´óÏó´«Ã½

That lot over on HYS are rabble rousers Mark, you should know better than to take them too seriously. There's definitely a different quality of discussion here in the blog comments. ;-)

I actually think you've done pretty well with this story. If anything, across the ´óÏó´«Ã½ as a whole it has possibly been a little under reported. The closure of the Forties pipeline is starting to make big headlines today, however if its fate is tied to the oil refinery, surely it should have come to light several days ago? The impending fuel shortages have been all over the Scottish news for several days now, so it's no big surprise.

As for p***c b**ing, I fought the instinct to join in when driving past queues this week and waited until the tank was below 1/4 as usual before filling up. But plenty of people around here are not doing that. The thing about panic buying is, once you see other people panic buying, it becomes entirely logical and reasonable for you to join in, before supplies run out. It's a vicious circle. Or a feedback loop. Or something. What was I saying about HYS ...

So the perfect storm continues, the economy gets squeezed from all angles and Grangemouth is the present location where we go through the motions of analysis.

Our national economy is being robbed piece by piece. The Oil Company starts forcing workers into strikes to organise scares in an already panicked market, the price goes higher, the petro dollars roll.

Operation credit crunch is there to take our private money and then bail out the banks with our public money.

Operation Oil crisis i guess serves to take what little money we have left and help justify our murder of those with Oil.

and we all happily keep living in the Lie.

When will one Journalist break ranks and fess up to how deep we are in it.

I rather like it when things like this happen, because they divert the Beeb from churning out the usual biased propaganada about climate change, and highlight the fact that oil underpins EVERYTHING we do. Motorists get taxed, blamed and clobbered, but in fact they are only responsible for about 15% of fossil fuel use, and oil or coal is behind every single action we take and every single thing we buy. No oil, no western society. You might not like it and you might want to change it, but for the time being it is like that and there's not a darn thing anyone can do about it. More power to the Grangemouth workers for highlighting the issue for the first time since the fuel protests of 2000.

Before you highlight queues and empty pumps, it is essential that you establish how representative it is of the whole situation. On any normal day you could find a busy petrol station or one that had run out ahead of receiving a delivery, but that wouldn't necessitate panic buying reports.

One of your reporters used the price of fuel at a single garage in Orkney to indicate how prices had risen. That is the definition of sensationalism. How many people does this effect? Isn't Orkney always more expensive? You wouldn't report the hottest day of the year as being representative of our climate.

I get the impression that you set out with an agenda to report a story and if that story isn't there, you create it. I don't know if I can trust the ´óÏó´«Ã½ any more than a tabloid newspaper.

It's not the actual reporting of the fuel situation that is the problem, but the language used to report it, let me demonstrate
1. don't think of a red car
2. never imagine a flower
3. forget about the fuel situation
Go on admit it, you thought of a red car, imagined a flower and had a thought about the fuel situation. Being a hypnotherapist, I am aware of 'unhelpful language' that people use about themselves, so when the newsreader say "we URGE you not to PANIC BUY FUEL, you might as well say "RUN AND FILL UP! The mind does not deal with 'negatives' very well, so in order to NOT do something, first it has to imagine it then somehow not do it!
A better way would be to say "stay calm and there will be enough for everyone" therefore linking a behaviour to the desired outcome. Hey ´óÏó´«Ã½ mind your langage in future! but you don't have to take this advice, it's only a suggestion!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I think the coverage has been fair. I was watching ´óÏó´«Ã½ News 24 last Saturday when the news broke. I immediately went and filled up my car.

Why?

I remember the last strike.

The coverage has been even. It highlighted both sides and pointed out ptoential problems: the company changing the scheme to current employees, and the typical union reaction wanting the same conditons for people who have not even started yet.

Perhaps the ´óÏó´«Ã½ could start putting some tough questions to Alex Salmond. Ask him what he would have done if Scotland was totally independant.

One good point about the blogs, they are moderated quickly and fairly. Please give some advice to the HYS moderators.

"That said, we've been trying hard to avoid the phrase "panic-buying" on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ News website unless we're quoting its use by an interviewee"

Lies lies... Why is 'panic-buying' in the main headline on the main news page then?

I live in Kent, and there were queues at our local petrol stations this morning. Normally on a Saturday, the forecourts are not busy at all.

What caused this? It can't be the fact that a refinery in Scotland has closed down due to a strike, because I understand that only really affects the north of the UK, and only affects about a third of the UK's total fuel stocks.

No. It's the media, hyping up a potential problem. As far as I know, if everyone just behaved normally, filling up as usual, instead of switching to selfish crisis mode, the fuel stocks would last over a month - and the stuff is still entering the country via the other refineries and pipelines anyway.

As it is, it strikes me the stocks will be lowered far more quickly than normal, forming a self-fulfilling prophecy of fuel shortages, caused by and fuelled by the panic-mongers of the British media.

Shame on you.

(The puns used in this post are purely accidental!)

I am at a loss to understand how it is possible for any media outlet to report truthfully on a subject such as this and avoid causing panic.

If the public decide to be sheep and panic buy you cannot be held responsible for that.

If the ´óÏó´«Ã½ or any media organisation lie, then subsequently we run out of fuel. how would you be thought of then. Then we would have accusations that you are a government run establishment paid to lie to the public. There would be inquiries that would go on for months.

You cannot win on this on so just do what it right and report the truth it is the basis of good journalism and ignore the people who complain on this issue.

OK so the ´óÏó´«Ã½ can't win. What it can do is stop anchormen from asking questions to the journalist on the spot (standing outside a locked factory gate wasting money by being there when he could have done just as good at home...) like "Isn't there a danger of this whole situation getting seriously out of hand?", to which the person on the spot says yes there is such a danger. Well there is now, because they said it, so everyone panics. What the anchorman should've said was - "what is the real picture", and the on the spot man should've said "We just don't know", which is what they normally say when posted outside factory gates/ someone who's had their child kidnapped's house/ the house of Commons etc. etc. etc.

People love a good panic!
They need something to bring excitment to their lives.

how dare you play the victim here.

You guys in the media are responsible for whipping up hysteria and causing people to panic buy.

If your going to act irresponsible through sensational headlines, you must also shoulder the responsibilty it brings and not wash your hands with it when the public critise you for whipping up the storm.

There was no need to go to town on this story as to be honest with you if you hadn't plastered 'running out of fuel' all over the TV we wouldn't be.

To say dammed if you do, dammed if you don't sounds very much like you've played no part in this, when the reality is you've played the biggest part in this hystertia.

Shame on you ´óÏó´«Ã½ !

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

How do you cause panic buying? easy, tell people not to do it. Tell people there is no problem, they'll just assume its spin and go and buy up.

How do you stop it? You cant. First one to find a way that works should get a nobel prize.

Well you might have served the public interest better if you had used the situation to question the matter of our energy supplies being controlled by Private Business.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I think people blame the media fairly for this sort of thing but to focus solely on Grangemouth is to underestimate the problem. It is though, a great example of a more serious issue.

In recent years the proliferation of extra channels, extra supplements for papers and the avalanche of information available on the Internet has led to a decline in journalistic standards. My contacts in PR tell me that most "stories" are simply cut and paste jobs from an original PR piece done by a professional. In depth reporting of the facts is too difficult when you need so much copy.

Simultaneously, the media has concentrated on "consumer friendly" styles which some would call dumbed down. This means that we get used to journalists who have been hurried to the scene of the story who clearly have nothing sensible to say and so get the first goon they can find to give an interview. Alternatively, they simply spout nonsense of the "Here at the RAF base we are waiting for Prince Harry's plane to touch down, we can see the lights of the plane, now we can see the wheels. presumably there is a captain on board, and free drinks, possibly..." variety.

In this environment, no wonder journalists hype a story before it has happened and no wonder the "consumer" gets cynical about it.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It amused me when I saw a report on the news detailing the % of our fuel consumption that would be effected, followed by a request for us not to panic buy !

I don't see what the panic is, if I have no petrol, I get to stay at home. : )

Coverage was Much better than the Northern Rock. Where in my view the ´óÏó´«Ã½ did create a panic unfairly.

Please point out which part of my comment your moderators found offensive.

Thanks.

Still on the responsibility of the media in the recent petrol "crisis"........I wonder why the ´óÏó´«Ã½ didn't have a lot more about how much petrol could be saved by driving no faster than 55 mph. It really does work too!! That is sure what a public service might be able to do successfully, especially with comments from experts, and maybe even getting Jeremy clarkson to commend it!!

it is sad that grangemouth workers had to go on strike.

the press in the united kingdom did a good job
on covering this story...