Posted in Media, tagged Alan Brinkley, Böcker, Bok, Briton Hadden, Fortune, Henry Luce, Historia, Journalistik, LIFE, Media, The Publisher - Henry Luce and His American Century, Tidskrift, Time on 30 juni, 2010|
Leave a Comment »
TIDSKRIFT: Alan Brinkley har skrivit en biografi om skaparen av tidskrifterna Time, Fortune och Life.
Ett längre utdrag av boken The Publisher – Henry Luce and His American Century kan man läsa i Vanity Fair (maj 2010, men tyvärr endast i pappersutgåvan).
”Just out of Yale, Henry Luce and Briton Hadden staked their golden-boy reputations on a presumptuous, prophetic challenge to a recession-weakened media establishment.”
Time was attractive to them because it captured something of the dual purpose of their enterprise – to chronicle the passage of time and to save readers precious time. They also experimented with various subtitles, using such words as ”chronicle” and ”digest” and ”weekly-newspaper”, but they finally settled on a term of their own invention: ”news-magazine”. (The hyphen disappeared in the late 20s.) It reflected [Briton] Hadden’s delight in creating new compound words and phrases.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Politik, politisk kommunikation, PR, Val 2010, tagged Andres Lokko, Fokus, Fredrik Strage, Musik, Politik, PR, Spotify, Svenska Dagbladet, Val 2010 on 29 juni, 2010|
1 Comment »
VAL 2010: Partiledarnas Spotifylistor har publicerats och analyserats i media.
Frågan är naturligtvis om listorna har någon som helst betydelse för hur väljarnas kommer att lägga sin röst i vallokalen i september.
Med något så till synes oskyldigt som en personlig Spotifylista kan i stället politikern – och hans eller hennes mediekonsulter och pr-personer – politisera vilken musik som helst. När de svenska partiledarna presenterar sina Spotifylistor blir avsändarens uppsåt mycket intressantare än själva musiken. […]
Men inget av detta har undgått partiledarna som sakta börjar inse att deras smak kan användas som ett vapen. Lika mycket mot dem som av dem.
Så skriver Andres Lokko i Svenska Dagbladet vid en analys av partiledarnas musiksmak.
Men dessa kritikers slutsatser säger minst lika mycket om kritikerna själva och deras fördomar som om de politiker vars smak man recenserar.
Läs mer: Anders Lokkos analys och de av Svenska Dagbladet sammanställda listorna. Även Fredrik Strage har intervjuats i Fokus om Spotifylistorna och om kopplingen mellan politik och musik.
Read Full Post »
PRESSETIK: De flesta journalister anser det som en självklarhet att man alltid skall garantera en källa anonymitet om källan så önskar.
Michael Kinsley, krönikör i tidskriften The Atlantic, håller inte med.
You cannot deny the sincerity or seriousness of journalists on this issue. Many (…) have gone to jail rather than break a promise of anonymity to a source. But you also cannot deny the arrogance of the absolutism here. The question is not whether journalists should be forced to break promises to anonymous sources. The question is whether they should have made these promises in the first place, and whether sometimes they should be happy to break them. (…) The CIA also has its secrets—legitimate secrets. Do the legitimate secrets of The New York Times always trump the legitimate secrets of the CIA? And why do reporters continue to owe protection to sources who turn out to be lying, or to be part of an official disinformation campaign rather than brave dissidents?
And does the press always get to decide whose secrets trump? What bothers me most about the cult of the source is the press’s insistence on its right to ignore due process of law and refuse to reveal sources even after the issue has been fully litigated. Fine: appeal it up to the Supreme Court if you want, but in a democracy with an (all but) uncorrupted judiciary, if you ultimately lose, you should obey the law as it is, not as you would like it to be. Especially if you are concurrently publishing editorials urging this course on the president of the United States (…)
And then there is the question of why any journalist who is also a citizen and a human being would even want to keep secret the identity of someone who is planning to destroy critical infrastructure.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Historia, Politik, politisk kommunikation, tagged Adolf Hitler, BBC, Charles De Gaulle, Charles Moore, Historia, Politik, politisk kommunikation, Radio, Tal, The Daily Telegraph, The Spectator, Winston Churchill on 25 juni, 2010|
Leave a Comment »
HISTORIA: I juni 1940 höll Winston Churchill och Charles de Gaulle var sitt viktigt radiotal vid en tidpunkt när ord var näst intill de enda vapen som stod till förfogande i kampen mot Adolf Hitler.
Charles Moore, kolumnist på The Spectator och The Daily Telegraph, har reflekterat över deras betydelse.
On 18 June 1940, 125 years after the battle of Waterloo and 70 years ago this Friday, Winston Churchill delivered his famous ‘finest hour’ speech. What is less well remembered here is that General De Gaulle also delivered his first, almost equally famous broadcast to France that evening. The French government, led by Marshal Pétain, was suing for peace with Germany, ‘alleging’, as De Gaulle put it, ‘the defeat of our armies’. Speaking loudly into the BBC microphone, De Gaulle said: ‘Is the defeat final? No!… For France is not alone… She can unite with the British Empire… I, General De Gaulle, now in London, call upon the French officers and soldiers… Whatever happens, the flame of French resistance must not and shall not go out.’ At the time, not everyone thought that either speech had worked. Churchill made his speech twice on the same day — first to parliament, and then, shortened, as a broadcast. Harold Nicolson recorded that he repeated himself because ‘He hates the microphone… he just sulked and read his House of Commons speech over again… it sounded ghastly on the wireless.’ As for De Gaulle’s words, they were heard by hardly anybody, and were not recorded because all the technical resources of the BBC were taken up in recording Churchill’s broadcast. Instead, De Gaulle’s text was re-read on air by British broadcasters four times over the next 24 hours. The situation which Britain and France faced was so desperate that neither man had much more than words at his command, but perhaps it was for this very reason that the words, once disseminated and pondered, did work. To understand their importance, one must imagine what that single day, and all succeeding days, would have been like if they had not been delivered.
Read Full Post »