"a car in the panhandle of Texas has been stolen and maybe Bret Michael Edmunds was the culprit" Uhhhh... Derrr... Uhhh, how is this in any way shape or form responsible journalism? I know that CNN lost a ton of marketshare to FOX.... but, the Vatican would lose share to the Colliseum if gladiators were put back to work. My community is completely distraught over Elizabeth Smart; hell it bugs me to no end... I ride my bike through that neighborhood every day on the way up to the Huntsman Cancer Institute up at the Univ. of Utah... She's a little girl; if the guy were in front of me I'd rip his throat out.. but "maybe Bret Michaels is in Texas". You know, maybe he is; maybe he stole the car... but can the media become a descriptive enterprise again? This two cent bullpooey is old. Facts, list facts. They used to do it all of the time: "blah blah blah happened, blah2 blah2 blah2 happened" on and on. Stop talking about people's favorite colors and violence and violence and violence. Being scared doesn't help me get to work, or help me make decisions. As a matter of fact, this just in, the Middle East... though important, probably doesn't demand every second of the media's day. International journalists... does Africa exist? Does South America exist? *sigh* (I'll go back to my corner now)
I have a different problem....I hate Paula Zahn's morning show. I wish she would be removed and that garbage show dismantled. I don't think she is sexy, either. I think she's annoying to have to listen to in the mornings.
OH MY GOD, YOU HAVE TO LISTEN TO HER?!?!? DOES THIS APPLY TO EVERYONE, OR JUST SURFGUY!?!?! I HAVEN'T BEEN BREAKING A LAW HAVE I???
BK, you're probably right... I just haven't been able to pay attention to the news in forever. CNN is drastically more sensationalistic than it was before September of last year... I'm sure at first it was fueled by the simple demand of the viewers to know what the hell was going to happen in Afghanistan... but now, it's non-stop Elizabeth Smart and pedophilic Catholic priests. Elizabeth Smart does actually affect me, because she's a member of my community. But 99.5% of the other bs on CNN (well, tied to Elizabeth Smart coverage, really only 55% of total tv time) has little merit it seems, just imho. Is that the point of the media these days? To live off of the prurient interests of their viewers? Whatever happened to being a medium of information.
The news media, on the whole, is horrible. Not only are they biased towards anything sensational (doesn't matter if it is liberal or conservative - their bias is towards the one thing that both sides love: money), but they have completely bailed on the concept of in-depth reporting. Fit it all in a one-minute segment or we'll have to call it "team coverage." The only in-depth stories any more are on news "magazines" and they are even worse. Lately, I've found that the only REALLY good reporting comes from the BBC or the Christian Science Monitor. The NY Times and Washington Post have very good writing, but they sometimes believe their own hype and get a little haughty. I love NPR, but even I'm not going to say they don't have a left-leaning bias. When CNN started showing sports scores, the DOW ticker, scrolling news, weather, "fun facts" AND the news cast all at the same time, they should have been declared legally dead. It's no better than watching "THE BIG STORY" or some other awfully tag-lined piece of crap on local news. I mean, when you define sweeps week on local news by stories on breast implants, strip clubs, surviving (insert disaster here) and "investigative reporting" that usually amounts to busting some convenience store manager for selling cigarettes to 16-year-olds, you have a SERIOUS problem. IMO, it is the product of the corporate nature of news. It is no longer about reporting the stories. It is about generating advertising revenue. So, cram as much crap on the show or into the screen as possible to keep people watching or the ratings will drop. And don't forget to mention every little suburb before going to commercial - "After this, channel 2 news continues for Baytown, Champions Village and Clear Creek." It's like a rock singer getting cheap applaus by saying, "Hello HOUSTON!!!" Oh, and make sure that your female anchor looks like a Playmate and your male anchor has a full head of hair that wouldn't move if a force five hurricane was blowing inside the studio. The news media is pathetic.
BTW: Achebe, I didn't know who the hell you were talking about at first. I never watch CNN and local news hasn't covered the Utah stuff at all. I was like, Bret Michaels, from POISON??? Why would he be on CNN?
I just love smartasses . Here's a CNN show I would be forced to watch: Here's a new article on them. Will you buy their clothes?
lol. BTW, I agree wholeheartedly with your previous post (I'd have quoted it and said ditto, except for kant's categorical imperative and loads on the server ). You should submit that 'to the editor'. Every line in that post is true. As a slight aside, do you know the history of the Christian Science Monitor? By their name, I would ass-ume the whole fire, brimstone and literalist rhetoric; but that's of course not their m.o. (and 'Christian' Science Monitor isn't the same thing as 'Christian Science' + Monitor) I don't think that I've ever read one of their articles and detected bias... Maybe that's not a revolutionary idea to some of you comfortable w/ that label... but obviously if you picked up a journal titled "Eastern Orthodox Science Monitor" you'd click the 'biased' flag as you started reading the articles.
I actually started reading the Christian Science Monitor in high school. They used to have a magazine years ago and I read it. I don't think they do a magazine any longer but my father used to get it and it was a great read. I like the BBC as well. From a journalistic standards standpoint... Fox is horrible. CNN is horrible. All the national netwok news reports are very bad. MSNBC is bad. The news magazine shows range from unwatchable to moderately awful though 60 Minutes occassionally still hits the mark (stress on occassionally). All local news is unwatchable at best. At worst, it needs to be taken out to pasture and shot. From a left-leaning perspective, I still like NPR and the Jim Lehrer News Hour. Both aren't going to win any prizes for un-biased reporting 100% of the time, but they do greatt in-depth work. Most newspapers are terrible, though it varies from city to city. Of the "biggies," there is no question that the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post are still the creme de la creme. The LA Times can be good as well but it has become typically commercial since the advent of the worst newspaper ever: USA Today. The Journal and NYT are the perfect opposites for one city. The Journal is conservative, capitalist and hard-hitting but they write tremendously well. The NYT is liberal, artsy and soft all over the edges but nothing beats their writers. The Post is somewhere in between the two. Frankly, what hasn't even been touched on but is on par is the horrific selection of news magazines. We subscribed to Newsweek wanting a general weekly news magazine but quickly learned it was not much more than a home for pharmaceutical company propoganda among other things. US News and World Reports isn't bad but the bulk of them are (ahem, Time) are not good. So, in short, media sucks and the main reason it sucks is because it is owned by huge corporations more interested in advertising than content. As a result, no real news content gets printed (except on that rare occassion) because the ad department and/or publisher can veto a story if it hurts an advertiser's reputation, hints at it or even hints at promoting a rival. Bummer.
Maybe, but that doesn't mean they are above reproach. A couple of years back, they were doing a "breaking news" story and had a caller on the line who said he was at the scene. Turned out it was someone from Howard Stern's show. Ooops! They are both horrible.
CNN headline news is the best,...something about that chick who keeps tilting her head that is strangely mesmorizing...
CNN started going downhill when Ted Turner sold it to Time/Warner. They (Time/Warner) said nothing would change and Turner would stay in charge. Right! These huge media companies look at the quarterly bottom line, and couldn't resist jacking around with what used to be a pretty decent news source. Say what you want about Ted (and I'm not his biggest fan), but when he owned it himself, HE ran the show. Bernard Shaw bailed when he couldn't take it any longer, and he was just about the last good newsman left. Fox sux... hey, that felt good. Love this place. I know this may have been a gross simplification, but I think CNN today is a joke. Thank goodness the Net let's me find my news from sources all over the world. AOL didn't help any.
