I used to be a tabloid reporter AMA

[AprilONeil]

Been meaning to offer up a thread on here for a while but tbh have been too nervous, since I know how people round these 'ere parts feel about the tabloids.

Anyway, I used to work as a showbiz reporter on a British tabloid newspaper (would rather not say which one because potentially outing) and have since moved into a more 'worthy' area of journalism.

AMA...

(Dons hard hat)

How have things changed since the me too movement? There must be many men (and women) who are worried about stories that were previously common knowledge finding their way to the press.

How does the ‘editorial angle’ thing work? The ‘media bias’ of each paper? Do you get told what angle to take on a story, or are you interviewed to see if your beliefs align with the papers? So obviously The Daily Mail is racist, misogynistic and always looks to write stories reflecting those views. How has that happened?
..,.,and, I feel like the DM is turning against the Tories and is starting to shift its coverage. Does that happen organically or do you all get told you’ve got to change the tone of your articles?

You can't say Mo Farah 'pursued celebrity'

So the Nike, Weetabix and Quorn adverts were just figments of our imagination?

My actual question is which story should have been/ you wish had been yours but wasn't?

and also is there any particular news day that stands out for you?

@PoppySeedSaid

How have things changed since the me too movement? There must be many men (and women) who are worried about stories that were previously common knowledge finding their way to the press.

In the UK things have changed less than in the US, where the first amendment means you can print pretty much anything and get away with it (think National Enquirer).

It's quite difficult to stand stories like that up without something concrete like an arrest or lawsuit. I think if someone rang a paper and said "X touched me inappropriately" and we asked X and he denied it we wouldn't get it past legal.

@Curioushorse

How does the ‘editorial angle’ thing work? The ‘media bias’ of each paper? Do you get told what angle to take on a story, or are you interviewed to see if your beliefs align with the papers? So obviously The Daily Mail is racist, misogynistic and always looks to write stories reflecting those views. How has that happened? ..,.,and, I feel like the DM is turning against the Tories and is starting to shift its coverage. Does that happen organically or do you all get told you’ve got to change the tone of your articles?

Out of curiosity do you read the DM - print or web - edition every day? Because, if not, how can you so confidently label something "racist" and "misogynist"? Aren't you being just as biased by judging a book by its cover (or newspaper by its title)? And a few screenshots of headlines on Twitter don't count.

In terms of angle - and, in case it's not obvious, all papers have editorial biases including the left wing ones (which is why they're left wing) - it's difficult to say where they come from.

They're definitely influenced by the editor, so the DM's long-time editor changed a few years ago and that drastically shifted the paper's lens.

But ultimately it's influenced by the readers. When I was writing a story I'd often think of the readers sitting at home reading it the next morning and write my copy to inform and entertain them (it was mostly showbiz stuff after all).

I think a good journalist can tell who their publication's readers are and tailor their copy for them and that will usually tally with a newspaper's overall editorial slant.

Are there any public names who are just universally well regarded by those 'in the know'. It would be very interesting to know of my gut instincts are in any way accurate!

How common is it for the paparazzi photos we see to have been set up by that celebrity or their PR?

Sometimes there seems to be a run of “candid” pics about someone for no particular reason eg photos of Roman Keatings daughter in the press for several days, and Summer Monteys-Fulham keeps cropping up. Is it likely these people are driving the publicity themselves?

Why is it some celebrities get nothing but good press and others receive more critical coverage?

I'm showing my age now, but it seems to me that someone like Kyle alway gets positive press but Madonna is more likely to be criticised.

@pastabest

You can't say Mo Farah 'pursued celebrity'

So the Nike, Weetabix and Quorn adverts were just figments of our imagination?

My actual question is which story should have been/ you wish had been yours but wasn't?

and also is there any particular news day that stands out for you?

Ooh great question, there are so many. I think anything that would have made a front page scoop really, but my favourite was when - and this was years ago, well before my time - a Mirror journalist infiltrated the staff at Windsor Castle by applying to be a butler or something and literally went and worked there for a month before writing all about it, including how he walked the Queens corgis.

It was absolutely explosive at the time and such a great story. Sadly I think with the internet and increased security etc it's not really possible to do those kinds of stories anymore.

Having had a rummage around Twitter, do you think the #superinjunction rumours are true?

@Wisenotboring

Are there any public names who are just universally well regarded by those 'in the know'. It would be very interesting to know of my gut instincts are in any way accurate!

Argh it's just so hard to remember now. I think anyone who sympathized that we were also doing a job and was willing to give us even a benign quote was always very well-regarded. It's so hard to remember the nice ones though. Darcy Bussell was lovely. If I remember anymore I'll update.

@Wisenotboring

Are there any public names who are just universally well regarded by those 'in the know'. It would be very interesting to know of my gut instincts are in any way accurate!

Oh actually also Daniel Radcliffe even though his statement against JKR was so disappointing.

@WheresMyMilk

How common is it for the paparazzi photos we see to have been set up by that celebrity or their PR?

Sometimes there seems to be a run of “candid” pics about someone for no particular reason eg photos of Roman Keatings daughter in the press for several days, and Summer Monteys-Fulham keeps cropping up. Is it likely these people are driving the publicity themselves?

It's hard to know because tbh the picture desk dealt with photographers - and also sometimes even they may never even know because it's literally a private deal between the celeb and the photog - but yes I would say that in a number of cases photographers have been tipped off by the person themselves or the PR.

Also if we've heard a celeb is somewhere/going to be somewhere we might tip a photographer off too.

Pp Do you mean Boris?

What a fantastically interesting thread. Thank you OP! AMAs are usually rubbish!

What sort of hours did you work as a journalist? Did you have a regular day off/bookable holidays etc.? I imagine you can’t just shut down your computer at 5pm and waltz off home. When you’re not at work, are you always on call? We’re there any massive stories that dragged you into work at inconvenient times?

@PoppySeedSaid

Why is it some celebrities get nothing but good press and others receive more critical coverage?

I'm showing my age now, but it seems to me that someone like Kyle alway gets positive press but Madonna is more likely to be criticised.

Again I think it's largely influenced by public opinion/readers. What's 70-year-old Marjorie in Little Dorryshire or wherever going to think of Madonna turning up at the Met Ball in a leather thong and fishnets?

It's also influenced by their history in the public eye. Madonna was controversial right out of the gate - that's always been her thing plus generally her being quite Hollywood-y with her Kabbalah and macrobiotic diet or whatever. (Marjorie would definitely raise an eyebrow over that while tucking into her morning cornflakes).

Meanwhile Kylie has always been "sweet", starting off as the girl next door on Neighbours, unlucky in love, publicly battled breast cancer and generally lived quite a low-key life in the UK. Which Marjorie can sympathize with.

@GeorgeTheFirst

Having had a rummage around Twitter, do you think the #superinjunction rumours are true?

So when I worked at a newspaper we would be told about who had filed a super injunction so we didn't accidentally run a story about them. That was one of my favourite parts of the job (I'm very nosy unsurprisingly). Since I no longer work there however I'm completely out of the loop.

@jeremypaxo

What a fantastically interesting thread. Thank you OP! AMAs are usually rubbish!

My pleasure! It hasn't been as painful as I was worried it might be!

@OhhhPeee

What sort of hours did you work as a journalist? Did you have a regular day off/bookable holidays etc.? I imagine you can’t just shut down your computer at 5pm and waltz off home. When you’re not at work, are you always on call? We’re there any massive stories that dragged you into work at inconvenient times?

In terms of being called in at odd hours, not me personally but that's because I worked in a large team. I think if you're more senior or have a very specific beat - eg Royal reporter - then you're absolutely at the mercy of the news cycle.

But yeah I used to regularly work Xmas/NYE which I didn't mind actually as it was usually quiet (although could be very hard to find stories) and I did find it hard to switch off even on holiday, especially if something big was happening.

Oh and I did also work in the evenings a lot especially going to events, which mostly I didn't mind because they were fun and sometimes I'd get a goody bag.

Hmm, have MN actually verified you’re a reporter?

Because your answer about #MeToo is spectacularly wrong.

You say: It's quite difficult to stand stories like that up without something concrete like an arrest or lawsuit. I think if someone rang a paper and said "X touched me inappropriately" and we asked X and he denied it we wouldn't get it past legal.

This is a bit weak and muddled if you’re an actual reporter who has any vague grasp of the law.

You simply can’t ‘stand stories like that up’ if there hasn’t been an arrest or conviction. You must know that.

Did you ever meet Reese Witherspoon or Dolly Parton? I always think the come over as genuine nice people. Please tell me I'm not wrong.

Did you find you were alert to news stories even when you were off duty? Would you phone a colleague and tip them off if you discovered something salacious in your down time, or would you write it up yourself and submit it?

@minicat

Hmm, have MN actually verified you’re a reporter?

Because your answer about #MeToo is spectacularly wrong.

You say: It's quite difficult to stand stories like that up without something concrete like an arrest or lawsuit. I think if someone rang a paper and said "X touched me inappropriately" and we asked X and he denied it we wouldn't get it past legal.

This is a bit weak and muddled if you’re an actual reporter who has any vague grasp of the law.

You simply can’t ‘stand stories like that up’ if there hasn’t been an arrest or conviction. You must know that.

Really? https://www.itv.com/news/2017-11-01/damian-green-kate-maltby-allegations