Journalism isn't Journalism anymore

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by jorod74, Jun 11, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jorod74

    jorod74 Psycholagnist (Ret.)

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2007
    Posts:
    7,559
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +2
    Ebay:
    i called FTD and had a dozen black roses sent to Ed Murrow's grave.
    Journalism is dead.
    It's bad when you can't read an article about a movie's release without getting fluff and filler that doesn't contribute to the story.

    i know entertainment reporting isn't hard news like world events, but it is still the same format- the reporting of who, what, when, where, how and why- and maybe add a few pictures.

    but even with hard n news, there's the addition of analysis or stale snarky remarks that don't accomplish anything more than stroking the "journalist's" tender ego.

    i don't want analysis in a straight story. Analysis=brainwashing. in other words, what a person explains to you is their idea of it being good or bad and thus it's biased to convince you. but the fact remains that your steady source of news is usually the one that most parallels your own leanings, so the analysis there is just reaffirming what you already believe.

    (really, you don't go to church to hear the opposing views (the pro's) on sin, right?)

    i guess journalism was on life support when Campbell Brown called it quits because she saw that no one was watching her just report the facts and leaving the debates up to Cooper, Maddow, Beck, et al.

    but to read pun laden reports and desperate attempts to create decade defining catchphrases (watergate, whitewater, trial of the century, etc) makes me think the information age is over and done.

    i guess when i am 80 and see obituary columns written in a style used by either the laid off staff of E! or The Soup, i will pray for dyslexia.

    Oh, i will end this on a positive note. I watched the news on BBC America for the past few nights. i am quite impressed by their coverage of the BP fiasco. it was pretty straightforward in a refreshing way.

    anyone else here wish for the old style of news reporting?
     
  2. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    23,507
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    347
    Likes:
    +136
    Journalism is a business, and facts just weren't selling as well as puns, snark, and rhetoric. The facts just got in the way, but don't worry, 9/10 viewers say they can't tell the difference!
     
  3. Ops_was_a_truck

    Ops_was_a_truck JOOOLIE ANDREWWWWWS!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Posts:
    11,549
    Trophy Points:
    236
    Likes:
    +0
    Ebay:
    Classic television journalism still exists. It's alive and well. You just need to know where to find it. Watch The News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS. They are reporting the news the same way they have been for almost 30 years - objectively, with a focus on the most striking issues of the day.
     
  4. Darkwing48

    Darkwing48 Heroic Decepticon

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    1,832
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    Got sick of the news when Britney Spears shaving her head was the first "issue" talked about.

    News isn't news for the longest time. In my University History class, a book called Taking Sides, had a discussion about the Yes or No to "Did Yellow Journalism caused the Spanish American War?"

    That says something right there.
     
  5. grimlock1972

    grimlock1972 "No Mas" My Wallet

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Posts:
    18,195
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +57
    what i hate is news slanted toward one political party or the other. Let the damn facts stand on there own. Fox news I'm looking at you! also rehashing the same story with no new information for much longer than needed gets old.
     
  6. Tenebrouser

    Tenebrouser Craft...or is it crap?

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Posts:
    6,666
    Trophy Points:
    226
    Likes:
    +0
    The current state of journalism, at least in America, is interesting in that a vast segment of it treats its consumers like they are stupid. It's no wonder newspapers, magazines, and network news broadcasts are shedding viewers and advertisers so rapidly.

    As for the post above me, that's just complete ignorance. To sit there and point the finger at Fox News's bias while saying nothing about MesSNBC is ludicrous. Don't try to make a point if you're not going to be honest about it. Of course the cables have a slant one way or another in their editorial shows, and that's fine. That's not news coverage, though.
     
  7. grimlock1972

    grimlock1972 "No Mas" My Wallet

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Posts:
    18,195
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +57
    I almost never watch MSNBC so i had no clue about there political slant. so ill apologize for not mentioning them out not have a clue. In an editorial show i got no problem with it, but on Fox any new from Washington seem to immediately get slanted to fit Fox's political reviews, or at least to me it feels that way.

    Any way to me Political views, outside of editorials have no place in covering the news.
     
  8. Optimus-JD

    Optimus-JD Team Laser Explosion!

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Posts:
    4,121
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Likes:
    +0
    HAHA, yeah because Fox is the only network guilty of a political slant. Sadly, you can't escape it no matter where you tune in.
     
  9. rattrap007

    rattrap007 Insert witty comment here TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2002
    Posts:
    14,886
    News Credits:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    297
    Likes:
    +37
    Fox slants right. NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN/etc slants far left..
     
  10. jorod74

    jorod74 Psycholagnist (Ret.)

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2007
    Posts:
    7,559
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +2
    Ebay:
    even my hometown news organizations have a slant on the local issues. we have morning show hosts (one guy hosts a weather and community events promoting program) who rant for their 2 hours about somone's words or actions.
    it makes things awkward.

    it has become a matter of copying the big leagues; if the Networks can do it, well, it's fair play here.

    i understand that newspapers publish stories that are usually written at a 6th grade level because it makes the news more accessible for the masses. that's fine with me. but it should still stick to facts.

    heck, we used to have a local paper that published a chart with our state legislators and the congressmen we sent to D.C. and their votes for a 2 week period.
    just a chart. Yes, No, abstain, out sick, out in his district, etc.
    and this newspaper refused to endorse any candidates or issues.
    But, to it's credit had a very active editorial section. you could speak. the only editorializing by the publisher was eliminating offensive language or making spelling corrections. nothing else.

    i just miss that kind of code of ethics for a member of the press.

    Fox uses the slogan, "we report, you decide." well, for about 2-3 hours a day, they might sincerely do that with one news program. But the rest is still commentary and opinion.

    I didn't want to start a network battle because they are all guilty in some manner.

    i love the field of journalism. it's fascinating how news is gathered. i just lament how the field is evolving.

    EDIT: when i said journalism is "dead", i didn't mean dead as in obsolete. I meant dead as it feels hollow and empty, devoid of heart like it used to have.

    who knows, the news may evolve like "Wheel of Fortune" or "SNL". there's gonna be a nadir at some point, but it will chug along till it gets its form back.
     
  11. Scantron

    Scantron Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Posts:
    8,249
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +3
    This thread seems destined for a lock. Anywho....

    The problem with that format is that it requires more mental effort than the average viewer is willing to put in these days. Just presenting the facts requires people to put those facts into context themselves, as well as to have the historical/political/economic/whatever framework and knowledge base necessary to understand how those facts interact to affect their lives. Thanks to our godawful education system, people don't have that framework or knowledge base to process and connect facts without a snarky talking head to tell them the 'right' way to put the pieces together. Thanks to people just being lazy and more interested being entertained than understanding the world around them, viewers aren't willing to try to go out and acquire the background or analyze anything for themselves. It's easier to just find a group of presenters you already agree with tell you how everything fits together, rather than drawing your own conclusions.

    Of course, even a direct "just-the-facts" style of news reporting can be abused if a reporter, their editors, their company or whoever filter out which facts are actually reported. All of the big media outlets are just as guilty of that as they are of using the talking heads, snarky commentary and other distractions.

    EDIT

    Never heard of a newspaper doing something like that, but I'd love to find one around here that would. It's a great idea and would probably get me buying newspapers again.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2010
  12. Darkwing48

    Darkwing48 Heroic Decepticon

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    1,832
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    I agree with this. It was very apparent to me since I heard of Bill O' Reilly. The when the current administration mentioned why the Fox News gets no interviews. There was a slight change in tone on Fox. When they discuss something political. I minor lean to towards "neutral."

    But they still leak or footnote a little information that can trigger a hate, or a political stance, most times it isn't important to the story, when they show a news segment.

    For example, when Fox11 News were talking about L.A. ban on medical marijuana, in the background of one, they happen to show an Obama poster that said "HOPE." My eyes when to there instead of the small amount of weed. Was that really an accident? I could understand a Bob Marley poster but out of all the stores, and all the angles in that store, they picked that one.

    Someone said BBC isn't bias. Confirm or Deny?
     
  13. Shelfwarmercon

    Shelfwarmercon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,057
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +1
    Despite my own distaste for Fox, their higher ratings than CNN and MSNBC mean they're doing something right, business-wise.

    It doesn't help that people are actually more inclined to follow a news outlet if its views reflect their own. More media outlets increasingly find themselves having to present some sort of slant on the issues of the day to stay relevant and profitable, especially now when it seems almost anyone can report on the news.
     
  14. Aernaroth

    Aernaroth <b><font color=blue>I voted for Super_Megatron and Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Posts:
    23,507
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    347
    Likes:
    +136
    The most important thing to remember is that journalistic objectivity is an ideal, not a reality, and most reporting doesn't even come close. With the rise of blogging and opinion-anchors, it has become even less important in the face of how a story can be "spun", or as a way for people to express their opinions.

    The other important thing to remember is that there is far more to media bias than what side of the political spectrum the bias leans towards (and contrary to what the stations may say, a far-right bias is no better/worse than a far-left bias). When you watch one of the major networks, ask yourself who their major sponsors are. Who owns the network and what affiliations do they have? What associations do the reporters, correspondents and anchors have, and how could that affect their stories? Are there any links that could make certain aspects of a story less attractive? Is there any possibility of a culture or nationalist-based mindset skewing how the story is seen? How are different media outlets covering the same story, and what could explain the difference?

    Journalism is all about asking questions, as was stated previously in the thread, but its not just the journalist that has to ask them, the audience needs to question as well.
     
  15. jazz4ever

    jazz4ever I'm turned on by numbers

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Posts:
    1,818
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    And You wanna know what I'm sick of? Seeing Obama's face on every single flipping news story! Even ones that have nothing to do with Him, I don't think the other presidents got as many pictures of them as Obama has right now.
     
  16. RabidYak

    RabidYak Go Ninja Go Ninja Go

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    8,467
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +31
    LOL no, at least not in Britain.
     
  17. smkspy

    smkspy is one nice fucking kitty

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    20,313
    Trophy Points:
    322
    Likes:
    +79
    This thread makes threads in the movie forum actually seem sane and rational. That's saying something.
     
  18. Foster

    Foster Super Mod

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Posts:
    32,062
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +11
    Nope, this thread is already too political.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page