jadeamberrose - Tumblr blog

jadeamberrose · 7 years ago

Text

Journalism in general has become a farce, you can no longer rely on the media to report the truth. Journalism is a dog eat dog world and it's dying by the day so of course these hungry journalists hoping for the coveted primetime news spot are going to kiss ass. They do not care about the oath they took to report the unbiased truth without their opinions. They always take creative liberty when reporting something because they have to and want to stand out. They care about clicks, money, and notoriety. The truth to them no longer exists and that is sad. That is why it is important for us to educate ourselves on what's really happening, whether it is with the Meghan and Harry drama or what's going on in the world around us. It's important that we not rely on the media since they can no longer be trusted to speak the truth.

The Faces and Outlets Behind Meghan’s Fake PR

What is ‘fake PR’, because some would say all PR is fake to an extent? The names that seem to crop up all the time are: Emily Andrews, Chris Ship, Rebecca English, Emily Nash, Camilla Tominey, and Omid Scobie in relation only to positive stories on Harry and MM, focusing on MM and ignoring Harry much of the time.There are boundaries though, and most people know tabloids exaggerate things for effect and to elicit gossip and take it with a pinch of salt.

However, isn’t this indoctrination when they gloss over actual facts, and only report what they choose to see, and ignore things that they know will show Harry and MM in a negative light? Is that ethical, or biased? Isn’t that deceitful, or are a certain band of journalists just a bit dumb? Isn’t journalism supposed to be impartial and report things as they are for people to decide for themselves? It reminds me of a scene in Batman where the Scarecrow release the fear toxin where all are suddenly affected; I wonder if once the royal correspondents arrive en masse someone unleashes a ‘stupid toxin’, because some are fairly decent journalists that are either being forced to write only positive things or seem content to be mocked behind the scenes by their contemporaries?

Erm… not many folks

I struggle to believe a sane person wrote this

Why do they do it you may ask? Ego, and to enhance their careers perhaps? With the advent of paid for MM fans (many are in third world countries that get paid $1 to have social media accounts and to follow, like, and to comment, hence why some comments make no sense and are in broken English), I’m sure a journalist that suddenly has an increased number of followers can’t help but feel a little smug, and think that they are popular and successful. They like being messaged and interviewed by other outlets as an expert, and they are riding the fame wave and don’t want it to end. However, if they upset their ‘new fan base’ then they know it maybe over, so they continue to ‘please’ the fan base while compromising their integrity (or some maybe not that bright), cue a journalist who left their laptop on the plane.

How can you forget your laptop?

Some may hanker for a book deal like the late James Whittaker who was a popular royal correspondent, and made money with appearances on reality shows and became a minor celebrity in his own right. Others maybe looking for their own show be it on television or radio or in the case of Emily Andrews and Omid Scobie, who set up their own podcasts. It’s all self-promotion and they are taking advantage of it whilst they can.

First of all, which media outlets seem to be biased towards Harry and MM, and in fact try to make them look better by mocking other members of the royal family? Having worked in PR and marketing, while no one likes to be judged by what they choose to read or watch, they are. However, what people say they read, and what they actually read maybe very different things.

In the UK there are tabloids where the news is not reported in depth, but covers trivial fun stories, gossip, and is heavily biased towards reality ‘stars’ and celebrities. The tabloid news channels are ITN (independent and rely on advertising), Sky, Channel 4, and Channel 5, where they don’t always cover world news items, but ones that may interest their audience (generally those who like gossip) and are more casual in their approach to detail.

Daily Mail (also known as the Daily Fail) and The Mail on Sunday ~ A tabloid that isn’t deemed a reliable source by Wikipedia (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source-for-website) and is right wing. The online version has in the past decade become a gossip rag and the comments section is visited heavily by trolls, and spammers. Rebecca English is currently the royal correspondent.

Daily Express (also know as the Distress as reading it can leave you in a state of distress) and Sunday Express ~ A right wing tabloid owned by Reach plc and Northern and Shell Media. Reach also owns the Daily Record, The Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and The Sunday People, Daily Star, and OK! magazine. These are red top tabloids (sensationalism and junk news), hence they all print exactly the same stories. Correspondents include: Richard Palmer, Victoria Murphy, Russell Myers, and Chrissie Reeves.

Hello magazine ~ A weekly tabloid magazine that one doesn’t read but looks at the photos that are often reprinted. Emily Nash is the royal correspondent, and allegedly a family member of Jessica Mulroney’s works on the Canadian edition and ‘leaks’ images and stories that promote JM’s business and highlights her profile. An unreliable source and is popular with z list and reality stars who wish to increase their public profile. It also provides material for Yahoo, which now contains low rated click and bait articles.

ITN, Channel 4, Channel 5, Sky ~ independent television stations that rely on advertising, and take a more gossipy approach to news and are less factual. Correspondents are currently: Chris Ship (a former political editor), Simon Vigar, and Rhiannon Mills.

The Sun ~ a tabloid that is often mocked as the paper for the dregs of society because of the former page 3 girls (topless models) it had, and is associated with fake news and click and bait headlines aimed at the working classes. One doesn’t doesn’t brag that they read the Sun if they wish to impress. Emily Andrews is the correspondent.

Magazines that appear biased towards MM in particular ~ Elle, Harper’s Bazaar US, and Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire US (Hearst), Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Tatler (Conde Nast), and Grazia, and Bella (Bauer).

Emily Andrews (39) and Omid Scobie (37) have joined together to create a podcast called On Heir, which they began in March, which is supposed to focus on royal stories. However, out of 26 items, only 3 aren’t about Harry or MM, hardly a balanced view of royals or the actual heirs to the throne. Are they doing this to elevate their own agendas as they are both approach their 40s? Both are happy to be interviewed as experts on television, and appear to be ambitious and keen to ride on this wave of fame with a throng of fickle (or paid for) followers. For those of you who are skeptical of the business of paid for social media followers, it exists for I have done it to see if the people would pay and to see how many others would do it. The pay was $0.50, and was among other tasks such as voting for companies that were nominated for awards. One wonders if anyone is backing Scobie, because as in independent reporter, he lives a rather comfortable life…

Scobie’s apartment while reporting on the tour

Several of the reporters have the coveted blue tick next to their name on social media indicating it is a genuine account, and that they have made it. Maybe the ego boost that they are ‘someone’ and are ‘famous’ encourages them to appease their new fan base? The question is why are they distorting the truth, or being selective in what they choose to report or see? Why say there are crowds when the streets are half empty? Why say MM looked amazing when her jeans were creased, or when a returns tag slipped from its hiding place in the hem? Only Rebecca English reported it as a minor faux pas and the others seemed to be blind to it. It wasn’t a minor faux pas, but a major one indicating that MM had intended to return the dress. People tried to spin it saying she was stressed and didn’t see a big white tag dangling, and others blamed assistants. Last time I looked, MM still had the ability to see, wasn’t using a white stick to walk, and unless they blindfolded her and pinned her down when she put on the dress, it would be hard not to see the tag that was hidden in the hem, but then fell loose.

It’s time for the reporters to be honest, to tell the truth, and to stop pretending that Harry and MM are so popular and liked when it’s clear they get booed and ignored at times. Face it, many of the hugs are staged and the public know it. I know it because in PR I have been involved in staging rent-a crowd when a celebrity arrived and had little or no audience.

A snide and inappropriate comment, but hey, it’s what you expect from The Sun, no class.

Are the reporters being coerced to write drivel and gross exaggerations, being paid extra on the side, been promised a promotion if they comply, or are they just not that bright? I find that hard to believe with the likes of Chris Ship who was able to report on ground breaking topics in politics, and now is dumbed down to writing about what designer outfits MM wears, or how many times MM touches Harry. I’m sure his former contemporaries are quietly sniggering, while he has had his own documentary on the tour, and is eager it seems to cash in on his newly found fame. Calling MM ‘brave’? He needs to look up the real meaning? Was she brave because she dared to go into the rain and risk melting? What did she do to warrant being brave? It’s a question that many wish Chris Ship to answer. Maybe at 44 he’s exhibiting the first signs of dementia?

Chris, newsflash, many women can speak for 3 minutes without the aid of notes and many don’t wave their arms around either. Seriously? A man who has met politicians wrote these words and can look at himself in the mirror and not be ashamed?

One hopes Ship is being sarcastic here.

Plugging his show…

An old friend calls him out

Tongue in cheek or men that have diabetes?

I would say to those who wish to read about the saga to choose your outlets with care, for each click lines the pockets of the website (even if you feel the need to click that red arrow on the Daily Fail, a dilemma if you will), and that click adds to the impressions of the article, which in turn make it appear as if MM is popular. The media outlets use these inaccurate analytics from click bait headers to then persuade brands to advertise with them, and if you aren’t familiar with pay per click, each time an ad is clicked even by accident, the website gains revenue.

In a nutshell, the public are being fooled and the websites are making money from it, and it’s making it look as if Harry and MM are popular. Just as you can’t quantify the popularity of a site by how many likes or followers it has, nor can you assume because people are reading an article it means they are popular. I have spoken to people in India who are paid $1 to sit and click on certain website sites or articles all day. It’s sad but true, so the figures you see may have been manipulated.

Enabling reporters that appear to have been compromised, or whom lack the morals or ethics to report on the truth is what paid followers do. Anyone with brain cells that work will avoid clicking on the websites that fail to report the truth, and one wonders if they have been paid to write over exaggerated, spun, and empty articles merely to gain and maintain SEO (search engine optimization)? Sunshine Sachs, the PR agency that represented MM have in the past have admitted to violating the Wikipedia terms of use by scrubbing their profiles of their clients and polishing them up. One wonders if the invite Keleigh Thomas Morgan (from Sunshine Sachs) got for the wedding was payment in kind to continue with the polishing of MM’s online profile?

The fake PR gravy train has created a faux situation where the media have been trying to convince the unread and unsuspecting public that Harry and MM are modernizing the monarchy by turning up to events in scruffy clothes, and who break protocol countless times a day. No, people are shaking their heads and wondering why the correspondents who are there can’t see what those with active brain cells and the capacity for sight can see and that is a mess. The faux and constant hand holding, both arriving to engagements looking unkempt, unprofessional with their hands in their pockets, failing to shake hands with winners when presenting awards, and basically an embarrassment to the people of the UK. Shame on the reporters who can’t report the truth, but if their hands are tied then maybe they should step down? If they are in for their 15 minutes of fame, then I guess they will end up on a trashy reality show when they lose their jobs as correspondents.

Why are the media afraid to reveal and report on the truths that many of us can see with our own eyes? How can you say that MM is best friends with Kate when they don’t even hug or kiss goodbye (let alone smile) when they are seen together in public (not often), and how can you say that Charles adores MM when he got her removed from the garden party and didn’t even say goodbye as she and Harry were escorted out by his equerry after 20 minutes. These are the truths that are recorded on video tape footage from more than one source, and haven’t been doctored, so why are the reporters ignoring the obvious and making up claims out of thin air and repeating the same made up stories in a bid to keep MM in the news for no reason except to boost her SEO.

Time to stop enabling them:

Don’t click on their click and bait headlines.

Don’t follow them on social media, you can still read their posts without following them.

Don’t buy newspapers or journals that are trying to indoctrinate you with false information. Click and bait headlines give it away.

Don’t be a victim of being ‘Markled’ by the fake PR and press.

Gruelling? Maybe one needs to look up the meaning of the word? Reading these tweets was gruelling, and EA, what language is ‘whatcha do’?

Tactile? They are supposed to be working EA!

No, they aren’t supposed to do PDAs anyhow

Ground breaking journalism at it’s finest

Yes, the bump that grows by the hour?

Maybe EA woke up and smelt some coffee?

Is EA on commission?

Maybe EA is blind, she may need to go to Specsavers

Plugging, a little thirsty maybe?

Shippy is a bit slow, its’ MM who has missed her IG account. She’s American, goodness where have you been?

Bit of plugging, get more views and revenue on YouTube

She must have been on a different tour because not many saw what she did

Promoting their pals

Karma?

Duh, people were given half a day off to turn up, but looks like most still didn’t bother

Yes, Chris Ship such a brave person and Hannah, such a gruelling time for her

Not now

Rebecca, his uniform is creased and she’s wearing slingback sandals to a formal event!

No one else wanted the job!

Seriously? You went to University and ended up writing this?

I can see about 5 people

Except her father paid, and she may have used affirmative action (places and grants for non-white students) to pay for tuition

Some morals kicked in, or just couldn’t spin it?

RE can do better

No RE, Harry was supposed to go first not MM as per protocol

No one cares…the followers are all fake

They are just photos…

People calling you out Chris

Men on the brink of chronic diabetes, why was she brave, and how do you define success? Maybe you were hacked Chris because intelligent people don’t write complete and utter nonsense.

The Faces and Outlets Behind Meghan’s Fake PR What is ‘fake PR’, because some would say all PR is fake to an extent? The names that seem to crop up all the time are:

#meghan markle #harry and meghan #media #Journalism

54 notes · View notes