Posts tagged media

Hacked web site – ooops

0

Looks like Stuff.co.nz is reporting today that the JBHiFi web site has been hacked, and diverting users to a page with a virus.

Stuff is a TAD slow on this – even a very small, but VERY cool, kiwi web site specalising on iPhones, spotted this a few days ago.

Oh, and looks like stuff forgot to mention “Oh, btw guys, our site had a virus last year, when we allowed an advertiser to  promote a “virus checker” that was actually a virus”.  OOOOOPS.  I am told they apologised (in rather small print) the next day. At least JBHiFi werent involved (ie they were the ones hacked).  Stuff.co.nz actually APPROVED the advertiser!

Back and White Version: Mainstream media are so light on themselves, tough on others (In my opinion of course!)

PS: Before anyone from stuff.co.nz threatens to sue me – all of teh above is my OPINION on what happened. So there (and besides if it’s true – you  screwed up!)

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Another missleading headline

0

Take a look at this headline: Blue Chip court battle loss for pensioners and story here

Anyone would think based on the headline that they couple LOST the claim.  They actually didn’t.  They WON their claim against their lawyer, and LOST the claim against the lender.

Read the very last sentence: Meanwhile Justice Randerson ruled in favour of the Bartles’ claim against lawyer Jonathan Mathias and reserved his judgment over damages.
A more accurate headline would be “Bluechip claim only half successful” or “Lawyers lose/lenders win battle with pensioners” or whatever. LAZY and SHODDY journalism IMHO.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Misleading headline of the week

0

Well today is my day to have a wee go at the media.

So here it is – a headline on today’s Press “Bid to shed 770 teachers axed

A whole bunch is wrong with this.  Firstly is that is not actually news.  Someone NOT doing something isn’t news, especially when they have never done it before.  Often headlines are “So and so says they wont do ….” (often politicians are quoted here).  This is NOT news.  Telling us what IS happening or they ARE planning on doing is.

But my main grip with this headline is that it’s designed to mislead (IMHO).  Editors know how people read papers – they skim read, so they read BITS of things.  Readying any part of that headline tells another story, “770 teachers axed” “Bid to shed 770 teachers” “bid … teachers .. axed”.  It’s only when one reads the WHOLE thing (and spends 5 seconds to comprehend) that the true meaning comes through.  A thing that might have happened will now not happen, and things will stay as they are.  the true headline is “Nothing to see here”.  Yeah .. not so exciting is it?

Black and White Version: Editors often make headlines more exciting than the story actually is.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Run for the hills!

0

Today the media went into a frenzied panic after a large (8.3) earth quake was reported just of the coast of Samoa.

Must have been a slow news day – I know VERY little about the topic but was 100% certain that there would be no title waves hitting NZ, and anything that did would be MINOR (smaller than the average swell).  Anyway …am I allowed to say “I was right” (coz I was).

I wont go on about it … the media did that for me.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon


Go to Top