Saturday, December 10, 2011

Been there before

I am reminded by a reader that we have been in a similar situation before, back in 2007 when I wrote this piece and this, writing in the latter:
The current trouble is that that the media – and not a few of the member states – are playing the current round of discussions as if they were an IGC, which cannot be – there has not been one convened. Much of the confusion comes from the indiscriminate use of the word "summit" to describe the forthcoming European Council meeting – thereby failing to distinguish between the IGC denouement which is correctly described as a summit.
Some people tend to be dismissive of the need for precision in the use of terminology, but if people were aware of the differences between an IGC and a European Council, and understood that the veto only had an application in the former, Cameron would never have been allowed to get away with his deception, and much of the tosh currently in the newspapers simply would not have been written.

There seems in the ranks of the media, however, an almost wilful refusal to use the correct terminology, no doubt for many profound reasons. But it does mean that the media is stricken by institutional amateurism, which can only be calculated to confuse and deceive.

Nevertheless, it is a waste of time suggesting that the media ups its game. Looking at the low-grade of journalist currently polluting the pages of once proud newspapers, it is very doubtful as to whether they are capable of doing any better than they are. They fail in their duty to inform, largely because they themselves are so ignorant.