Following on from yesterday’s most popular blog, entitled Violin master Shinichi Suzuki ‘the biggest fraud in music history’ – Sydney Morning Herald, thanks to the eagle eyes of Seymour Lightman, at Probe Forensics, I am sharing the follow-up story of the Sydney Morning Herald.
Seymour simply advised:
No idea what’s what here, but maybe worth flagging this revisionist piece: apparently posted as a late update to the original story?
Both stories are well worth a read and some reflection. For me I really admire the Sydney Morning Herald for publishing both sides of this story. The point is that irrespective of whether the Dr Shinichi Suzuki fraud claims are genuine, his contribution to music has been outstanding and should stand separately to the questions about his early years.
When I was a youngster, I thought that newspapers reported the news honestly and it was for editorials to share their political bias. I soon learned that I was naive.
Let me share another reflection on the same thread. Last night I was at dinner with a friend who had recently retired from a forty-year career at the BBC – he was involved in news operations, viz. delivering the news. I offered that their was too much bias in the mainstream media. My wife gave an example of a headline completely at odds from the main story. Our friend responded that the headline was an editorial decision – so the headline can give a pointed or political message, irrespective of the underlying story. He then moved to my blog and suggested that I was providing editorials of the news.
This started me thinking that with Twitters’ 140 characters, headline were these days much more important than the underlying story.
Any thoughts on bias in the mainstream media and, in particular, editorial decisions on headlines?