Indo Vs Times reporting on Waterford Crystal job losses

whiskeyman

Read this on www.sbpost.ie
Interesting...


NEWS ANGLES

When a news story about job losses makes the front pages of all the national newspapers, the tone of the reporting is usually much the same. But not in the case of Waterford Crystal.

While the Irish Times and the Irish Independent both carried the story of the 485 job losses on their front and inside pages, the difference in theme and reporting was notable.

While the Times reported accusations of “incompetent management'‘ (quoting furious workers who labelled them “scum'‘ and “vultures'‘), there was very little of a similar tone reported in the Indo. Instead, it used headlines such as “heartbreak'‘ and emphasised the management line that the whole thing was “very sad and very regrettable'‘.

This is presumably in no way connected to the fact that Tony O'Reilly, proprietor of Independent newspapers, is also the major shareholder in (and chairman of) Waterford Crystal. Not a bit.

Neuro

whiskeyman wrote:

This is presumably in no way connected to the fact that Tony O'Reilly, proprietor of Independent newspapers, is also the major shareholder in (and chairman of) Waterford Crystal. Not a bit.

Probably not. The papers have two different target markets; The Independent is targeted at working class readers, The Irish Times towoards more affluent readers.

flogen

Neuro wrote:

Probably not. The papers have two different target markets; The Independent is targeted at working class readers, The Irish Times towoards more affluent readers.

so?
If the Indo is trying to get the working class reader, surely they'd be willing to give their story more of a working class angle... as in the run of the mill workers. By your analysis the Times should have been taking the side of the bosses and the Indo the workers. The Times just reported what the workers had said to them, and I'm sure (but not certain) that they reported what the bosses said too. The Indo reported what the bosses said and not what the workers said.

While O Reilly doesn't make as much of an input on his papers as, say Murdoch I'm sure he wouldn't want to see the bosses of Waterford Crystal (and thus himself) be ridiculed in his own newpaper. It's only a small issue, but it shows the dangers of media conglomerates.

damien

flogen wrote:

While O Reilly doesn't make as much of an input on his papers as, say Murdoch

Find me a negative article in the Indo or O'Reilly stable of papers in regards to eircom.

flogen

damien.m wrote:

Find me a negative article in the Indo or O'Reilly stable of papers in regards to eircom.

You misunderstand me, while I know O'Reilly tells his editors what they can and can't do, it's not as much interference as Murdoch. O'Reilly protects his invested interests while Murdoch does this while pushing his papers to his personal political leaning.
O'Reilly may influence the spin of the paper indirectly I don't think it's as big an influence as Murdoch, which is huge.

mike65

whiskeyman wrote:

While the Times reported accusations of “incompetent management'‘ (quoting furious workers who labelled them “scum'‘ and “vultures'‘), there was very little of a similar tone reported in the Indo. Instead, it used headlines such as “heartbreak'‘ and emphasised the management line that the whole thing was “very sad and very regrettable'‘.

Seem to me less a conspriacy (not having read the original articles) more a reflection of the ideologies of the papers, IT has changed somewhat under its curent editor but its traditionally leftish on big business while the indo is deffo right of centre.

So "up the workers" for the IT, while the Indo notes the economic/market realities and sympathises with those caught in the fallout.

Mike.

monument

I’m partly with Mike on this one, if Murdoch/O'Reilly/Guardian Newspapers hires likeminded journalists 'proper' results should follow without passing on any ground rules.

Victor

mike65 wrote:

Seem to me less a conspriacy (not having read the original articles) more a reflection of the ideologies of the papers, IT has changed somewhat under its curent editor but its traditionally leftish on big business while the indo is deffo right of centre.

Really? But isn't the IT the traditional protestant, middle class, business paper?

The Indo the semi-literate rag that appeals to populism?