One of the commonest phrases that I hear from reporters on TV News is “the story”.  Increasingly, it seems to be ‘the story’, which is important, not ‘the news’.

Despite there being various journalistic distinctions between what is meant by ‘news’ and what defines a ‘story’, I fear that what powers the one form of reporting over the other is ratings.

A case in point is the recent de-Princing of Andrew Mountbatten Windsor.  The ‘news’ was a single event that was announced by Buckingham Palace in a statement issued on the evening of 30 October.  However, the ‘story’ persisted for days afterwards.  Royal correspondents were queueing up every evening to announce the portentous lines:

“The story isn’t over yet.”

And, no, it wasn’t, but only because the media was continuing to generate it, long after the actual ‘news’ was dead and buried.

My issue with the ‘news’ becoming a ‘story’ is that a ‘story’ isn’t always true.  Particularly if that ‘story’ is fuelled by ratings.  It is a sad fact that an entertaining lie generates greater interest than a boring truth.  The entire Brexit Leave campaign is evidence of this.  This blurring of the lines between ‘news’ and ‘stories’ leads to fake news and the kind of false propaganda pumped out by the oligarchs who control many of our media and communications channels, who exploit human credulity and our natural weakness for gossip and sensationalism.

Now, I for one, love a good ‘story’, but I want to discover it in the pages of a Charles Dickens novel or in a Netflix drama, where it is clearly signposted, not served up as fact on my nightly News programme.

© Simon Turner-Tree

Simon Turner-Tree: journalism’s loss.