My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

AIBU?

To get annoyed at lazy journalists recycling bollocks press releases

22 replies

AgaPanthers · 29/08/2014 19:35

Lloyds put out this report claiming you pay a huge premium to live near good schools.
www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/globalassets/documents/media/press-releases/lloyds-bank/2014/140826-house-prices-near-schools-web.pdf

Dutifully lapped up by the meeja. www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/26/good-schools-add-21000-pounds-property-prices
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734932/Parents-want-send-children-best-state-schools-face-paying-500-000-extra-home.html

But it's worthless bollocks. Their methodology was as follows:

  • take the top 30 (why?) state schools for GCSE results
  • Find out which postcode (e.g., W1, GU3), etc. the schools are in
  • Take the average (mean, not median) house price last year for the postcode, and compare it with the average for the county (again, why, if you live in Sevenoaks, you are quite likely to be earning ÂŁÂŁÂŁ in London, whereas if you live in Dover, you probably don't, and this is reflected in local house prices)

    They used this to claim that you pay a big premium for a house near a good school. But it proves no such thing, given that:

    all* the top state schools for GCSE results are selective, and catchments are less critical (although some grammar schools do have catchments), e.g., for Beaconsfield High, which supposedly has a ÂŁ483k premium, you could live in SL6 (no more expensive than Bucks on average), UB9 (cheaper than the average for Bucks), and many others

  • the house prices are misleading anyway, because they can easily be distorted

    The reason it's expensive to live in HP9 is because it's a naice town with a fast train into London. It's got fuck all to do with the school, because the whole of Bucks has grammar schools, and it doesn't make a huge difference where you live within Bucks if your child is grammar school material, so the (ridiculous) house prices are entirely due to proximity/rail to London and the quality of the area.

    It must have taken half-an-hour to knock up this report, but why does it get reported on when it's so obviously nonsense?
OP posts:
YouTheCat · 29/08/2014 19:46

I couldn't agree more. It is so lazy.

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 19:51

It's not laziness, it's just indicative of the huge pressures that journalists are under these days.
Newsrooms have been cut to the bone. In my last job, I covered one of the biggest counties in the UK on my own, churning out 30+ "stories" a day.
Quality, unfortunately, isn't rated by news organisations any more. It's all about rewriting PA copy and press releases as fast as you can, and getting it online first.
Don't blame the journos, blame the big newspaper firms who are cutting, cutting and then cutting staff some more while still paying bonuses to the top dogs.

AgaPanthers · 29/08/2014 19:56

From what I can see, both journalists are reasonably senior.

OP posts:
TheBogQueen · 29/08/2014 19:57

Churn it out and fuck off early

Comito · 29/08/2014 19:58

I get cross with misrepresentation of statistics. A recent one was the BBC saying there had been a 21% increase in sex crimes on public transport. No, you mouthbreathers, it's a 21% increase in REPORTED sex crimes. As a result of BTP initiatives like Project Guardian, MORE people are reporting assaults and/or unwanted sexual behaviour. It's not an increase in the actual behaviour.

Andrewofgg · 29/08/2014 20:04

Ffs, OP, so the DM is lazy and rubbish.

And ursines defecate where arboreals abound.

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 20:06

Nobody "fucks off early" in journalism. Well, not any reporter I've ever met. And I was very senior in my last reporting role. You're still snowed under with copy to rewrite, even at the "top" in a newsroom (columnists, celeb journos etc aside).

I'm not defending the quality of these "stories" - it's shit. I'm just saying that it's not the fault of reporters. They will, most likely, have been handed this release and ordered to get it online within 10 mins.

The problem lies with the likes of Trinity Mirror, Johnston Press etc, who are all trying to do much more with far fewer staff.

SarcyMare · 29/08/2014 20:08

blame the big newspaper firms who are cutting, cutting

or blame the public who want their news free and aren't paying for papers anymore

Comito · 29/08/2014 20:08

MrsJoss And the devaluation of journalism which has accompanied the rise of blogging and people writing content for nothing.

DinoSnores · 29/08/2014 20:10

I write press releases and am always surprised by the complete lack of any editing that happens to them. They are almost always printed word for word from the press release.

A relative used to be a journalist and said that they just don't have time to anything else.

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 20:12

Indeed, Comito. My last paper was all about UGC (user generated content). Those at the top were curiously oblivious to the fact that you need skills such as shorthand and media law to cover courts.

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 20:15

And SarcyMare - yes, that's a big part of it with regionals and nationals. But with locals the financial problems are more the result of losing advertising revenue, as people don't advertise houses, cars etc in the local paper the way they used to. And the recession of course meant that fewer houses and cars were being sold. So even the locals that kept circulation high took a hammering.

TheBogQueen · 29/08/2014 20:22

You get good and bad journalists.

Those stories were written by people who either didn't understand what they were writing or couldn't be bothered to challenge it.

Comito · 29/08/2014 20:26

Dino, I see press releases copied and pasted on a regular basis in the majority of news outlets. And yes, a huge amount of press releases are appallingly written.

MrsJoss, do you think that all news content is going to end up behind a paywall? I'm actually pretty interested in this and what it could mean for journalism, particularly political reporting.

TheBogQueen · 29/08/2014 20:29

A big problem fur locals is also council - backed newspapers which take up advertising too.

taxi4ballet · 29/08/2014 20:30

Who was it who said:

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"?

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 20:44

Comito - no, I don't, simply because of the BBC. They can't charge again as they have the licence fee. So it would be death for local websites to charge as their audience could just get their news for free from the local BBC site.

MrsJossNaylor · 29/08/2014 20:46

In my new role, I write press releases. The big city paper (think MEN, Liverpool Echo size) used one of my releases completely unaltered as their splash recently.
Front page. Word for word. I was saddened but not surprised.

Comito · 29/08/2014 22:10

MrsJoss, what do you think be the effect of increasing paywalls on the BBC would be? I hadn't really considered the licence fee aspect.

TheBogQueen, YES, I totally agree. Eric Pickles tried to ban what he called 'local pravdas' from circulating more than once a quarter. Our local 'freesheet' which actually costs the taxpayer around ÂŁ250,000 PA is widely considered useless by residents and has also been accused of supplanting the local press which is supposed to be impartial.

StrawberryCheese · 29/08/2014 23:51

I completely agree with MrsJoss, the amount of staff that are expected to cover an extensive workload has reduced significantly in the 6 years I have been working for a newspaper. Everyone is stretched beyond their limits so sometimes a 'copy and paste job' with a quick sub is entirely necessary in order to meet deadline. We all keep at it regardless of the fact circulation figures are dwindling and it's only a matter of time before the next redundancies happen (I have survived 5 rounds of redundancy in 6 years and my salary doesn't even start with a number 2 yet!)

MrsJossNaylor · 30/08/2014 07:47

Strawberry...and despite your salary not beginning with a 2 yet, I bet you usually work 12+ hour days, doing the work of a reporter, a sub and a photographer, all at once. It's shit.

I loved journalism, but after 10 years of it (and god knows how many rounds of redundos) I got out and went into comms. Where I now earn 5k more for doing a quarter of the work.

Its hardly surprising that reporters cut and paste my stuff now - I have time to write something half decent, whereas they will have more than 20 things on their list by 9am.

This is a huge, huge change. Even 10 years ago, I might have got a full day to go out, interview someone and write a feature. Now, reporters get 10 mins to do a phone interview and 5 mins at best to write it up, caption the photos and write a headline that hits search engines properly.

I'm told that it's even worse at the big news websites (eg Mail online) where reporters no longer produce original copy at all. Instead, it's about turning other people's work into clickbait ans getting it online asap.

TheBogQueen · 30/08/2014 08:21

I also 'quit' journalism ie: was made redundant during maternity and am now in comms!

The sad thing is that 10 years ago I was training reporters to look beyond press release, generate stories themselves, think laterally.

Even at that time we were on 8 stories a day.

But my training has served me really well in my comms job.

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.