Discussion in 'Current Events' started by insein, Sep 9, 2004.
The people are speaking pretty loudly.
24 hour news networks are forced to fit 3 hours of news into 24 hours. To increase ratings, the entire industry has turned to sensationalist news coverage; the industry remains "a business", and networks are scrambling to emulate Fox News' style coverage. It is edgier, more entertaining, and more abrasive. Its just more fun to watch. Kind of like Star magazine's and the National Enquirer's respective popularity. Doesn't mean it's a better news source (I would argue the opposite), just means its more entertaining.
I would not dispute your analysis except for that last sentence which you just HAD to throw in. Is your analysis of Americans so cynical that you think your fellow countrymen are so stupid that they watch the news to be entertained? Amazing the mechanisms libs seize upon to make themselves feel superior.
I can only speak for myself and my wife and I can tell you that we watch things like Turner Classic Movies or the SciFi channel (that's me) to be entertained by television. We watch the news to get FACTUAL data, unfiltered by network agendas and talking head opinions. THAT sir, is why we both watch FOX and practically ignore the rest.
I was thinking the same thing merlin. I dont find Greta or Brit particularly entertaining. In fact i find them to be , well like news anchors. Boring and to the point (at least the way they used to be). Hannity and Colmes and Oreilly are interesting and informative but hardly entertaining. In fact you might say they are dull at some points. Bottomline, I goto Foxnews for just that, NEWS. Seems a majority of cable viewers do as well.
Frankly, the libs, who now bitch about 24 hour news service, forget that it was the Clinton News Network (CNN) that started the entire thing. They also forget that one of the BIGGEST benefactors from the first Gulf War, in terms of money earned from it, is - you got it, CNN. Gulf War 1 is what turned CNN from a dinky 24 hour "news only" station into a 24 hour a day analytical analysis of what is going on in the world (with a liberal slant of course). They are just pissed that somebody came along, went back to what they WERE doing, and beat their pants off at it.
This is the hilariousness of the situation about the Right Wing's mouth piece, FNC: half of you, Merlin for example, argue that FNC is on the straight and narrow and that it is FAIR and BALANCED. NO SPIN ZONE!
The other half (freeandfun1), ACCEPT that Murdoch and Ailes have political agendas, and point at other news sources ("Clinton News Network") and whine "YOU STARTED IT!"
You guys should link up and hammer out your difference.
What a lousy thing to say. We don't feel superior. Eesh. I'm merely lucid enough to know that what I meant was not that the news on FNC is practically fictional and a carefully constructed web of lies of the GOP. Its not GOP pornography. What it IS is a company that has allowed its politics to intervene in coverage techniques and their ability to get higher ratings affects their journatlistic integrity.
It's more thought provoking. Two points of view are expressed and true discussions occur. It's refreshing after years of the big 3 pretending there's only one legitimate point of view and referring to all others as "extreme" and unworthy of consideration. The stranglehold the left had on information and public opinion is broken.
well what DO you feel then ? Wronged perhaps? The news is unfortunately a business and they are constantly at risk of selecting certain items and "reporting" them to appeal to a large enough audience to stay in business. What they risk is crediblity and the possiblity of an ever changing audience. For years many conservatives have had to grumble and mutter about the liberal presentation of daily events and still are angry enough to have to point out liberal bias where and whenever they see it. There are now networks out there that present a different perspective on the very same events and people have discovered them. Ratings show these shows to be very popular. You choose to explain this popularity as the entertainment factor or biased reporting. Could it be that people have found a news source that is closer ,maybe not perfect, just closer to the TRUTH? Competition for the truth is a bitch and some times you lose out to the will of the audience who apparently more interested in having some truth in their news. Others prefer to have the truth twisted for them and go to michael moore creations.
Separate names with a comma.