Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

aoav.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 242 posts

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#131

Post by JdeBP »

kitd wrote: post #107
JdeBP wrote: post #76

It is interesting to look at the details and see who the (news) 'media' are in this case. Going through the details, I find 1 instance (under Kemp) of the BBC, and everyone else is the 'usual suspects', the Telegraph , the Mail , GB News , the Sun , the Times , and so forth. The Guardian is only mentioned in context of exposing these conflicts of interests; and whilst I am surprised to find LBC and Nation Cymru as no…

The survey excluded veterans with no commercial ties. Maybe those publications not mentioned used them instead.

Yes, and I was slightly disappointed, from a statistical point of view, that they didn't tell us how many people they excluded from the original sample for this reason. That could have told us things.

If (say) they threw out 967 to leave those 33, then one possible explanation that that leaves the door open for is that journalists are so used to there being no conflict of interest, it being the case the majority of the time, that they don't check in the minority of cases where there is.

I suspect that they didn't throw out anywhere near as many as that, though. But, still, I would have liked to have been told the figure.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#132

Post by thesamethrowawa »

It is interesting that any US-centric article causing political flame wars immediately sinks here, but anything generating similar "debate" on UK issues is allowed to sit on the front page, accumulating hundreds of comments. I don't think the conversation here is evolving in way that HN tries to foster, so hopefully this one is shadow-flagged (or however the internal mod tools work) soon.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#133

Post by cryo32 »

iso1631 wrote: post #127
cryo32 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never thought of it from that perspective. They should read multiple sources too. BBC as well, which once the articles have settled, are quite good. (just ignore the breaking stuff which is dubious sometimes)

Breaking News Broke News The BBC used to deride Sky for being "never wrong for long", but the race to "break the news" changed that. If the news is about something that happened today it's barely worth looking at. Personally I get my general news from "The Week" magazine each week, which occupies half an hour on a Saturday morning. It has a selection of articles from across the UK and international press, cut down to…

I have actually worked for the BBC. It all went downhill when they moved to media city in Manc. Bit of a disaster for staffing.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#135

Post by cryo32 »

SanjayMehta wrote: post #124
cryo32 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never thought of it from that perspective. They should read multiple sources too. BBC as well, which once the articles have settled, are quite good. (just ignore the breaking stuff which is dubious sometimes)

The bbc never reported on the pedophiles in their midst and they are the good ones.

Yeah that is totally unforgivable.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#136

Post by gib444 »

meta_gunslinger wrote: post #101

[flagged]

Special shout-out to the BBC who just embellish and release ahistorical nonsense, brainwashing kids

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M-qsVS8zeU

On top of ton of social programming with an overrepresentation of eg mixed race couples in shows

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#138

Post by roysting »

I wish we had a requirement for every corporation (non-profit, for profit, or politician) to disclose any and all “links”. The fact that there is so much resistance to that notion should tell people all they need to know about how toxic the people’s relationship is to these entities.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#139

Post by k1m »

JdeBP wrote: post #123
k1m wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The report doesn't say the media mentioned is an exhaustive list of the media that failed to disclose ties to the arms industry, which is what you're assuming. You mention the Guardian. I took one of the names listed in the report, Richard Barrons, and quickly found an article in the Guardian where he's quoted but his ties to the arms industry are not disclosed: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/mar/20/britai…

Not quoted as saying that there should be some sort of budget or spending increase, which is the sort of evidence being presented in this report, but merely some historical context statement about how the armed forces had been 'right-sized for the era'; and with his political ties also mentioned. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if AOAV had a blind spot with respect to The Guardian . However, that doesn't show one;…

I'm sorry, that's a real stretch. It's apparent to anyone reading what his comment implies.

And this is far from an isolated case, if you think the Guardian is an exception. We're all technical here, easy to use Google search and look up the names in the report and see how often the Guardian and the other "better" papers disclose the arms industry links. (Oh and the political party he's affiliated to isn't what's under discussion here.)

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#140

Post by TiredOfLife »

rigonkulous wrote: post #118
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #28

> These individuals had also been quoted, featured, or otherwise used as commentators in UK media coverage of defence, conflict, or national security issues. If they are promoting defence spending or plugging their employers products that's bad, but using their experience to comment on the Iran war or Ukraine, or Russian/Chinese Spy networks doesn't seem that bad?

In the context of Julian Assanges' treatment by UK media, and his subsequent disassembly at Belmarsh, who cares what they have to say about Russia or China.

In the context of Assange turning out to be russian mouthpiece. Well deserved.
Post reply on HN