I find it offensive -it's sloppy journalism. Kids are baby goats as has been pointed out - they were poor innocent CHILDREN. The trouble is the latest generation have absolutely no respect!
I find it offensive -it's sloppy journalism. Kids are baby goats as has been pointed out - they were poor innocent CHILDREN. The trouble is the latest generation have absolutely no respect!
So should nobody else called children kids either? Do you have children? Does it offend you if someone says "you have 2 nice kids" (as an example)? It's not sloppy journalism, it's got NOTHING to do with respect (sorry but that's a load of absolute tosh, and that's being kind), and as for it being offensive, my word, if someone is offended by the word kids, or a journlist using the word kids then whoever it is that's offended by it needs help.
Was never an issue anyway. It really doesn't matter. This talk of respect is a load of tosh too. Just because they're dead doesn't mean they should say children rather than kids, and it doesn't make it any more/less respectful. It's nothing more than people making a mountain out of a flat piece of land, let alone out of a molehill. Absolutely nothing wrong with the original broadcast. Then again it sums up people nowadays when they can be offended/find something disrespectful when there's nothing to be offended by/to find disrespectful. Almost seems fashionable nowadays for people to claim to be offended by something when there's nothing to be offended by. Same goes for the respect claims.
Ha, no, I just find it ridiculous how people can apparently be offended or find something so insignificant disrespectful. I mean let's be honest here, it's a word. That's it.
Although it's in no way disrespectful to call them kids, it was very noticable and slightly jarring at the constant use of kids, as if the word children had somehow been banned and the reporter was deliberately not using it. Mixing up the use of children and kids would have been better to stop repetition of the same word over and over. Doesn't really matter, but generally children would be primarily used in news reports, with kids used as an alternate.
I don't see the problem. It's just another word for children. I always use the word kids rather than children. The world children sounds old fashioned to me.
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
Offensive? Check out the cruel headline in today's (Wednesday) Daily Mail which I saw on the paper reviews earlier tonight. The headline screams "VILE PRODUCT OF WELFARE UK".
Now that is both offensive and incendiary beyond belief. To even dare to equate a convicted multiple child killer of his own offspring to those who claim benefits of whatever kind. Even if he has had 17 children by 5 women to milk the system some way, it remains a very very nasty and un-called for headline, trying to smear millions of decent people with this loathesome couple of killers. The Daily Mail cannot even report this terrible story in a straightforward manner, without using it for its own agenda, and in this of all weeks.
Insofar as the "kids" word in place of "children" is concerned, it is not offensive, simply damned shoddy journalism that should have been picked up and rectified before airing. Similar to saying everyone will be 500 "quid" worse off this year, rather than "pounds".
I doubt that any of the posters defending the use of the word Kids actually saw the item, and the context in which Kids was used.
They may have thought differently had they done so.
I have seen the item, and I'm quite comfortable with the use of the word kids rather than children. Complete non issue. If anything I'm disappointed they changed it later on as there was nothing wrong in the first place.
Lead item on the 6pm BBC1 National News, the 6 dead Philpott Children, killed in a fire started by their convicted father & mother.
The reporter in the package showed no respect at all, by constantly referring to the Kids, not the Children.
Just another example of dumming down at the BBC I'm afraid.
I also noted that in order to satisfy some kind of "regionality" quota, the presenter of last nights "Special" on the death of those children wasn't required to speak comprehensible English. So I had to translate a lot of it from Northern Irish into English for my OH, as she genuinely couldn't understand what was being said. Even I struggled to work out that "regular rise" was "regular rows".
You'd think a topic like this might deserve a bit more respect.
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
Very disingenuous attempt at points-scoring there I'm afraid.
This is a broadcasting forum - of course discussion is going to revolve around the reporting of the topic, and not the topic itself.
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
For goodness sake, this is a broadcasting forum, where people discuss what they have seen and heard being broadcast. Just how high is your moral high horse.
What i find appalling here, is the fact that more credence is given to a word, kids, and not the fact they were burned alive!
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
Comments
Latest generation?
Anyway they were also kids.
I needs to be raised so they can employ a better caliber of journalists then.
So should nobody else called children kids either? Do you have children? Does it offend you if someone says "you have 2 nice kids" (as an example)? It's not sloppy journalism, it's got NOTHING to do with respect (sorry but that's a load of absolute tosh, and that's being kind), and as for it being offensive, my word, if someone is offended by the word kids, or a journlist using the word kids then whoever it is that's offended by it needs help.
My personal view is that 'kids' is fine when used in lighter stories or an informal context.
For a hard news story - and they don't come any harder than this - I'd always use 'children'.
Well said.
I too have many years experience of working in broadcast TV News.
I doubt that any of the posters defending the use of the word Kids actually saw the item, and the context in which Kids was used.
They may have thought differently had they done so.
There is seriously something wrong with this world and forum if more attention is given to the word kids!
**** sake!!!
Well said
100% with you.
Offensive? Check out the cruel headline in today's (Wednesday) Daily Mail which I saw on the paper reviews earlier tonight. The headline screams "VILE PRODUCT OF WELFARE UK".
Now that is both offensive and incendiary beyond belief. To even dare to equate a convicted multiple child killer of his own offspring to those who claim benefits of whatever kind. Even if he has had 17 children by 5 women to milk the system some way, it remains a very very nasty and un-called for headline, trying to smear millions of decent people with this loathesome couple of killers. The Daily Mail cannot even report this terrible story in a straightforward manner, without using it for its own agenda, and in this of all weeks.
Insofar as the "kids" word in place of "children" is concerned, it is not offensive, simply damned shoddy journalism that should have been picked up and rectified before airing. Similar to saying everyone will be 500 "quid" worse off this year, rather than "pounds".
I have seen the item, and I'm quite comfortable with the use of the word kids rather than children. Complete non issue. If anything I'm disappointed they changed it later on as there was nothing wrong in the first place.
I'm not hugely offended- but the BBC used to take a pride in getting it right.
Just another example of dumming down at the BBC I'm afraid.
I also noted that in order to satisfy some kind of "regionality" quota, the presenter of last nights "Special" on the death of those children wasn't required to speak comprehensible English. So I had to translate a lot of it from Northern Irish into English for my OH, as she genuinely couldn't understand what was being said. Even I struggled to work out that "regular rise" was "regular rows".
You'd think a topic like this might deserve a bit more respect.
Very disingenuous attempt at points-scoring there I'm afraid.
This is a broadcasting forum - of course discussion is going to revolve around the reporting of the topic, and not the topic itself.
BBC1 National News at Ten replaced all references to Kids, using Children instead.
So is the words bairns and weans, I doubt the BBC would use these words in a serious news story.
Perhaps I just expect higher standards from the BBC!
For goodness sake, this is a broadcasting forum, where people discuss what they have seen and heard being broadcast. Just how high is your moral high horse.
Totally agree.