Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I watch Fox, CNBC, CNN, BBC, Al Jazera and a bit of Sky and a bit of MSNBC. I live in Europe, so I am a bit limited to access.
In commentary the commentator can say whatever wants. It is the NEWS and news presenters that I take issue with.
Last year, on Al Jazera I saw a news scroll go by where it just said "Americans kill women and children". Nothing related to this "story" preceded or followed.
Several years ago, I saw Ashley Banfield say: "Dick Cheney is going to the hospital. Let's not get our hopes up, he is only getting a check up"
On a commercial for CNN a few months ago, Christina Amapour said "We want to tell the news in a way that will change the world for the better"
I few weeks ago I saw a CNBC reporter calling Bush a monkey.
Today, this NBC guy covering Obama says it is hard for him to stay objective.
Are the standards for journalism changed or lowered?
What is up? I thought reporters are just supposed to report. Commentators are supposed to comment.
The early bird catches the worm. As for FOX, how about Brit Hume reporting back when Bush was trying to scuttle Social Security that FDR had actually wanted to include private accounts as well, just like Georgie boy. That's a flat out lie of course, but when has stuff like that held FOX back...
I do find Journalism standards pretty low generally. It seems we are morel likely to have reporting than proper investigative journalism which drives me nuts.
So much of modern journalism seems to rely on speculation and so much time wasted on the "maybe, perhaps, in the future ..." when what you really want to know is news and how they are unfolding.
I also find un-biased journalism to be pretty rare .
I would like to see more proper balanced investigative journalism where journalists try to get to the crux of whatever matter , in a thorough and almost scholarly manner, challenging what appears to be and trying to chart how events develop.
I get intensely frustrated with so called journalists who can spend hundreds of hours speculating about one issue rather than waiting for the event to unfold before they make a judgement on it.
I also find that our "News" are far too peppered with sensationalism, headline-grabbers and there is often little follow on on terrible stories once the "gloss" of public interest has left the arena. To me journalism is a very worthy profession but is soiled by financial interests from Newspapers and TV channels all vying for public ratings in one way or another.
Ifind it increasingly difficult to find good , "proper" journalism and one of my last moan on ths issue is the never-ending presence of celebrity or sport stories on News programme.
I wish people would realise that what some brain-dead cretin in Hollywood is wearing today will never be important , never mind as important as thousands of people dying in Bangladesh for example...
There are some decent journalists and decent newspapers but they are far and few between sadly.
Are journalists supposed to make judgments on events?
I thought they are just supposed to present objective facts.
For example Ahmadinejad (SP) says there are no homosexuals in Iran and that homosexuality is ... western. All I need to know is that he said it. I don't need the news presenter to render his/her judgment about the speaker.
If the presenter makes a judgment, people will tend to accept that judgment as an objective fact.
Last edited by Bob The Builder; 01-10-2008 at 04:30 AM..
There are some decent journalists and decent newspapers but they are far and few between sadly.
The news is now corporate-owned as well as corporate-sponsored. In this country at least, the FCC's continuing relaxation of ownership rules has served only media concentration, and that concentration has been into the hands of a pretty predictable bunch. When the news needs above all else to be a profit-maker, it's cheaper just to take the White House press release and reword it. It's cheaper to sit in New York or Washington than to have boots on the ground all over the world. I'm not really sure that we have any decent journalists or newspapers anymore...we may have a few journalists and a few newspapers that here and there put out some decent reporting, but it's hard to say that anyone has any actual credibility anymore...
Are journalists supposed to make judgments on events?
I thought they are just supposed to present objective facts.
For example Ahmadinejad (SP) says there are no homosexuals in Iran and that homosexuality is ... western. All I need to know is that he said it. I don't need the news presenter to render his/her judgment about the speaker.
If the presenter makes a judgment, people will tend to accept that judgment as an objective fact.
I guess I phrased it badly, I guess I meant wait until the event occurs to report it as it is. Not as it could/might be.
Speculative journalism drives me nuts. We constantly have these ridiculous "reports" on UK news for example, where a journalist will stand outside 10 Downing Street , speculating about who will come out of the famous black doors and what that person will say . GRRRRR!
What is the point ? I also wish that serious issues such as poverty, modern day slavery, etc... were given a larger role than what colour dress Mrs Brown wears.
It really insenses me. A lot of journalism nowadays has been derailed due to the bottom line which is basically big bucks and who pays your salary.
I want honest, intelligent , and most of all well researched reporting with a modicum of impartiality and respect for the viewers/readers.
I guess I phrased it badly, I guess I meant wait until the event occurs to report it as it is. Not as it could/might be.
Speculative journalism drives me nuts. We constantly have these ridiculous "reports" on UK news for example, where a journalist will stand outside 10 Downing Street , speculating about who will come out of the famous black doors and what that person will say . GRRRRR!
What is the point ? I also wish that serious issues such as poverty, modern day slavery, etc... were given a larger role than what colour dress Mrs Brown wears.
It really insenses me. A lot of journalism nowadays has been derailed due to the bottom line which is basically big bucks and who pays your salary.
I want honest, intelligent , and most of all well researched reporting with a modicum of impartiality and respect for the viewers/readers.
Moose
I agree. I want the same. But leave the judgment for the opinion commentary people.
You guys have that state funded thing going on though...BBC
I do see some f that speculation thing going on with BBC that you talk about. It looks foolish to me. But I thought it was just more of a cultural thing or just lazy journalism.
I have this British expat in my neighborhood that goes on about how the BBC wins so many awards and was quite upset when the BBC had layoffs a year or so ago.
The news is now corporate-owned as well as corporate-sponsored. In this country at least, the FCC's continuing relaxation of ownership rules has served only media concentration, and that concentration has been into the hands of a pretty predictable bunch. When the news needs above all else to be a profit-maker, it's cheaper just to take the White House press release and reword it. It's cheaper to sit in New York or Washington than to have boots on the ground all over the world. I'm not really sure that we have any decent journalists or newspapers anymore...we may have a few journalists and a few newspapers that here and there put out some decent reporting, but it's hard to say that anyone has any actual credibility anymore...
It's not quite as bad in the UK perhaps but is certainly not as good as other European Nations.
I have found to get some proper real world-news I go to French TV news ( TV 5 is excellent, others are not as good) / newspapers and Deutsche Welle which is very good indeed.
The idea of politicians influencing the reporting of news is terrifying to me ! It reeks of social control and any control of information is really bad news ( pun intended !) .
All more extreme governments ( right or left wing) always seek to control the dissemination of news, and knowledge as their most powerful too against the populace having not only any say but first and foremost any idea how what is going on and it really gives me the creeps.
I don't think the agenda in the UK is of that order but rather than has been a severe drop in interest in normal , true news and an increase in moronic and sensationalist affairs. Current affairs seem relegated to second place and I am often shocked how serious world events can often be ignored by channels in favour of popular "fluff".
"Posh and Becks" or "Prince William" are more likely to make the headlines than some natural disaster in Asia or what is happening in Darfur, which to me is shocking and disturbing.
News people like to focus on one big story of the "moment", thousands dying of starvation in Africa or Kosovo for example, then all of sudden we hear nothing else about it.
I would like updates on all serious issues even if those stories are not deemed worthy any more.
I find it very hard to "trust" most news ( "the Independent" in the UK is very good and Channel 4 news better than others but still standards are dropping, maybe because demand and expectations are too).
Maybe we only get the news we deserve, I don't know...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
