your question. your reporter should absolutely not go to see Amy Winehouse. What could she possibly have to say that would be of any importance whatsoever? Whatever the Prime Minister has to say, whether you agree with teh content or not, is vastly more newsworthy.

I agree with Jeff Zycinski that '..pictures of Amy Winehouse are a form of pornography' but not with his thinking. As with porn, the 'porn' star is gaining from the publicity, the 'porn' star's behaviour is being glamourised and normalised by the awards, photos, interviews etc.

Bottom line she is a very sad junkie whose husband (who also gets mentioned almost as often) is in prison facing extremely serious and violent assault charges. Was a terrific but now increasingly wasted talent. Not in any rational sense a role model and whose invitation to the Mandela evening in Hyde Park beggars belief and performance was rubbish. But like the porn star, why change your behaviour when its rewarded.

"I have wept over pictures of Amy Winehouse."

WHAT A SAP YOU ARE.

Apart from my personal opinion that Amy Winehouse would probably be more likely to say something in which we could believe, I'd continue with the Downing Street interview, seeing as it was all arranged. Anything Amy might have to say would be widely reported elsewhere and available easily after the fact.

I'd also start an internal inquiry as to why there weren't enough journalists available.

I have to confess that while reading your article, Mr McKenzie, my eyebrow was involuntarily ratcheting up to the point that it was hidden by my hairline by the time I got to your 'question.'

What a load of self-aggrandising claptrap!

'Not behaving as badly' as the tabloids is hardly a challenge at the best of times, and being able to do so is certainly not worthy of claiming the moral high ground. That's like saying you should be able to claim Sainthood for being able to walk past a bank without trying to rob it. And the self-justification that running Amy/Britney/et al stories 'provides useful ways' to discuss social issues is churlish to the point of obscenity.

Maybe 'you'( in the generalised sense rather than in the personal, btw) aren't as bad as the tabloids, but that doesn't absolve you of responsibility, either for what you report, how you report it, or the consequences thereof.

The 'question' is laughable, and as many others have noted, that you're even asking it at all speaks volumes. But I have a question for you... if Amy is porn, then does that make the media her pimps?

Amy Winehouse, is very addicting to watch because she has some problems....Do I think that she is like porn...NO.

What's all the fuss? She is a great blues singer. Let her live and get on with it.

Because of the TV license I believe the 主播大秀 has a duty to provide the license payers (general population) what they want. Evidence (magazine sales - hello, heat etc) would suggest that the population does in fact want this sort of nonsense.

It's also worth noting however that the 主播大秀 is a public service and as such also has the responsibility to lead and not to follow or putting it another way, to not be wagged by the tail of public opinion.

So yes their should be room within the 主播大秀 for this type of coverage just as their should be room for all types of content to be covered (as the 主播大秀 should cater for all sections of society).

It is my opinion though that this populous approach should never be at the expense of the public service responsibility.

Surely you can trust readers who object to prurient details to use the "Printable version" responsibly?

Are we trying to stop the rot in our society that has been cause by

overpaid,overglorified people who are doing a job, thats it. A global

music business that represents what it wants, not what is. Media and

government orchestration for what they want you to see, not the actual

truth.
I have seen more talent in one town than the whole of the promoted music

charts.Please stop going on about drugged up drunk so called talented

people, that are being placed on a pedestal by our brainwashed

generations, its not helping. Put them on stage on their own, no glitz

or glam, no lighting effects, no dancers, then we will see. Start

covering the real people in society, workers, nurses, police, fire

fighters, rescue services, shop owners, anybody but not the current

rubbish including the people getting awards, for what! making lots of

money. Good PR is encouraged in all media related jobs, so being linked

to "a good cause" is good for the bank balance and public image

regardless of a persons true motives, We should all remember that when

the global actors, friends and clubs that they are all in paint us a

picture.

Television and mass communication is by far the most evil thing ever

created, look around and see what it has encouraged and allowed to

happen.

It could of been the best! Mankinds intelligence is now measured by have

far we let things decay before we do something about it. Thats modern

progress, how very sad......

There's nothing Amy Winehouse could say to make it more important than an interview with the PM - even if that interview turns out to be ridiculously boring and completely useless

can you see people's reaction if they learnt the beeb cancelled on political news for a celeb announcement?

You cancel Winehouse.

If you think you should cancel Brown then you should not be in your job.

Thank you.

I am so happy that, as I no longer live in the UK, I am not wasting my money paying your salary.
I cannot say how shocked I am at your question, as If I did, my comment would not be published.

Speechless in Taiwan

Why is the media paying any attention to this angry, drug addled misfit woman of questionable talent and no common sense? Terrorists are trying to buy or build a nuke... and the ice sheet in Greenland is melting... and then there's the price of heating oil next winter heralding the fate of Grandma and Grandpa freezing to death. Well... they're too broke to pay utility bills and buy food. Mean, mean, meanwhile... across the pond... America has become AmeriKa, a land ruled by a dry drunk $ociopath. I would think that we have bigger issues than a loser (Amy Winehouse) on drugs and booze making a fool of herself.

What's wrong editors? Are you going to censor this abrasive (but brutally truth-full) commentary too?

Ian Watson, nicely put sir....

The drugs are part of the image -- I've seen people in much worse states than Miss Winehouse.

The literal mean of "pornography" is "writing about whores" (from the Greek porno+graphos). So what are you implying about Amy Winehouse!?

To my mind the tabloid coverage of Amy is more revelling in the sad demise of someone who is extraordinarily talented. "Schadenfreude" would be a more appropriate description.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Rod mc ,, Amy is a lov, just wish she stop needling and burnin brite,,, but ,, to change the subject ,, intellectual property rights a very interesting subject , (1967 criminal law act) , needs revising ,, National security and buggin me expense

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Amy better than all the above,, terrorism old news,,

Jeff is right. You are wrong.
This is a graphic illustration of what has gone wrong with that section of the media that once had integrity and decency.
Then look at the films that the 主播大秀 routinely shows 鈥� full of gratuitous violence and foul language that the 主播大秀 calls 鈥渟trong鈥�.
It is very sad: we have lost the 主播大秀 that we used to know. If you want conclusive evidence look back through your archives.