Interview Transcript
Richard Branson: Well I don’t own any media outlets I’m afraid. I’ve got a 10 percent stake in one. But if I did own a media outlet, I hope I could own it responsibly. And I hope that the news would be dispassionate.
It’s sad today to see Lou Dobbs on CNN. You know, CNN, that very dispassionate TV channel that is the voice of the world, speaking so xenophobically, speaking without any dispassion whatsoever. I mean, this is meant to be a news channel. And here he is spouting forth his views before anybody has a word to say, to say anything in response. And I think that’s wrong.
Take the BBC as an example. Although it’s government owned, people respect the BBC. But they also watch the BBC because they know it’s dispassionate. And they know they’re going to get an honest viewpoint. And it is the biggest news channel in the UK.
If there was an equivalent channel in America, I think it would be watched by people. I think it’s wrong to think that just because a TV channel is not gung ho, that everybody is going to switch off in their millions. I think people actually want the truth. They want dispassionate viewing.
But if I’m wrong, I still think it’s important that TV stations give people the truth and give people a more balanced outlet.
Ted Turner, he’s not dead; but he’ll be turning over in his bath robe or in his grave right now. I’m incredibly sad to see what’s happened. Look. There are good people on CNN. Anderson Cooper, he’s good. But they shouldn’t spoil those people by having others that are xenophobic.
Recorded on: July 5, 2007
The Media's Malaise
Chairman, Virgin Group
Branson, on the need for dispassionate reporting.
November 17, 2007 | In Media & Internet
Discuss
johan hendrick on January 19, 2008, 6:10 AM
media is supposed to be dispassionate when reporting facts ,it is allowed passion with sport and the arts ,noting neither sport nor the arts are news
you sir richard are an ideal case in point, while your flair and passion are motivated by your buisness ,thier promotion as news isnt what news is supposed to be
neither is the reportage of road deaths , sports scores or what the rich and famous may or may not be doing today ,but none of that is going to change [is it]so who can blame you for using it to the max,
its past time that we see you doing something ‘new’ any way, but it shouldnt be classed as new[s] but light entertainment
news is in a terrible state, the same headlines , and opinion masking as news every 15 minutes or so ,news shouldnt really be in depth ,[thats why we go to news papers for ,or more reasonably we sites]
visual television and radio media should be a fast paced reading of headlines ,that link via web links to the full reportage where the full reporting is done, linked to opinion pieces by the headline subject ,on pro /con pages that have the statistical analasis, related implications, possable concequences ,and contact links that round off the full spectrum of our reactions to the particular story or subject
in a fast paced news reportage two or three minutes could cover the headlines intersperced with real news ,then arts , national news then sports, political news , then health ,international news ,then personnality , news ,then buisness , news then stock reports, news then science ,then news , weather
possably with a ticker tape running under with hot links hooked up to the digital ,that searches for more detail ,watchable during the slow times , or able to run together in a weekly progressive sumerised sequence
what is anoying is not know in how something happened , or why , or how it turned out ,computers can accumulate the whole progression to run at our conveniance
i am discusted in our present media,bbc has the same as cnn, fox is so clearly biased as to be insulting to non war mongering peace nicks such as myself
i pray some saviour [virgen to the media starts a site like this , or my space or answers that does the whole news in a truely un biased manner
but it aint going to happen now is it
James C on December 5, 2008, 4:22 AM
Which women would want this, and why?
If it was a trade-off for economic security, then there would have to be more sexual discrimination in the workforce, and less globalisation (so that the men were economically secure), so it couldn’t be a choice that individuals made for themselves.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register