Fact-Fudging

Well, I'm back. I briefly contemplated not writing a post today just to peeve you all - but then I remembered that I work and play alongside most of my readers, so antagonising them further may not be a smart option.

In short, yes I did have an awesome time up there. And yes I probably will be doing their diploma course next year. By Friday I was wondering where the week had gone; I had so much fun! I learned heaps too. And basically as soon as I got back (ie. today) I was straight into a real-life work situation making a promo video. So I'm reaping rewards already.

But one of the things that really caught my attention while I was away had nothing to do with my course (or did it?). Last week an otter escaped from Auckland Zoo. Just the kind of cutsie event that seems to catch the mind of journalists worldwide - one has to wonder occasionally about the mental status of people who think we should be fed on a steady diet of inane nothingness coupled with bloody carnage. Anyway, back to the otter. Jin the otter took off on a sightseeing trip of Auckland and environs, and was only recaptured after several days of searching. At least, everyone thought that the critter in question was Jin, until they got the escapee back behind bars. They discovered then that it was not Jin, (who was apparently still safe in the zoo) but an entirely different animal. Simple mistake, no big deal. So one would think. Except that all news programs and papers are still maintained that it was Jin. That was their story, and they were jolly well going to stick by it. Most of the public is none the wiser, and I only found out the discrepancy because I talked to someone who worked at the zoo - they weren't supposed say anything either. Okay, so who cares about the identity of some random otter? Not me. But the thing I do find worrying is that the media (by and large) knows that it's fibbing. They just don't want to own up to getting it wrong. But of course they'd never treat an important issue like that. Yeah right. They would be more likely to continue hoodwinking the public if something significant was at stake; if they're worried about minor embarressment is there any question that they'll cover their butts when it's 'big time'? I suppose it was a bit naive of me to be surprised by the incident, but surprised I was. How much fact-fudging goes on? Frankly I haven't a clue, but I fear that it's more than we'd like to imagine.