Fluff News

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thanatoast, Aug 7, 2004.

  1. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #1
    An email I just sent to CNN, by way of their website. Sure it won't do any good, but at least I did *something*.
    So what does everyone here think of the dramatization of news? I'm sure we all agree, blue and red, that news is news and fluff is not. Is there anything to be done?

    Is it this bad in other countries? Do you international members get breast cancer stories during sweeps week? Oh wait, breasts aren't verbotten in other countries, so how does that play out?
     
  2. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #2
    Some eight or ten years back, my mother started grumping at what she labelled "News Lite".

    Regardless of any journalistic code of ethics about reporting, the media owners are in business to make money. That means, sell advertising. The sales derive from relative audience sizes.

    Anecdotal item: Channel 7 in Austin, Texas had a highly skilled, professional meteorologist for their weatherman. He was not a "giggle, giggle, tee-hee" type. He presented understandable commentary and useful forecasts.

    He was fired, and replaced by the g,g,t-h types. Thereafter, the ratings rose.

    Go figure. I dunno whether "It's the audience, stupid!" or "It's the stupid audience!"

    'Rat
     
  3. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #3
    depending on channel

    on those private channels known for light entertainment of course they will put that dog news in at 8 pm
    on the news channels or private channels they put it in somewhere in the afternoon
    on the national channels (kinda bbc) they perhaps put it in some special shows or in most cases they don't other at all
     
  4. Leo Hubbard macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
  5. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #5
    if you want in-depth coverage, I recommend in-depth magazines, like The New Republic and The Economist. Also, the BBC does an excellent job. But if you're expecting hard-hitting journalism from the softball US media, then you're expecting too much. I like CNN and other networks, but I don't expect them to break the next big controversy or give me the deep analysis that I want. #1: Their journalists are soft (or have gone soft in recent years). #2: Television as a medium is not conducive to truly in-depth journalism, or at least, not in its current avatar.
     
  6. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    Fluff/soft news is hear to stay 'cause it is good for ratings. You ever see that Simpons where the kids had their own newscast and Bart steals the show doing his softnews crap and Lisa's hardnews stories keep getting undercut?

    Soft news has a place and a time but too often that place and time is in the middle of hard news.


    Anyway... was it a famous dog that had a b-day or just a regular dog? ;)


    Lethal
     
  7. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #7
    It must have been the one bitten by Man. ;)
     
  8. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #8
    I remember when the "feel good" news trend started. It was during the early '70s when everybody was getting pretty weary of hearing about Vietnam, war protesters and Watergate. The TV news guys got the idea that what Americans really wanted to hear for a change was "good news." So they made some up. It was good for ratings, and better yet, required no investigation and was therefore cheap to produce. Soft and cheerful no-news news quickly became ubiquitous and inevitable.
     
  9. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #9
    I remember when CNN started years ago, about all they had the resources to do was "rip-and-read" stuff from the wire services. But you know what? Even without all the videotape, motion graphics and other gee-gaws, that was real news. Now, so much of it is fluff.

    I'm sure they're doing it in part to imitate the "happy news" format the local stations use -- and that's sad, just really sad. It could also account for some of the reason why Fox News has pulled ahead of them.

    As to real news, well...I recall reading about a TV station (in Boston, I think it was, but I could certainly be wrong) a few years back where the news director decided to do it very professionally, very straight, the same way Peter Jennings does it. And the ratings plummeted. That ended that little experiment.
     
  10. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #10
    Ah, so no news is better than fluff news! That makes sense.
     
  11. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #11
    Wait a minute, I never said I was defending Fox news. Far from it. I just think the CNN's fluff has driven people to other networks. That doesn't mean I think Fox's popularity is a good thing. It ain't.
     
  12. Leo Hubbard macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #12
    Fox isn't the only news agency taking share away from the old traditional news sources. The internet, individual blogs, upstart news agencies with little or no media play have also sprung up. It is a good thing that our choices have expanded. It is a good thing that the left wing mass media no longer has a monopoly on our information retrieval choices.
     
  13. mouchoir macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    #13
    Yes quite. I hate these damn lefties and their strive for equality and freedom. And I earned my millions the hard way and i'll be damned if i'll let anyone tax them.

    Bring on the right wing mass media and their culture of fear. Let's keep those god-fearing citizens too scared to notice us scewing them.
     
  14. iLikeMyiMac macrumors 6502a

    iLikeMyiMac

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis
    #14
    Do I sense a little sarcasm?
    The so-called rich pay almost all of the income taxes in this country. In fact, the top 1% highest-earning Americans pay a whopping 37% of all individual income taxes collected. The top 10% pay 67%. In other words, 10% of Americans pay two-thirds of the taxes. Half of all taxpayers – those in the bottom 50% of earnings – account for less than 4% of income tax revenues. This means no matter how taxes are cut, it’s nearly impossible for those cuts to primarily benefit lower-earning taxpayers. Tax cuts necessarily benefit those who pay the overwhelming bulk of the taxes. This simple truth allows the left to attack each and every tax cut proposal on the grounds that it disproportionately benefits the rich.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    link, please
     
  16. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #17
    That isn't a legitimate link. Try and find some IRS stats that show who pays what part of the budget.
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #18
    ah, yeah, the free market guy. not sure i trust his numbers....

    regardless, does it surprise you that those who earn more, pay more? the mistake mr rockwell makes in expressing statistics like that is that it's the individuals who pay, not the groups. i.e. all the people who make between $500k-1 mil don't all sit down and fill out one tax form.

    so let's look at the individual. is it fair that the person who makes $100k/yr pays more than the person who makes $50k/yr? that's the question i put to you.
     
  18. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #19
    Did you know that 50% of all people are below average in intelligence? What an astonishing statistic!

    The only fair way of comparing tax burdens is to add up all the taxes people pay and figure that as a percentage of their incomes. Until we have those numbers in front of us, all talk about tax fairness is so much hot air.
     
  19. Leo Hubbard macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #20
    depends if they are both paying the same percentage of their income?
     
  20. Leo Hubbard macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    #21
    That statistic is contained in your tax booklets itself. The graduated tax system. you got your 28% columns and your 35% columns, if everything was "fair" there would only be one column.
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #22
    What's "fairness" got to do with it? If tax is raised simply to cover the cost of government services, it's just as "fair" for that cost to be shared equally by all taxpayers (i.e. all those whose earnings are above a predetermined "subsistence level"). You cannot argue otherwise without predicating a redistributive function for taxation, which is by no means a given.
     
  22. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
    All taxes redistribute wealth. This is unavoidable, since it is impossible to create a system whereby everyone pays for government services in precise proportion to their use of those service over any given period of time. This would be true even if it were possible to quantify the value of all government services, which it most certainly is not.
     
  23. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #24
    because if it's not fair that those who earn more pay more, then what are we left with? communism? or someone who we won't be able to even have a conversation with?
     
  24. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #25
    Life isn't fair.

    Or my new favorite: Fair is in Pomona. The teacher/professor I just took my special ed class with has that sign in his classroom. Pomona is a town with a Fairplex. He works in Los Angeles Unified School District.
     

Share This Page