You are reading a single comment by @The_Kindness_of_Trees and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
In the context of media/client interest, I would agree. When people are poring over our history in 50-100 years time, though, I think it'll be austerity they're reading about.
I guess I don't equate demand with worthiness; 'importance' is not necessarily driven by what's popular, in my view, even if on a commercial level it is.
The_Kindness_of_Trees
Not a journalist but work for a very large news organisation and spend a lot of time explaining how the news works to people so it's something I've had some practice at :)
Absolutely agree and the output of news organisations is driven by both client demand and newsworthiness.
Putting aside the commercial factors though, I would still argue that given the history and who was sitting on the bench that Taj Mahal MkII was a more newsworthy event than yet another austerity march with no influential/powerful people involved which wasn't going to affect anything. Also like it or not Will and his wife sitting on a bench is a global story - a relatively inconsequential anti-austerity march in London isn't.
It's quite depressing really isn't it? This is why nearly all seasoned hacks are miserable sods ;)