Good article on Jen's film Unrest in The Telegraph today 24th Oct

[NelliePledge]

It does, but in modern usage, neoliberalism means the re-establishment of liberal values that took place from around the end of the 1960's onwards.





The same newspaper may publish both articles which support the BPS "all in the mind" views of ME/CFS, as well as articles that support the opposite view that ME/CFS is a real physical disease with a biological cause. I think it often depends on the journalist writing the article.

Of course, any journalist that falls for the "all in the mind" twaddle of BPS needs to be sent on a refresher course of scientific skepticism (not to mention a refresher course on how corporate interests, in this case the disability insurance industry, can manipulate the agenda); but without toting up the scores for pro- and anti-BPS articles published by the Guardian over the years, and comparing these scores to those other newspapers, it's hard to say whether the Guardian is more pro-BPS than other papers.

No in the UK it means the approach first brought in by Thatcher from 1979 and that failed with the economic crisis in 2008. This guardian article by George Monbiot gives UK left perspective. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot
I've not yet seen anything in the Guardian on ME that could be described as not influenced by BPS. I'd expect them to be taking the opposite stance and resisting BPS influence, even calling it out. I realise we are off topic here so will end on that note. NP

 

[Hip]

No in the UK it means the approach first brought in by Thatcher from 1979 and that failed with the economic crisis in 2008. This guardian article by George Monbiot gives UK left perspective.

Perhaps for neoliberalism (which relates to economics) yes, but the rise of liberal values in general in society began in around the late 1960s. Prior to that, we had a conservative era of the 1950s.

I've not yet seen anything in the Guardian on ME that could be described as not influenced by BPS.

Looking through the Guardian ME/CFS archive, I found this article that is anti-CBT/GET, and this article talks about viral causes and other biomedical info. Most of the articles I saw are neutral, in that they don't mention BPS subjects or CBT/GET.

So I wouldn't say from skimming through those archives that the Guardian is pro-BPS or influenced by BPS.

But I even just one article promoting the BPS "all in the mind" view of ME/CFS does damage.

 

[Liz_999]

I think this is ultimately a matter of allegiance and the perception that one side cares and the other wants to make money. Publications like The Guardian will side with those who are generally regarded as caring as opposed to those who have clear business interests. The divide is roughly speaking between therapists/psychologists and pharma companies.

 

[alex3619]

The problem with newspapers, that I have blogged about, is journalists today are expected to do twice as much in half the time and with no additional funding. This is compounded by churnalism, the rehashing of a story from another source. Most journalists do not have the time nor permission to properly investigate. So they go for the easy news. Which makes the official story much harder to challenge, even if the facts are out there.

News media has been downsizing and struggling to find additional revenue. This is largely blamed on the internet. The issue here though is that as quality of reporting goes down, and it becomes more about appealing to readers than informing them, anyone who wants information will more and more have to go to the internet, and do so with caution due to the abundance of misinformation on the net.

 

[Solstice]

The problem with newspapers, that I have blogged about, is journalists today are expected to do twice as much in half the time and with no additional funding. This is compounded by churnalism, the rehashing of a story from another source. Most journalists do not have the time nor permission to properly investigate. So they go for the easy news. Which makes the official story much harder to challenge, even if the facts are out there.

News media has been downsizing and struggling to find additional revenue. This is largely blamed on the internet. The issue here though is that as quality of reporting goes down, and it becomes more about appealing to readers than informing them, anyone who wants information will more and more have to go to the internet, and do so with caution due to the abundance of misinformation on the net.

Here in the Netherlands we have De Correspondent who still does investigative pieces, I don't always agree with the ideology of some writers seeping through but it's far more informative than any newspaper. I think in America they have something similar with one of the newspapers? Was it the washington post? My point is, people are still willing to pay for quality. Not so much for churnalism.

 

[alex3619]

There is still investigative reporting out there, but the total number of journalists doing that appears to be dwindling. This is part of the reason I think good stories about ME, and any deep investigations, tend to be the exception. However as more and more well investigated and written stories get out there then we might find churnalism works for us for a change.

 

[liverock]

Life here in the UK will not seem the same without Jen and her inimitable smile.

 

[frozenborderline]

It does, but in modern usage, neoliberalism means the re-establishment of liberal values that took place from around the end of the 1960's onwards.





The same newspaper may publish both articles which support the BPS "all in the mind" views of ME/CFS, as well as articles that support the opposite view that ME/CFS is a real physical disease with a biological cause. I think it often depends on the journalist writing the article.

Of course, any journalist that falls for the "all in the mind" twaddle of BPS needs to be sent on a refresher course of scientific skepticism (not to mention a refresher course on how corporate interests, in this case the disability insurance industry, can manipulate the agenda); but without toting up the scores for pro- and anti-BPS articles published by the Guardian over the years, and comparing these scores to those other newspapers, it's hard to say whether the Guardian is more pro-BPS than other papers.

From what I gather "neoliberalism" usually refers to an economic ideology that pushed toward marketization/privatization of almost everything, starting with milton friedman, reagan, thacher, et. al.

of course there is an ideological component that goes a little deeper along with a theory of governance that could be called "postliberalism". Fukuyama's work on the supposed "End of History" is relevant