Why I don't wear a poppy on air
8 November 2006, 11:53 AM
A message from last night's duty log is not untypical. It reads:
"I'm disgusted at Jon Snow for refusing to wear a poppy. He interrogates those people sitting opposite him, but refuses to answer questions on why he refuses to acknowledge those who fought on his behalf."
The Poppy issue is an interesting one - opinions are much more bitterly divided and assertively put than on any other symbol.
Fiona Bruce is to be allowed to continue to wear a crucifix, or a cross-shaped item of jewellery. I am allowed to wear unspeakably bright ties. But there's a world of difference there that we should be assertive about.
My ties are abstract - I do not believe in wearing anything which represents any kind of statement. You may say my ties, my socks are a statement anyway. But of what? A statement of rebellion? Joy? Absurdity? You see we don't know what the statement is - if indeed there is one - and that is as it should be.
I am begged to wear an Aids Ribbon, a breast cancer ribbon, a Marie Curie flower... You name it, from the Red Cross to the RNIB, they send me stuff to wear to raise awareness, and I don't. And in those terms, and those terms alone, I do not and will not wear a poppy.
Additionally there is a rather unpleasant breed of poppy fascism out there - 'he damned well must wear a poppy!'. Well I do, in my private life, but I am not going to wear it or any other symbol on air.
I respect our armed forces, the sacrifice and the loss, and like others I remember them on Remembrance Sunday. That's the way it is. I won't be wearing a black tie for anyone's death - I don't for my own relatives, so why on earth would I for anyone else's?
When the Queen Mother died, our coverage was not of dark grief but of a happy life remembered.
In the end there really must be more important things in life than whether a news presenter wears symbols on his lapels.
Here's my colleague Lindsay Taylor on the same subject.
And for an alternate view, read Sarah Smith's post: Here's why I WILL be wearing a poppy
Permanent URL for this article
Readers' comments
-
Posted by OHARE on 8 November 2006, 2:06 PM
I think you are taking your own importance to seriously.
-
Posted by Macca13 on 8 November 2006, 2:23 PM
You conform by wearing a shirt and tie to read the news, why not wear a poppy too? If you truly were a impartial and free spirit you'd tell us the news sat there in a T-shirt and Bermuda shorts...
-
Posted by justined on 8 November 2006, 3:34 PM
I think Jon is absolutely right not to wear the poppy on the show. The universal adoption of the poppy on TV is less about commemoration than it is about conformity - otherwise, it wouldn't be unacceptable to make a personal decision about how and when you remember British losses in war. Wearing a poppy makes a political statement about the place of the military in British society, and as such, should be considered properly by each individual rather than just pinned on because everybody else has one.
-
Posted by guesto on 8 November 2006, 4:52 PM
Can't say I'd ever thought about it like that before, but I see your predicament. Can you not just make your own personal choice on what symbols and issues are meaningful to you? So if remembrance is important, then yes to the Poppy, but no coloured wrist bands if they dont feel relevant to you. But then I guess that makes even more of an overt statement about your relative support for different issues, so I guess you are damned either way!
-
Posted by Bryanappleyard on 8 November 2006, 5:15 PM
The last line lets you down, Jon. If there are more important things, why are you posting?
-
Posted by MayorWatch on 8 November 2006, 5:39 PM
Seems reasonable enough, news presenters are there to address the whole nation and any emblem which can get in the way of the message has no place on air.
-
Posted by leyton.org on 8 November 2006, 6:46 PM
[Trackback] I’m quite happy to wear a poppy, and have at various points helped my mum and my grandmother out with their poppy collections back at home. However, it’s become increasingly obvious that the TV - in particular the BBC - have a squad of Popp...
-
Posted by sjhoward.co.uk on 9 November 2006, 12:33 AM
[Trackback] As sort of an adjunct to this post, a little more about wearing a poppy on TV. Jon Snow, on Channel 4 News, won’t (he hasn’t in years): I do not believe in wearing anything which represents any kind of statement … I am begged to wear ...
-
Posted by kjfan on 9 November 2006, 10:19 AM
It's Mr Snow's choice. What IS irritating is that newsreaders and others start wearing their poppies in the middle of October. Why not just wear it for the week preceding Nov 11?
-
Posted by fpd on 9 November 2006, 2:40 PM
I agree there should be no symbols worn by newscasters. But war in any case has been outlawed since 1948 and every country adopting a social/national insurance system. That's why all the Ministries of War then changed their names to Ministries of Defence. Perhaps the poppies should now be called "Social Insurance Poppies"?
-
Posted by ukdailypunditblog on 9 November 2006, 3:26 PM
Fascism, Mr Snow? The same sort of fascism that sees left-leaning journalists brand as racists anyone who dares to call for more controls on asylum seekers and illegal immigrants? Surely not.
-
Posted by Unsworth on 9 November 2006, 3:35 PM
How do you feel about black ties, Jon? And say you were covering events at the Cenotaph, what would you feel constrained to wear?. It's certainly good that you wish to retain impartiality, but that's an extremely difficult thing to do. In all honesty I can't recall any broadcaster being able to do that. And some of our best have been remarkably biased. The very process of selection of news items is itself a manifestation of some discrimination.
-
Posted by Rumsfeld on 9 November 2006, 5:13 PM
ukdailypunditblog - what on earth have asylum seekers and illegal immigrants to do with poppy-wearing? By the way, I support Jon Snow in his eminently sensible choice.
-
Posted by bvanzy on 9 November 2006, 5:13 PM
Jon - you've made your career out of preaching to the converted on your news programme, who won't give tuppence whether or not you wear a poppy. As for everyone else, your reach doesn't extend there, because your bias and prejudices make you an untrustworthy, if otherwise sleek and intelligent, journalist. Make your statement, it does nothing to extend the reach of Channel 4 news as it smacks of student politicking.
-
Posted by Lavretski on 9 November 2006, 6:29 PM
The poppy is surely only emblematic of all those who have died in all wars.It is not a political statement. I have been opposed to wearing poppies ever since I left school where it was almost mandatory (in the early sixties.) I watched OH WHAT A LOVELY WAR today for the first time in many years. I was so moved I have changed my mind. The poppy is a powerful symbol of all oppression and waste of human life. Nothing more and nothing less. Does Jon Snow really wish to make that a controversial issue?
-
Posted by emesel on 9 November 2006, 7:40 PM
Until reading Mr Snow's reasons for not wearing a poppy I was concerned that it was a political/pc decision by Channel 4 News. I am pleased to see this is not the case. I can quite understand that wearing symbols for what ever cause would set a precident and make future refusal to wear more controversial items
-
Posted by LesleyMcDade on 9 November 2006, 10:25 PM
Yes, newsreaders should wear a poppy for remembrance, as it is a sign of respect for soldiers who have laid down their lives for our benefit, even if some of us are too young to have lived through the horrors of war. Soldiers who have participated in WW1 and WW2 and other wars are from every denomination. Its a sign of respect and reflection.
-
Posted by rodvc on 9 November 2006, 10:39 PM
Mr Snow is wrong. Of course he can't be expected to support every cause that requests his time. Yet, the Poppy Appeal is important as it helps us all to focus on what was & still is given to us by many. Several years ago we were at risk of forgetting what the Poppy Appeal was about. Figures such as Mr Snow ( who is a news reader , not maker ) play an important role in setting the standard.
-
Posted by Bnaster on 10 November 2006, 2:29 AM
Would the dissenters mind if Jon wore a hijab? A crucifix? A turban? A Liberal Democrat pin badge? A balaclava? A swastika? A CND t-shirt? A VIVA beanie? A "Keep Britain Tidy" bandana? The principal role of a news presenter (utopianistically) is to form and deliver *impartial* news. As soon as a presenter starts or perpetuates the adornment of political/social/religious icons/badges etc, their views can be seen to be biased. And probably are. Have a look at www.medialens.org, get their alerts, and see how bias really works. I for one applaud Jon for making this decision - in a media world where the lack of a poppy on a lapel at least three weeks before November the 11th is seen as distasteful or unpatriotic. As a corollary, if I go to work, I'll wear what my work dictates I should (suit/overalls/basque). And when I'm enjoying my own time, I might decide to pop on a Monkees t-shirt, a 'Rumsfeld Forever' cap or a basque. My choice.
-
Posted by Bnaster on 10 November 2006, 2:33 AM
Oh. And sort this blog out. Great idea, but it's crap for users. Can't see user profiles. Can't find particular posts that easily. Can't preview posts. And in a world of diminishing grammar, punctuation and understanding of the English language, I can't even make a simple paragraph. I used two in my previous post, but it comes out as one long block of drivel. I wouldn't want to read my post, it being that long.
-
Posted by GordonFreeman on 10 November 2006, 3:31 AM
It's unlikely anyone will forget the wars of the 20th century whether they wear a poppy or not. This concentration on the flower is unhealthy and is putting me off wearing one. It's a personal choice to wear a poppy or not. It could be argued that what people fought for was freedom of choice. Now lets respect that!
-
Posted by jane_in_california on 10 November 2006, 4:32 AM
Ian Hislop took a similar stance re: red ribbons in public several years ago. I think it's a reasonable and intelligent action but because people want to react against an original action instead of consider it, you become brave too.
-
Posted by ianinbangkok on 10 November 2006, 4:58 AM
I remember that the Great War 1914-1918 was fought to end all wars.It didn't happen.Maybe people should wear white poppies to signify the horrors of war.
-
Posted by IanKemmish on 10 November 2006, 8:09 AM
I've had a "poppy problem" for years. There's always the risk, as with crucifixes and veils, that what you wear will become more important than what's in your heart. So for some time I've bought poppies but never worn them. And, one might argue that at a time people are losing relatives in Helmand, wearing a poppy - particularly a pale-coloured one - is just a touch insensitive.
-
Posted by rlong on 10 November 2006, 8:24 AM
I think that Jon has every right to choose not to wear, or to wear a poppy. I choose to wear one to remember those who fought and died in our wars. Jon chooses not to wear one and I respect that. It should not be about displaying one's respect. Who is more honest - he who buys a poppy but forgets the 2-minute silence or he who doesn't but remembers it?
-
Posted by dougndins on 10 November 2006, 8:26 AM
Well put Jon. Nothing has annoyed me more on this subject than the BBC sporting poppies in mid-October, and obviously by management edict not choice. How else do their corresponents around the world all start wearing them so early, and on the same day? By the way - keep up the good work - I've given up on most other daily news programs, and don't compromise the quality. Many thanks Chris
-
Posted by apemantus on 10 November 2006, 8:35 AM
I am absolutely supportive of Jon Snow and I am sick and tired of the incessant pressure to show public support for charities and causes. How many entertainers, newsreaders, presenters and the like are wearing their poppies because they believe in it or because the producer gave them one before they went live on air???? I cannot stand this sanctimonius rubbish that we must support certain causes, that somehow some things are just nondebatable. Once charity becomes obligatory (which is effectively what people are doing when they demand TV presenters wear red poppies) it is no longer charity. What people support, what they do with their money, what charitable causes they believe in is entirely a matter of personal choice. To deny that right to a public figure like Jon Snow is simply unacceptable.
-
Posted by apemantus on 10 November 2006, 8:35 AM
I am absolutely supportive of Jon Snow and I am sick and tired of the incessant pressure to show public support for charities and causes. How many entertainers, newsreaders, presenters and the like are wearing their poppies because they believe in it or because the producer gave them one before they went live on air???? I cannot stand this sanctimonius rubbish that we must support certain causes, that somehow some things are just nondebatable. Once charity becomes obligatory (which is effectively what people are doing when they demand TV presenters wear red poppies) it is no longer charity. What people support, what they do with their money, what charitable causes they believe in is entirely a matter of personal choice. To deny that right to a public figure like Jon Snow is simply unacceptable.
-
Posted by cheridj on 10 November 2006, 9:17 AM
Well done for Jon Snow, freedom of expression is to importante now than ever. I will not also wear the red poppy because it's symbolise war and death. Cherif, London
-
Posted by mdoyleC4 on 10 November 2006, 9:55 AM
I think Jon Snow is correct in his principle not to wear any synbols while representing the BBC. His job is to be impartial, and unlike in the USA, he should report the news and not become the news. No symbols of religion, nationality, or belief should be shown. Above all else, newsreaders in this very important public role should remain entirely transparent. The Queen, to the contrary, embodies the State and it would be silly for her to take such an approach. This is not about free speech, its about doing your job correctly.
-
Posted by KenS on 10 November 2006, 10:07 AM
Snow is right to refuse to wear a poppy on air. The display of such symbols has become not an expression of care remembrance, but merely a shallow and hypocritical statement of the wearer's ethical brownie points. The truly charitable find no need to wear a badge of their moral credentials, but simply get on with the business of ordering their lives in an ethical manner, contributing and working for charities on a regular basis without the need to demonstrate to the world at large that they do so. Virtue is indeed its own reward.
-
Posted by adrianmarley on 10 November 2006, 10:20 AM
I would like to congratulate Mr. Snow on his non-poppy-wearing stance. It seems to me that people wear it to be fashionable. Look at me. See how much I care. Donate to the charity by all means, but you don't need a visual symbol of your support. It's just another form of the wrist-band wearing trend that was around a few years ago. (Where are they now?)
-
Posted by Rosee1 on 10 November 2006, 10:28 AM
As a reporter I was TOLD to wear a poppy in my previous job. The tray would be passed around the office and all the reporters would have to put one on - even if they didn't have the change on them to make a donation - which surely goes against the whole point. I totally understand where Jon Snow is coming from and respect him for his decision. My great-grandfather is buried in a field in France for his efforts in World War I. He left behind a daughter, my grandmother, who has never gotten over his death and even now, at the age of 96, struggles not to cry when she remembers the last day he spent with her while on leave from the Front. He went back to war and died in the trenches. I support poppy wearing and probably buy half a dozen every year around this time. But I would never say that people have to wear one. Well done Jon for taking a stand.
-
Posted by inc4wetrust on 10 November 2006, 10:30 AM
I think jon snow's stance is spot on. it's the same with things like jeans for genes day and wear it pink, it's all become some rediculous fashion statement and your pressured if you don't comply... doesn't this completly deviate from the actual meaning of the event... to raise awareness and to raise funds to help people. who's to say he/we don't donate money to charity in support and recognition to their cause... and then the people who probably give the bare minimum to these charities, wear a symbol of the cause and then have the cheek to complain if someone doesn't do like them. i think the people who complain do not understand that doing your bit is more than just wearing something on a paticular day because everyone else is.
-
Posted by lordweive3rd on 10 November 2006, 10:52 AM
I think that Jon is utterly wrong in his opinion. There is a world of difference between warring a Poppy and supporting the Red Cross or RNIB. The Poppy represents the sacrifice of two generations of British people in defense of the nation. I think that he is quite right not to ware the symbols of other charities on the show, however the Poppy is something that transcends personal opinions and charitable support, representing a collective national recognition of the sacrifice people voluntarily, or other wise, gave for principles like freedom of the press. Of cause you should not be forced to ware a Poppy, but I find it stunning that someone who knows their meaning would choose not to ware one. Alexander
-
Posted by nicojabin on 10 November 2006, 11:18 AM
Jon is absolutely right with his opinion. While wearing a poppy might not be the same as wearing a wristband, the difference is in magnitude, not kind. Both are statements that the person makes about their own thinking. When Jon Snow is on air, he is a news presenter and should not make personal statements. Just imagine he'd add his opinion to everything he reads out? And the poppy, may I point out, does not transcendent personal opinion, as shown recently by the suggestion of wearing a white poppy, combinging remembrance with an anti-war stance.
-
Posted by leppings on 10 November 2006, 11:23 AM
Stired up a hornets nest here Jon old boy!!, but at the end of the day the decision is yours - personaly i find your statemant a insult to my great Grand father who was killed in action and then just 3 days later his close cousin was also killed in action back in the trenches of Ypres WW1 in 1916. These 2 brave souls where volunteers fighting with the pals battalion the Tyneside Scottish. Like i said, maybe Jon should have kept his appinion to himself... or at least show some respect!.
-
Posted by patagonia on 10 November 2006, 11:46 AM
Bravo John Snow, I am a pacifist who each year notes with displeasure the annual eruption of carbuncles afflicting the lapels and dresses of television presenters. I refer, of course, to the red British Legion poppy. Walk around any city, and you will count that fewer than one person in a hundred has chosen to invest in one of these gory emblems. Contrast this with the one hundred percent uniformity on the small screen. Contrast too, the entire absence on screen of the emblems of far more worthy causes. When are the insignia of World Aids Day or Marie Curie to be seen endorsed by newscasters? It quickly becomes obvious that we are being subjected to a subliminal sales-pitch for one of the establishments favourite causes. Something I find highly distasteful especially at a time when British troops are still involved in the criminal and murderous occupation of Iraq.
-
Posted by patagonia on 10 November 2006, 11:47 AM
Bravo John Snow, I am a pacifist who each year notes with displeasure the annual eruption of carbuncles afflicting the lapels and dresses of television presenters. I refer, of course, to the red British Legion poppy. Walk around any city, and you will count that fewer than one person in a hundred has chosen to invest in one of these gory emblems. Contrast this with the one hundred percent uniformity on the small screen. Contrast too, the entire absence on screen of the emblems of far more worthy causes. When are the insignia of World Aids Day or Marie Curie to be seen endorsed by newscasters? It quickly becomes obvious that we are being subjected to a subliminal sales-pitch for one of the establishments favourite causes. Something I find highly distasteful especially at a time when British troops are still involved in the criminal and murderous occupation of Iraq. MD OXLEY
-
Posted by uknetmonitor on 10 November 2006, 11:50 AM
Jon is absolutely right, not just about poppy wearing, but in raising the issue, which is being debated across the internet. Who is to say that the terrible suffering through war is any worse than terrible suffering through illness or poverty? No "statements" has to be better than some. Much as it might have been entertaining, for example, to have seen Jon wearing a bra to support the breast Cancer moonwalk earlier this year, public broadcast newsreaders cannot be festooned with wristbands, ribbons, medals and maintain any sense of objectivity. Of course, off-screen, what he does is his business - and Jon is well-known for the massive amount of work he does for a great many charities. It's a personal issue - worth noting many people only wear a poppy to stop being harrassed by poppy sellers. Richard Brown UKNetMonitor
-
Posted by markar on 10 November 2006, 12:11 PM
Mr Snow may like to consider that the people who died and lost limbs fighting fascism did so to give people like him the opportunity to make hundreds of thousands of pounds a year making a living that has little value to society. What this is about is Mr Snow using the poppy issue as an opportunity to bolster his credentials with like-minded mealy-mouthed so-called pacifists in order to sell more of his books and thus make more money. This is a typical standpoint of middle-class liberals who can afford to make empty gestures from their Hampstead towers. The poppy is about respecting people who died for our freedom, who paid with their lives to save us from the evil of Nazism. Mr Snopw should be sacked immediately, he is a disgrace. markr
-
Posted by TCady on 10 November 2006, 12:18 PM
What a perfect irony it would be for Mr Snow to present a news item that focussed on him. The kind of hyperrealism that gets the Baudrillards of this world concocting a new chapter in social theory. Even I would be transfixed to the twit box, if only I were able to sustain the abject nausea caused by Snows kaleidoscopic accessories. It seems to me that the liberal clown of news has entangled himself in a mesh of semantic barbed wire. Fortunately this is one battle where the rout of machine gun fire will be music to the ears. Through his ramblings Snow makes perhaps the most insightful, and duly obvious, observation of this entire tedious debate: In the end there really must be more important things in life than whether a news presenter wears symbols on his lapels . Precisely and if people were more concerned with say conserving the global habitat for future generations, then such pitiful news items would not consume moments of our short lives and I would not feel the need to perpetuate them on sterile websites. The fact that Snow felt the necessity to publish a response, suggests he was seeking a reaction as a result of his initial decision not to wear the symbol. Is this possibly one of the most boring and pedantic pamphlet wars of the twenty first century? I might just have to put head to telly in the style of a transit van ram raiding the local H Samuels.
-
Posted by Fearless_Leader on 10 November 2006, 12:21 PM
As a serving member of the Armed Forces I totally respect Jon Snow's stance on this subject. It totally subverts the meaning of wearing Poppys if people just wear them for wearings sake. I only have to watch evening television programmes in the runup to Rememberance Sunday and I have this mental image of the wardrobe department pinning on a Poppy before they go on air; I may be doing such people a dis-service but it's the impression I get. People should be allowed to express their personal support for causes without being pressured, and as a newsreader Jon and his peers could be said to have a responsibilty to be impartial because I respect people's democratic rights. I joined up to protect people's rights not to be bullied, I want people to protest and complain even if it's about my role in the military. It's what democracy is all about, the people who the Poppy commemorates served to protect that principle.
-
Posted by CuthbertB on 10 November 2006, 12:33 PM
The things I dislike most about poppy-wearing are the hypocrisy of the likes of MPs and journalists who supported the war in Iraq and who then wear a poppy as some sort of badge of respectability, the sanctimonious attitude of the wearers towards non-wearers as if we're all traitors and subversives towards the national cause and the idea promoted by poppy-wearing that the two World Wars are somehow still relevant. I don't mind people of the war generations respecting their own or younger people respecting the dead but the idea that we should all do it as some nationalistic act of solidarity is nauseating. Jon Snow and anyone else who chooses not to wear a poppy, myself included, has the right not do so. If you want to wear a poppy do so but do so in memory of the dead not as a comment on today or on others.
-
Posted by Felixity on 10 November 2006, 12:50 PM
Well done Jon. I wear a poppy and always make a point of giving to the appeal, but to some extent it's an act of rememberance to my dad and others who fought in the war. I don't want to forget and this is part of my way of showing that. I applaud you for keeping your private and public views separate. And even more so for being prepared to be different on this. Not sure about the ties though. I think it's the sort of knot you use, rather than the lariness (how do you spell that?). ;o)
-
Posted by georgie-em on 10 November 2006, 2:32 PM
There seems to be a mis-conception of what the Royal British Legion Poppy Appeal stands for, The Poppy Appeal does not promote war, I can assure you that. Members of the RBL and Poppy Collectors would rather not be collecting at all, they would rather that no service men or women would ever be wounded or killed and that there would be no need for such a charity but sadly there is and that is why we wear our Poppy and stand in the town centres with our Poppy Boxes raising money for hours on end in often freezing wet windy November conditions (nothing compared to the conditions that those who serve for our country have to endure I might add) not just for those who served in world wars 1 and 2 but for those who are serving today. The Poppy Appeal has no control over which wars our country participates in, all the Poppy Appeal can do is provide support to the service men and women and families who find themselves in need of it.
-
Posted by heidi62 on 10 November 2006, 2:56 PM
Good on you, Jon. For myself I think we get bogged down under symbol overload - from wrist bands, ribbons, lapel pins, red (and white) poppies - that because of their almost compusory display lose their significance. Personally, I contribute money to a host of appeals, but don't feel especially compelled to wear the 'proof' on my person.
-
Posted by Homo-proteus on 10 November 2006, 3:14 PM
It is wonderful to see this debated. I'm sure many of us lost ancestors or relatives during the World Wars, who left their families deeply grieved & financially struggling. Remembrance of their sacrifice is one thing - but who & what sacrificed them? History did. World affairs did. The politics of Nation-States with imperial ambitions did, as empires turned and pointed their guns at each other. Today we can look with a little more objectivity, taking account of the causes & effects and can mourn the state of affairs that led our historic enemies to their deaths too. There is something of the poppy wearing that is condescending (in that we need an emblem to remember by), sanctimonious & nationalistic, when what we might chose to remember in this secular age is the fragile value of the individual so easily snuffed-out by a cause like "Queen & Country" & broader world politics.
-
Posted by greyisthenewbleak on 10 November 2006, 3:31 PM
I have worn one in the past, but at a time of war the poppy feels like a vote of support for that war. And I ask myself why Britain continues to believe it has a right or even a duty to fight, and pick a fight, as often as it does. And no matter what others say, I think the poppy actually reinforces this nation's love of war. This year I have gone for the Protect the Human pin.
-
Posted by cwhowe on 10 November 2006, 3:44 PM
I think Jon Snow is quite right not to wear one when broadcasting if he is so inclined. The sight of all those BBC presenters, and guests on various talk shows, wearing poppies which, in the majority of cases, were probably handed to them before they went on air cheapens the poppy and what it stands for.
-
Posted by TCady on 10 November 2006, 4:19 PM
Many of these comments seem to be littered with a romanticised notion of the media and its ability to provide impartiality. News programming should be used to facilitate aspects of democracy, such as the provision of accurate information to citizens. But can events be hermetically sealed in a vacuum of impartiality? I think not. Despite the most committed efforts of an individual to report events as impartial, it remains a condition of human nature that subjectivity will stand up and be counted. By the nature of a news item, it is a packaged product that has been edited to contain specific elements of an event. Those elements will have been chosen by a group of individuals, their own actions informed by their personal experiences and nurture. We havent even considered the diversity of personal interpretation or the transformation of information that occurs from the point of transmission to reception. A compelling story often has an angle; it must engage and inform the reader or viewer. To be comprehensible it must have narrative lucidity. The point is, is that in employing these techniques an opinion is expressed. One viewpoint is given precedence over another, depending on the preference of those who have the power to construct and distribute content. While I am encouraged by the progressive nature of Jon's journalism he, or any other distributor of news, can only fail in the pursuit of impartial news.
-
Posted by Cerro on 10 November 2006, 6:16 PM
I want to congratulate Jon Snow for resisting the tyranny of compulsory poppy wearing. Three of my Grandparents fought in the Second World War and I'm very proud of them and all the other poor souls who have had to sacrifice for their country. Despite my natural attitude however, even I am actually put off wearing a poppy nowadays because of the sheer cheesiness of displaying something that it is now almost compulsory to have. It's absolutely meaningless to wear a poppy simply because it's "the done thing". Taking away the real meaning of rememberance by removing the aspect of free choice involved in wearing a poppy is a shameful thing to happen.
-
Posted by zoeyou on 10 November 2006, 6:37 PM
perhaps the logical conclusion of mr snow's position that he prefers not to wear overt symbols would be for him to refuse to wear a (suit and) tie at all. these items are well known symbols of male loyalty to a certain culture generally identified with patriarchy, (state, social market or gangster) capitalism, christianity and consumerism. the socks though can definitely stay, whatever the colour or style they keep you nice and warm and no one can really hang you with them if you don't do as you're told by the big boys...
-
Posted by gustard33 on 10 November 2006, 6:46 PM
perhaps the logical conclusion of mr snow's position that he prefers not to wear overt symbols would be for him to refuse to wear a (suit and) tie at all. these items are well known symbols of male loyalty to a certain culture generally identified with patriarchy, (state, social market or gangster) capitalism, christianity and consumerism. the socks though can definitely stay, whatever the colour or style they keep you nice and warm and no one can really hang you with them if you don't do as you're told by the big boys...
-
Posted by gustard33 on 10 November 2006, 6:49 PM
It should be up to the individual whether or not they wear a poppy - certainly it shouldnt be banned or enforced. Personally I dont care whether news readers wear Poppies, Crucifixes, full Muslim garb , blonde fright wigs or silly plastic afros - as long as the news the are giving us is truthful and not propoganda.
-
Posted by Cromerty on 10 November 2006, 7:48 PM
To those commentators who disagree with what Jon Snow has chosen to do, bear in mind that the brave men who gave their lives did so to defend his right to make such a choice. Consider the words of Evelyn Beatrice Hall - I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
-
Posted by hhaugan on 10 November 2006, 7:49 PM
Couldn't support you more, the negative comments above have put me off wearing a poppy at all. Why can we not remember the fallen in our own way, without conforming to everyone else's "thou shall"? Ridiculous in the extreme, i am not about to agree with everyone, just because "everyone" tells me to. Too often "everyone" have been wrong. Keep up the great work, this is nothing but a digression. And a silly one at that! Harald
-
Posted by ptony on 10 November 2006, 7:52 PM
I'm a bit fed up with Muslims complaining about the way they are reported in the media. Back in the day, like up until 9/11 it was black people who had issues with the very same thing, that thing had been an issue for around 40 years. I rememer my parents complaining about the lack of support from the Muslin community or not so much the religion, but people from that continent. It was as if the racial issue didn't affect them as it wasn't aimed at them so it was ignored by them. I guess for me this the problem with not been able to support them as deeply as I would like. I believe they expect so much from everyone else, expect us to live according to their rules, but won't accept any other way or support any other group simply because it doesn't affect them. That for me isn't a fair exchange, and I guess until they show some kind of diplomacy I'll understand their issue, but I won't support it. Regards Pete
-
Posted by Marigold on 10 November 2006, 7:57 PM
Jon Snow has had the courage and integrity to voice his true feelings, when he knew he would get flak. Freedom of expression is his right, as it is yours and mine. Remember this next time you beg to differ, if you have the guts to do so, or are prepared to engage your brain in the face of convention. Thanks Jon, you have done society a huge favour in being true to yourself, rather than bending to the pressure of what seems an empty gesture. Bumblebee
-
Posted by chiendeguerre on 10 November 2006, 8:51 PM
I always respected the channel 4 news team and considered john snow to be a maverick in his industry. He is idiosyncratic but for him to blatently disregard a national symbol of rememberance and PUBLICISE it is beyond the pale. Unless, he is doing it to highlight a point about modern attitudes toward war and the Great War. I know him to be an intelligent man so I am leaning toward this as an explanation. To put it simply without going into detail, it is clear to me what is happening. We are forgetting. This is a tragedy beyond the neglect and disrespect it is displaying for the fallen. It means we are forgetting the lessons learnt from that futile and bloody carnage. We are forgetting that vanity and shortsightedness are sins of ignorance and the young. We are forgetting that this country is only at a stage in its history. If it abandons its symbols of rememberance it is abandoning its identity. That way lies madness. Do they have an equivilant to the poppy in America? Maybe this is yet another example of Britain following the United States. Hey! Isn't a maverick a name for some kind of wild horse in America? It could be That John Snow, The man who confronted 'Rummy' (the blathering senile old fart) is too busy being cool to notice his talent is outshining his pride? Nah, I'd rather believe he is trying to make us aware of our lack of respect by doing a good impression of it and drawing attention to himself. Keep up the goog work John, Nick Griffin will be gutted if your plan works and people start to remember what hatred actually means.
-
Posted by Jordon on 10 November 2006, 10:41 PM
Dear Jon, You are well aware that you were in nearly on all broadsheets today and BBC Radio two show at lunch time asked the listeners to ring in about your refusal to wear a Poopy. I agree that if you wear one charity item you are going to probably open the floods gates for other charities to persue you to wear their items on the news show, unfortunately in today society there seems to be more charities popping up all the time, but none that have had such an influence on the change of history and the lost of life's as the first and second world wars.That is why I personally give to that one and the other to the National Trust. Jon you go onto say that you are making a statment if you wear a poopy, what is the difference than wearing a poppy than that of a White rubber band that you wore on the news show this summer?. Jon I hope that I you carry on as the anchor man at Channel4news as I think your style and delivery of the news in this country is second to none. Regards Gordon
-
Posted by Jordon on 10 November 2006, 10:47 PM
Dear Jon, Please tell me what is the difference of wearing a poppy than that of wearing a white rubber band on your wrist as you this earlier this year on the news show? Keep up the high standard of news reading as you are head and shoulders above your rivals. Regards Gordon
-
Posted by sobit on 10 November 2006, 11:40 PM
I think Jon is entirely right. The poppy has become, it seems, a subtle symbol of conformity in these days where on the surface individuality is celebrated. It ranks similarly to the charity rubber bands that have been in vogue for the last few years. For some reason, people have latched onto these symbols of charity and donation as signs of moral superiority and righteousness - it feels like they are compensating for some lack of modern equivalent for nationalistic or religious mass culture. The whole point of charity and solidarity is that it is voluntary, not a social norm or sign of moral superiority to be touted for all to aspire to. To say news presenters should always display a poppy for their job is another manifestation of this. It is better for someone to have made a donation of some significance than that a person should wear a poppy on his label. Like religion, acts of charity is a personal act that does not require advertisement.
-
Posted by splashthegreen on 10 November 2006, 11:44 PM
Jon, I actually agree with you on this. The poppy has now become a meaningless symbol, rather like the little wristbands last year - people wore them for a fashion. However, the use of the poppy is different - it is sort of compulsory for certain types of presenter to wear them at a certain time of year, and though it's meaning IS important, many normal people will NOT wear one this year, including newsreaders when they aren't working. Its not that these people don't care about the veterans of the two world wars; its just that the charity may not be close to their hearts. Take me, for instance. I'm 17, and I choose to wear the "Save The Human" badge. Now, there are probably lots more badges for me to pick from, but human rights is a cause I find very important, which is why i wear the badge. You too are showing your suppot for causes, but also not demeaning a symbol by contributing to our continual overdose of poppies.
-
Posted by Kier14matrix on 11 November 2006, 12:06 AM
I agree with many other posts in this blog on John not wearing a poppy. A newsreaders job is to inform us of the news, not act as a puppet to broadcast or raise awareness of anything. Keep wearing your ties and keep up the exemplary work! Regards Kieran.
-
Posted by theright1976 on 11 November 2006, 1:02 AM
i love jon with or without a poppy
-
Posted by theright1976 on 11 November 2006, 1:03 AM
i love jon with or without a poppy
-
Posted by mdr42 on 11 November 2006, 3:03 AM
A few years ago the Manic Street Preachers performed at a music awards show wearing poppys. I remember thinking it was an original, genuine, and decent gesture. How times have changed - now, no newsreader, presenter, or celebrity would be seen near a camera without a self-righteous poppy pinned to their chest. It has become the conservative equivalent of political correctness, the Daily Mail equivalent of a black person in every advert. It is similar to EastEnders' excruciating insistence on shoving St. Georges' Day to the front of the storyline every April, momentarily depriving us of our regular fix of gangsters, infidelity, and violence - the only reason anyone watches it. I applaud Jon Snow for not conforming to our gesture-obsessed society.
-
Posted by Klondike2 on 11 November 2006, 8:50 AM
Thank you Mr. Snow for voicing an opinion shared by probably millions of people. For several weeks now (and in previous years) I have been amused to see all presenters on the BBC wearing their corporate poppies - an instruction from above no doubt. When one sees the low percentage of the general public who wear the poppy one can only assume that these people only wear them because of 'company policy'. Like you I buy my poppy every year and generally attend the local service of rememberance. What I resent and will not kow-tow to is pressure from 'a higher authority' to conform to their agenda. This situation seems to be prevalent in many other spheres of our life today, i.e enforced one/two minute silences, continual warnings from the 'health police', the nonsense of all politicians being forced to support a football team or the embarrasing naming of their iPod tracks (they have to contain at least one of the following :- Snow Patrol/Arctic Monkeys/Coldplay, the continual bleating of the climate-change lobby telling us that we are to blame and must change our ways, whilst jetting off all round the world 'spreading the word. The list goes on. Good on you Mr. Snow for your courage in making this stand.
-
Posted by fotsa on 11 November 2006, 11:32 AM
i have just seen jon snow on tv promoting the vso appeal. i am afraid i will be exercising my opinion by saying one appeal i will NOT be supporting is the vso because of the disrespectful way he views the efforts of all the brave men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice to enable him to be able to view the world from his lofty position. do as you wish mr snow, but it has cost the vso a donation. dave hand
-
Posted by zoeyou on 11 November 2006, 2:00 PM
if people in the uk (mainly white men in suits) weren't so busy imposing social spending cuts on southern/third world countries as a condition for aid, and simultaneously poaching doctors, nurses, scientists etc from third world countries because it's 'cheaper' than training people here, then there would be no need for charities like VSO in the first place. so my argument stands - why not ditch the suit and tie, mr snow, because of what *they* symbolise?
-
Posted by zoeyou on 11 November 2006, 2:01 PM
if people in the uk (mainly white men in suits) weren't so busy imposing social spending cuts on southern/third world countries as a condition for aid, and simultaneously poaching doctors, nurses, scientists etc from third world countries because it's 'cheaper' than training people here, then there would be no need for charities like VSO in the first place. so I ask again - why not ditch the suit and tie, mr snow, because of what *they* symbolise?
-
Posted by huplaloola1959 on 11 November 2006, 3:04 PM
I can't understand how Jon Snow can use the phrase "poppy fascism". No one is forcing Mr Snow to wear a poppy. He has a right not to wear one just as we have a right to criticise him for making a bad decision. Deciding not to wear all of the many charity symbols is completely different from not wearing a poppy. It is traditional that newscasters, politicians and those in the public eye wear poppies. Its not their personal feelings that are important, they are the high profile representatives of a nation who choose to remember the millions of people who have died to preserve our way of life. Most jobs have an unwritten dress code which has been deemed appropriate by society. Although it is within an individual Doctor's rights to have a skull tattooed on his forehead most people would agree that it is a bad decision to do so. Mr Snow is offending people whose families have lost people to the horrors of war just because he doesnt like to conform.
-
Posted by librarygirl on 11 November 2006, 4:48 PM
I hardly think that a Marie Curie flower of aids ribbon can be compared to the poppy. Perhaps, Jon, you need to be reminded of the fact that you have the freedom to choose only due to the sacrifice of the men and women that you choose now to snub. It is not fascism. If my memory serves the poppy stands to remind us how close we came to fascist dictatorship in this country. You should be ashamed.
-
Posted by apmcleod on 11 November 2006, 6:25 PM
So Mr Snow is taking a stance against wearing a poppy? How pathetic. Wearing a poppy transcends politics Mr Snow. It's just a collective display for a couple of weeks a year to show we remember. It may also prompt younger generations to ask 'why?' which is no bad thing. 'Poppy fascism'? You're not forced to do anything in this country and it's wonderful. For just once a year it's nice for us all to show we know how hard it was for that to happen.
-
Posted by DaveParker on 11 November 2006, 6:35 PM
Interesting, isn't it? I thought 45 million Europeans died in 1939-45 so that others wouldn't have to wear badges of obedience, conformity or enforced identification, like yellow Stars of David or pink triangles. Or red poppies. I wonder what those who find not wearing it so abhorrent would compel us dissenters to wear instead? It's become a reminder of fascism, indeed - ironic, given that it represents the wrong war, albeit a particularly stupid one even for a country that seems to have lost the plot somewhere around 1895.
-
Posted by DaveParker on 11 November 2006, 7:13 PM
"It's just a collective display... You're not forced to do anything" Nope, if it's collective everyone has to do it, otherwise it's not collective, it's sectional. If you're not forced to do it, you're allowed to NOT do it. You think wearing a piece of platic means you know how hard it was to accomplish that? I don't think so.
-
Posted by apmcleod on 11 November 2006, 8:10 PM
DaveParker - when exactly did I say you HAD to wear the poppy to know how hard it was to accomplish our way of life? I also don't have a problem with people not wearing it - we're free to do either, thanks to amongst others the people who have fought and died in previous wars. The problem I do have is with people like Mr Snow taking a pathetic political stance against wearing a poppy, which in my opinion is so much more than a 'piece of plastic'.
-
Posted by hpargelet on 12 November 2006, 12:29 PM
Jon I can see your dilemma and I have sympathy with you not wanting to wear any symbol that might show you are in any way partisan, but what I can not see is how a man who has spent a life time grilling public figures on what they say, you thought for one moment that by placing the words poppy and fascist next to each other, that you did not know you would not whip up a news story where you became the news and so making a mockery of your pious views on not wearing symbols for fear of being seen as partisan in short you have failed in the first calling of your profesion, to report the news and not to be the news.
-
Posted by Sophie_83 on 12 November 2006, 3:40 PM
Like Mr Snow says, it is a matter of choice and besides, he says he wears a poppy in his private life, so he is not berating the value or meaning of it - he supports it. I think he is right to make a point of not wearing one publicly - I have always wondered year after year when watching tv (any kind, not just news) whether those wearing poppies have chosen to or whether they have been asked to wear one (by tv producers). And of course there is a stigma when everyone else is wearing one and one person is not - 'do you have no respect?' - as though they are deliberately trying to hurt people. Political correctness gone mad - again.
-
Posted by JonathanS on 13 November 2006, 12:54 PM
Full marks to Jon for resisting the pressure to wear a poppy. But he doesnt go far enough, by half. The poppy has a history that goes back to the First World War, so it has taken on a lot of different meanings for different people over that time. But youre missing the point if you think its primarily about remembering the sacrifice anybody has made to preserve our way of life (even though some of them truly did in the Second World War, and we should be profoundly grateful to them for it). My grandfather fought in the First World War, survived, and lived for more than fifty years, into the 1970s; but despite the ritual of Remembrance Day, he (and his sacrifice, which Im sure was very real) were ignored and continue to be ignored both by the state and by those who were nearest to him, throughout his life and to this day. In his case, unlike that of L Taylors grandfather, there is no tape recordng of his memories, nor any other record: he lived and died in a silence which I fear it is now impossible to break. Poppies are in their origin a token gesture we make to excuse ourselves for forgetting how a generation was destroyed between 1914-18 fighting a war which unlike the Second World War had no conceiveable justification. Today, however, the Iraq War is another we should not be involved in, and todays poppy fascism is (I fear) an orgy of sentimentality that is blinding people to our politicians responsibility (and culpability) for the deaths, injuries, and traumas of a thankfully far smaller number of servicemen of a new generation. Not to mention thousands more men, women, and children of Iraq who have no choice in the matter: our servicemen and women are (this time, thankfully) volunteers. I give money to the RBR, but I would not wear a poppy, even in private life, if I were offered a thousand times the sum I give to do so. Jonathan S
-
Posted by JonathanS on 13 November 2006, 3:55 PM
Please harken also to the person who wrote higher up the string that you need to sort it out so it's possible to write in paragraphs. Mine too deserved better presentation, considering what it's about.
-
Posted by Onen-ag-ol on 13 November 2006, 10:51 PM
Jon Snow is right. If other broadcasters want to wear a poppy, can we at least agree not to wear one before November 1st. They seem to start about mid October nowadays
-
Posted by duckboythefirst on 8 June 2009, 8:06 PM
Hi i am saying that Jon Snow is completely right he should not make a personal contact with his audience to keep them of balance. Also he does channel 4 news for a job and to make people aware of the real things that are going on! NOT TO MAKE ADVERTISEMENTS FOR THE DIFFERENT SHOPS AND CHARITIES!
-
Posted by alastair901 on 31 October 2009, 3:18 PM
well spoken Jon
-
Posted by alastair901 on 31 October 2009, 3:18 PM
well spoken Jon
-
Posted by alastair901 on 31 October 2009, 3:19 PM
well spoken Jon
Jon Snow
-
Jon Snow is the main presenter of Channel 4 News.
More from our authors
- Samira Ahmed
- Ziad al-Hasso
- Jon Bernstein
- Arts blogger
- Newsroom blogger
- Ruth Brown
- Tom Clarke
- Benjamin Cohen
- Sarah Corp
- Carl Dinnen
- Martin Fewell
- Gary Gibbon
- Nicholas Glass
- Jim Gray
- Krishnan Guru-Murthy
- Lindsey Hilsum
- Faisal Islam
- Ben King
- Jane Kinney
- Tim Lambon
- Victoria Macdonald
- Neil Macdonald
- Natasha Maguder
- Lucy Manning
- Nick Martin
- Jonathan Miller
- Kylie Morris
- Cathy Newman
- Keme Nzerem
- Ben de Pear
- Job Rabkin
- Katie Razzall
- Scott Reeves
- Jonathan Rugman
- Julian Rush
- Ginny Sandringham
- Sarah Smith
- Jon Snow
- Darshna Soni
- John Sparks
- Felicity Spector
- Lindsay Taylor
- Alex Thomson
- Will Thorne
- Sue Turton
- Roz Upton
- Nick Paton Walsh
- Emily Wilson
Recent articles in this blog
Other blogs of interest
- A Liberal Goes a Long Way
- Adam Smith
- Adrian Monck online
- Africa Beat
- Andy Ramblings
- Boris Johnson MP
- Brian Micklethwait
- Chicken Yoghurt
- China Dialogue
- China Digital Times
- China Study Group
- Cyril's Press Pass
- Daily Kos
- Daily Telegraph - Richard Spencer
- Danwei
- Dave's Part
- Dizzy Thinks
- Dry Bones
- EastSouthWestNorth
- Global Voices
- Guido Fawkes
- Harry's Place
- Huffington Post
- Instapundit
- Lebanese Bloggers
- Lynne Featherstone MP
- Mr Eugenides
- Niles' Blog
- Normblog
- North Korea Zone
- Oliver Kamm
- Real Climate
- Recess Monkey
- Rough Type
- SJ Howard
- Sacred Facts
- TechCrunch
- Time's China Blog
- Tom Watson MP
Channel 4 cannot be held responsible for the content of external websites
-
Blog owners
Create a link back to your blog with this trackback. Simply right click on link below and select 'Copy shortcut' or 'Copy link location':
Trackback URL
What is a Trackback?