Quote:
Originally posted by Sinner
[b]Your link was ignored, I don't believe G.W. Loves Michael Jackson......
|
Quote:
|
Anyhow, who decides what is and is not relavant to individuals around the world? You?
|
Nope... what's relavant is generally decided by the networks themselves. As Richard Salent, Former President of CBS News put it, "Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have." I tend to switch off when they introduce the 'talking heads' (that's usually when they're desperate for something to say).
Quote:
|
Those channels spit out all kinds of different news from all around the world. Some--maybe a lot-- I find irrelavant, like what JLo and Ben had for supper the night before but there are people out there who care about that sort of shit, so they tell it.
|
Isn't that what "E!" and other celeb news channels are for?
Actually, (now that I read my own post again), I don't object to the occasional trashy news subject, what annoys me is when 24-hour news channels seem to be desperately seaching for something to talk about - not because it informs those watching, but because it's easier than sitting there infront of the cameras and being honest by saying: "well shit, we told you all we know, so now we're going to tell you again and add-in some made-up stuff, to make it seem like we're making progress on a story".
I must say, CNN and FOX are quite good at it - they're very smooth and never seem to get ruffled by a lack of journalistic progress (actually journalism's the wrong word). In the UK, we're subjected to BBC-24 and the ITV News Channel. They're terrible to watch because the lack of anything to update a story is obvious. I'll give you a hint - see if you notice it next time you watch a 24-hour 'news' channel... as soon as the presenter starts speaking slowly (or even stutters) he or she will start asking incisive questions like:
"Errr, yes... so... what's the mood like there, Simon?"
I love it when they ask that question - it makes me feel so empowered knowing that I know what 'the mood' is like. "The mood here, after this momentous succcess, is jubilant, John" (like the humungous crowd of people behind Simon, jumping up and down and slapping themselves in the face, didn't already inform me of that fact)... or "The mood, here in Iraq, is very low, John" (like people being blown up and shot in the face makes this unexpected - there's nothing like being cracked over the head by a disgruntled soldier to 'lower your mood'. I'm so glad Simon made the effort to tell me how 'Iraq' or 'Basra' is feeling... Hey... did you know that the mood in my diary is 'papery' or that 'Albania' is currently feeling albany-ish?)
In particular, I like the way the presenters ask the reporters questions, whilest simultaneously providing the answer... (this question is usually a follow-up to the 'mood' question)...
"Simon, there's a sense of [insert emotion/cogntion] in the air, is there not?"
Simon then has to do one of two things, he can either cling to the shreds of reality and go with: "No John, actually, there's a sense of lavender in the air", or he can just go along with the rubbish line of questioning with, "Yes... John, I really cant tell you how the [insert emotion/cognition] is growing here [cue mindless fluffy waffle about whatever fills time]".
On a final note, I recently dropped in on FOX news a few weeks back. Now, I hate bashing FOX news for it's attempts to appeal to the lowest common denominator - it's kinda like giving retarded people a hard time for being so slow... but I was a bit pissed off by the way they flash up one-word captions beneath news items (kinda reminded me of that scene in 'Clockwork Orange')... as if I was monumentally stupid enough not to understand the concepts that some dicknose politician was yacking on about... "DANGER"... "STAB"... "SECURITY"... went the captions, like some spastic attempt to reinforce a point...
...and as for that constant little box in the left hand corner with the "TERROR ALERT" sign...
[/rant]