Welcome to the six o'clock olds. Good evening, I'm Blonde Airhead.

It may strike fear into the hearts of many incredibly middle class mothers and upper class Lords who seem to defy death by only ever napping briefly (normally during important debates), but it is unfortunately a fact- some students actually do like watching the news. Every now and again, or at least attempt to keep up with it.

This in itself, as with so many formulaic posts on the infinite internet, isn't a problem or even that scandalous, but it's a statement that leads oh so smoothly on to the bulk of this grumble, so I've put it first.

I'm a student, and I watch the news. Yup, that's right, that's the link. Tenuous, wasn't it?

Anyway. Watching the news used to be easy. I can remember as a (very boring and bizarrely "mature", which should be read as socially indifferent) child sitting down with a choice between the news or some tat about antiques at six followed inevitably by The Simpsons at half past, and choosing the news. It was amazing- stuff had happened in the world that was more important than the fight I'd seen in the playground or our lesson about the Romans- which, by the by, seemed to be repeated every two years and we never thought to question it. Why? Well, they were fucking Romans! But then I look back and think fuck the Romans, the Greeks came first and were better. Pish.

The point is news was new. You'd sit down, be told about the important stuff that had happened that day and after half an hour your perspectives would be realigned (there was an earthquake? My collapsed souffle isn't that bad then...), your horizons widened and you'd be free to do whatever you would do that evening having learned about things you didn't know had happened.

This is the news!

More importantly, when something devestating did occur (and I think the last time this could really be said to have happened would be September 11th, although only sort of), the news would actually be BREAKING and would rip into the middle of whatever Friends episode you were drilling into your brain for the umpteenth time or the sleepy early-morning and friendly-faced presenters who don't know what they're doing but are fien with it. It would smash through the front of the telly set you'd been stewing in front of, not really paying attention to, and scream "Something is happening that we didn't know about, pay attention!"

Now we've got 24 hours channels, we've got the internet where we can refresh the page to see if certain announcements have been made every five minutes, and more importantly, we've got time travel!



Well, not really, but it got your attention, didn't it? And we might as well have, because it's no longer a case of "it's six o'clock, here's what happened today that you didn't know abotu before". Now it's a case of "it's six o'clock. Here's what happened today that we told you yesterday would happen today, and that we mentioned would happen today last week". No, it's not new. It's just recycled guff.



And it isn't just the news people that are to blame. In a way, the fact that they choose to report on stuff before it happens isn't really the worst crime here. It's the politicians (and I use the term lightly, encompassing the actual political world and anyone who wants to be head of anything, be it a bank, an enquiry or the cultural studies at Ohio University). If they're going to make a speech, an announcement or anything then they should keep schtum until they actually make the bleeding thing, reading their autocue awkwardly or drolling on for hours. Leaking or "leaking" the contents to the press takes out any of the new in news.



"So and so is expected to announce tomorrow a new stationary tax to cut back on biro related injuries to minors". Here's an idea- tell us he's said it after he's actually said it, or failing that if you're the one making a speech just wing it and say something unrelated. make them look like the beautified berks they are.