Talk:ITN

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Bulletins on GMTV 2 Claims that ITN doctored images 3 Logo change 4 Reads like a PR promo 5 It Does Not Reads like a PR promo

[edit] Bulletins on GMTV

I seem to recall Sky News providing news bulletins on GMTV (or maybe TV-AM) rather than ITN at some point. Did I only dream this (I was never particularly a morning person) MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 11:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

According to TV Ark: "Shortly after the announcement of it's loss of the ITV Breakfast franchise, TV-am closed it's news service, in favour of specially produced bulletins from Sky News. Lisa Aziz was kept on as presenter, along with a handful of reporters."[1] --Marknew 12:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claims that ITN doctored images

Don't you think this article should mention the claims that ITN doctored images of Serbian 'death camp' in 1992? Here’s some information from the website emperors-clothes.com that seem to support this;

“Last week the British alternative magazine, LM, was fined over $500 000 US for libel. LM had printed a story that that charged British news station ITN and reporters Penny Marshall and Ian Williams with fraud. LM said ITN had faked the "death camp" pictures to demonize the Serbs.”

“The Judge in the libel case admitted that ITN might have made some mistakes. But he argued: the LM people weren't in Bosnia that day. So how could LM be sure what was really happening there?”

“IN FACT another film crew was present the entire time. They filmed the footage used in JUDGMENT!”

Some more information from the same site;

WHAT THIS FILM PROVES

1) The Loyalist ("Serbian") Authorities were humane.

From the pictures that ITN produced one would think that Marshall and her crew had sneaked into a death camp and shot their film when nobody was watching. Not so. The ITN crew visited two surprisingly casual and humane locations. They were protected but not controlled by the loyalist authorities whom they later compared to Nazi's.

2) Marshall KNEW the loyalists were humane.

She and the crew from RTS interviewed POWs', their wives, non-POW refugees, a doctor, at least one red cross worker, the commander of the POW Center. The film shows these interviews. Marshall simply suppressed this evidence of humane treatment. Instead she staged some pictures. These were then doctored to produce Nazi-like images for mass consumption. The height of cynicism and dishonesty.

3) The refugees SAID they were treated decently.

Marshall is shown arguing with one refugee. She tries to coerce the man to say something anti-Yugoslav. He refuses. "No, no," he protests vehemently. "Not a prison. No, no. REFUGEE center. They treat us very kind. No, no, very kind." Undeterred, Marshall used this very location to stage her phony death camp shots.

4) Marshall staged the death camp sequence seen around the world.

She went out of her way to film from inside an awkward storage area. Why? Because one side had what she wanted: a fence, mainly chicken wire but with a few strands of barbed wire at the top. Shooting through the barbed wire, Marshall talked to refugees OUTSIDE the fence. She then doctored the raw footage to produce false images of prisoners behind barbed wire.

5) Marshall and Ian Williams were filmed in the act of lying.

The amazing thing is -- the RTS people were filming a few feet away. They caught the same shots from a slightly different angle. They got pictures of Marshall, Ian Williams, a cameraman, a man holding a mike. You will see, step by step, just how Marshall doctored her pictures to produce the look of a Nazi death camp. That is, the film takes footage shot by RTS and then proceeds to alter it, as you watch, producing the phony ITN photos of Nazi-like atrocities.

Although I’ve not look into this very deeply, I think this article should at least mention the claims considering that they appear to be true. Envis 18:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo change

I don't like the new logo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.74.156.162 (talk • contribs)

I'm inclined to agree - it's not a particularly attractive new logo. Would it be possible to keep the old ITN logo lower on the page as well? After all, this is a history as much as a current page, and that logo had been in use for years, at least since 1969 (see News At Ten at TV Ark. Bob 20:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I know it looks like a badly drawn ITN logo in paint, but it is the new one. I would be in favour of of one of the older production slides. I would be inclined towards this one, it could be added beside the bit about Super Channel News. There's no point in having two pictures of just the logo.   theKeith  Talk!  22:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I've added the previous ITN logo, in use until June 2006--Sam Dutton 10:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reads like a PR promo

I've tagged the article Advert. It reads much too much like a PR promo written by ITN themselves to tell everyone how wonderful they are. Needs to be calmed down and made more encyclopaedic. Jheald 23:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It Does Not Reads like a PR promo

Well Perhaps you should Read what Wikipedia have to say about THEMSELVES :P Wikipedia Anyway ITN is wonderful and one of the most trusted names in News. and thats my 2cents.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.205.196 (talk • contribs)

The article has been slightly rewritten since the PR promo comment. Edward 20:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Tweaked it again to remove (more) PR stuff. Sam Dutton (talk) 10:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)