Just got some outstanding coverage (as you may have read below) for GO Outdoors’ new job creation plans. It’s been on all the TV news channels BBC 24, Channel 4, Sky national and regional radio and, don’t get me wrong, I’m hugely appreciative of the attention and interest.

The coverage will be valued in the hundreds of thousands of pounds – possibly breaking a cool million. So everything is rosey!

My question however is this..

Can someone explain to me how a meat packing firm, fashion house (or whoever) laying off half the number of people that GO Outdoors is taking on can generate five times (and counting) the mentions and detailed editorial analysis of GO Outdoors’ wonderful job creation news?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/20/burberry-jobs-factory-closure

Is it our fault as readers and media consumers? Are we more interested in crap things than good? And journalists simply respond to our hunger for crap news?

I get the impression sometimes it must be really frustrating to some journalists when nationally significant news doesn’t fit snuggly into the current editorial agenda of doom and despondency.

I acknowledge that we need to respect businesses and individuals who are enduring tough times. But my question is do we really need to obsessively dwell upon their misfortune?

These are bad times, no question. And the media should responsibly represent the mood and real issues in a balanced and realistic fashion. But why not dwell on the good stuff when there’s an opportunity to do so and give people some hope? (Not false optimism of course)

Isn’t there an opportunity to seek out more about businesses that are making a go of it and share their expertise and acumen – maybe inspire others to achieve more too.

Or should we sit upon the carpet singing sad songs staring blankly into space cursing our rotten inevitable luck?

“We’re doomed I tell ye!”