Re: [GZG] Vehicle Recognition

On 8/29/05, gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu 
> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:49:31 -0400
> From: "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@magma.ca>

> I always get burned when I see the media talking about 'tanks' and
realize it is just an
> APC or AIFV that they are refering to (often not even tracked). And
you hear them talking
> about 'machine-guns' - and I go looking for someone toting a MAG or
RPK and find out it 
> is some fellow with an M4, AK or MP5.

That bugs me, too.
 
> I one took a local journalist to task on this (calling the C7 a
machine gun). His defence
> was that the paper shoots for about a grade eight audience and saying
'assault rifle'
> wasn't meaningful to everyone.

Actually, he's right. He is only doing a disservice to the readers who
would mostly know better anyway. Newspapers have a limited amount of
space, and they have to peg their reading level at a certain segment
of the population. It would take a sentence or two, minimum, to
explain what an assault rifle is. That explanation would lose most of
the audience who don't want to mess around with details.

Seriously, folks don't want to know the details. I've discovered that
while teaching software. It's not a case of "lazy journalists" but a
case of giving the people what they want.

There's also the fact that a story only has so much space. Do you add
a sentence or two about the distinction of a "machine gun" and an
"assault rifle", or do you add more detail to the story?

I read an interesting article in the late, great magazine "Brill's
Content" about reporters and the military. It described the sad state
of military reporting. Part of the problem had to do with the
journalists covering the story having little experience with the
military, while earlier in the 20th century military journalists often
came from a military background. There was also the flip side: the
military was often antagonistic against journalists, who were seen as
security leaks at best and enemies of the state at worst. This set up
an "us against them" mentality, with neither side trusting the other
side.

This isn't a new problem. There are some fascinating stories about
journalists during the American Civil War (probably the first major
war where journalists had widespread access and limited censorship).
During that conflict journalists were despised... unless they were
being used. Since war is politics by other means, there will always be
a love/hate relationship between the military and the media.

As for reading levels, I remember reading that Canada's Globe and Mail
newspaper pegs itself at a grade 9 reading level, the Toronto Star at
a grade 7 reading level, and the Toronto Sun at a grade 5 level. It's
one of the reasons that nuance is often missing from media reports
(and written media is far better at it than television).

-- 
Allan Goodall		 http://www.hyperbear.com
agoodall@hyperbear.com
awgoodall@gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l