Hatrack River Forum: Stupid Stupid Stupid Cable News Anchors

This is topic Stupid Stupid Stupid Cable News Anchors in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=047473

Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :

I just spent half an hour of my life watching some CNN pinch hitter named Carol Costello say one unnecessarily obtuse and shortsighted thing after another. When did it become acceptable for "journalists" to express personal beliefs (I believe hers are stupid) and pass them off as obvious common sense?

Posted by Avatar300 (Member # 5108) on :

They've been doing it since the beginning of journalism. I think a lot of them don't even realize they're editorializing.

Posted by Euripides (Member # 9315) on :

Try the BBC or Al Jazeera English.

I also hate the stock-ticker-like crawls at the bottom of the screen.

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :

In a class I took from my university's well-regarded journalism school, which included several former professionals now pursuing journalism PhDs, including one former CNN producer and a former international reporter for several major newspapers, the sentiment was repeatedly expressed that the journalists in tv newsrooms are the producers, and the anchors and almost every other news station employee you see on air are generally (not always, of course, but mostly) better viewed as entertainers.

Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :

BBCnews.com, seconded.

Euripides -- I remember the constant ticker appearing on September 11, and they never took it down. Maybe it had been there before, I dunno; I watched the news a lot that day.

--j_k

Posted by Euripides (Member # 9315) on :

The things that wikipedians know; history of the news crawler.

As expected it was originally used as a stock ticker. It was popularised by CNN in the late 80s.

Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :

quote:
Originally posted by airmanfour:
I just spent half an hour of my life watching some CNN pinch hitter named Carol Costello say one unnecessarily obtuse and shortsighted thing after another. When did it become acceptable for "journalists" to express personal beliefs (I believe hers are stupid) and pass them off as obvious common sense?

Your first mistake is watching CNN. [Smile]

The BBC has better coverage of American news than we do...hands down!

Journalists are supposed to give us their views and opinions. I could go on a huge long rant about modern journalism...I won't now, though...but one problem I see is that journalists are trying to be "fair and balanced" rather than just coming right out and having the courage to tell it the way they see it. They aren't fair or balanced, of course, but when they try to pretend to be it becomes crap, IMHO.

I am also amazed at the amount of real news that you never see on the major networks....but wait, that's part of the rant I wasn't going to go on about.

Posted by Abhi (Member # 9142) on :

At least you weren't watching fox news... I actually have that channel on "skip" on my tv

Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :

Yahoo had a headline yesterday "National Gaurd Families Struggle with Deployment" and the video link next to it was titled "I Miss Daddy"

This is the kind of propaganda crap the enemy used to use to demoralize our soldiers. It's not any different than Tokyo Rose telling our Sailors and Marines that their girlfriends back home are cheating on them.

Yet it passes on the news without anyone batting an eye.

Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :

The Daily Show for the past week has been having a hilarious time with the standard of news.

Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :

You should watch C-SPAN, get the news before the news agencies get it. And trust me, we report more news than the leading news channels, for all we don't have fancy graphics.

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :

pix,
I know. It's so much easier to "support our troops" when they are faceless numbers. Making them into human beings who are suffering and whose families are suffering puts a cost on the war and might actually cause people to introduce accountability so that their sacrifices aren't in vain.

I also really don't understand how this would demoralize our troops. Do you think that they aren't aware that their families really miss them and worry about their safety?

Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :

I wonder what you might say if that report was called, "National Guard Families Grateful for Service," and the video link said, "Thanks for protecting me, Daddy," or something along those lines, Mr. Squicky.

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :

I'd be okay with that too. And heck, that'd be something I'd want sent over to the troops.

I think you may be mistaking me for someone who isn't grateful for the sacrifices our military makes and/or has a problem with people expressing that gratitude.

Right now, I'm for anything that'll make the Bush adminsitration actually do something besides grind away our troops lives with no realistic exit strategy or plan for success.

---

What's your take on the original story and Pix's reaction to it?

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :

I hear Bush heard your request MrSquicky and is currently setting up an exit from Iraq via Iran. [Wink]

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :

BB,
This really isn't a joke for me. I've got too many of my family and friends over there, some of whom have already paid some severe personal costs, for me not to take it seriously.

Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :

I'm certainly not mistaking you for someone who isn't grateful for the military sacrifice. And to be perfectly clear, I'm not being sarcastic or snarky when I say that. That's not an accusation I'd make lightly, and I can't say there's anyone on HR I think would merit it.
-------

My reaction to the original story is that, whether or not it was intended to be propaganda-I'm leaning more towards sensationalist tear-jerking media-seller-it's certainly a one-sided headline.

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :

Yeah, I think it's a sensationalistic, tear-jerker too. I also think that the people who object to showing the human costs of this war in the name of "supporting the troops" are generating enough unacknowledged irony to power a small city.

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrSquicky:
BB,
This really isn't a joke for me. I've got too many of my family and friends over there, some of whom have already paid some severe personal costs, for me not to take it seriously.

My sincere apologies I hit the wrong graemlin. I was going for [Confused]

. The joke was told in my political ideologies class but it was more of a grim joke then a, "haha" joke.

In either case if the topic is sensitive to you I apologize for hurting your feelings.