:
Dos and donts
US ‘setback’ blah blah…( Do look out for them- they’re not too difficult to find if you’re a proper investigative journalist- a star, like say, Rageh, Caroline, Matt and Orla.)
‘the BBC’s Nick Childs (or another of our experts) at the Pentagon says the blank will make for red faces in Washington.’ (red faces- yes- ha ha- essential to cut them down to size with trivialising language. Don’t show too much- or any, for that matter- respect)
‘This is a clear embarrassment for the Pentagon, given how much it has been trumpeting its advances in blank blank blank blank, our correspondent says.’ (do, whatever you do, throw their own propaganda back at them)
Pentagon officials ‘playing down its significance’ (yeah- ha- right!)
‘US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials have repeatedly trumpeted… ‘ (Don’t be frightened to repeat an insulting observation, if you’re prepared to stick by it- my old teacher used to say you have to repeat everything to the average ie. stupid person.)
The End. (If you’ve already included the elements above, there’s little need to criticise with your conclusion. If you haven’t used them all, consider a slick finish like, ‘the Pentagon must be hoping fervently that things don’t get any worse’.)
Good Luck!
Meanwhile, far removed from this sparring, Instapundit presents some sensitive observations on the US media coverage, or lack of coverage of Iraq. I wonder how much Greg Dyke’s criticisms of the media there have impacted on their approach recently. Come to that, I wonder how much the BBC’s attitudes generally have proved trendsetting. Do they [those attitudes] run deeper [and have more influence] than the [typical liberal] US media reluctance to back their Republican leader? [To clarify, have the US media been unwarrantably ‘shamed’ by Dyke’s comments and specious statistics about what I believe he called ‘flag-waving’ US coverage of the ’21 days’ conflict?] Another, British, commentator, has his own reflections on Iraq somewhat contrary to the BBC in-crowd (thanks to Donald Sensing for the link). [update. I’ve updated some of my comments in brackets, because I was beginning to forget what I meant by them! Blogger’s prerogative, I trust.]
“trumpeted”
As you say, no respect.
Perhaps we should keep such derogative language in our mind when the BBC is describing activities in old Europe. See if we can spot such colour in those reports.
I think the BBC is very “trendsetting”, especially in the UK, because they are seen (for some bizarre reason) as being the guardians (heh) of newscasting virtue.
I visited the Sky News website the other day, and was quite shocked at how leftie the whole thing was. On the telly, they may have Littlejohn as their little hint of Fox, but the smug, smarmie ‘anchors’ in the regular Sky News studio could easily work for the BBC if they lost a bit of personality.