HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Dec. 7, 2006 With the onset of the 24 hour news cycle and Cable I have seen a radical change in how the news is reported. In the good old days, we could turn on the nightly news and expect to hear the important stories of the day reported with clarity and without a personal or political agenda. The Networks did not insert their own philosophies into the reportage and the reporters themselves were true "news readers". I now turn on the three major Networks (I still consider Fox to be a hybrid), and there before me are a cheerleader who grins and slants the news to fit her agenda and her personality, and a few other reporters who seemingly try to report the events of the day but stop short of believability. There is always something thrown into the mix that lightens the mood or slants the reality. The shows that are the most offensive are the ones hosted by former lawyers or individuals who have become minor celebrities like Greta Van Susterin or Nancy Grace. Although Greta has a somewhat flat affect, she still manages to turn her reportage into a performance. Nancy Grace reminds me of someone trying to convince a jury that her side is right and that they must agree. She is often rude and even more often, her facts are wrong. She will repeat something that she was fed by her staff that has already been proven to be incorrect or she'll slant her words to fit her own personal beliefs. She runs the same clips over and over again until I begin to think that I am experiencing deja vu. A prime example of this type of reporting is her coverage of Anna Nicole Smith and her many travails as of late. Nancy had Anna's mother on her show to accuse someone (anyone) present in the room with Anna's late son of murder. The woman has had little if any relationship with her daughter and her late grandson and was NOT privy to any information, yet she made an accusation that could have resulted in the arrest of her own daughter. Nancy also has the Editor of "In Touch" magazine on her show and that completely negates any credibility that she attempts to portray. That magazine is more often than not guilty of printing absolutely inaccurate information and is certainly no authority on the ins and outs of a police investigation. They take whoever comes forth with any type of gossip and make it a headline. It is than portrayed as fact and the speaker is now the authority. When you find yourself yelling at your television set rather than listening to what is being said because you know that what they are claiming is bogus it is time to make a change. The entire focus of television news has become a ratings game just like the prime time sit-coms and drama shows. The measure of how well the show is doing is based on numbers and not on accuracy. If enough of a certain demographic is tuning in than the show is deemed a success. The fact that what that demographic is being fed is pure tabloid crap doesn't seem to matter. I could pull what my parents used to do and say, "What happened to the price of a loaf of bread? I remember when it was 10 cents a loaf...", but that won't help. Nothing is the way it used to be and that's a fact that has to be accepted. That does not mean that we can't demand change. We can still have the junk shows (as I call them) and we can and should have the REAL news shows that simply state the facts as they are known and let the viewer draw their own conclusions until more facts are revealed. Walter Cronkite is retired and Edward R. Murrow is dead but there must be those who took their studies seriously while attending journalism school. Here in Arizona there is even a branch of one of our major universities named The Walter Cronkite School of Journalism. Do they actually teach journalism or do they teach show business? What I wouldn't give for the good old days when the reporter on my very tiny television screen didn't try to project his own personality or agenda in place of real hard news....wouldn't it be nice to get the facts and only the facts without the hype or the slant of a particular Network? Whoops, I sound like my parents. After speaking to a friend's son, who is currently majoring in journalism, I know that I will probably never get my wish. From what he told me he is being taught, it has nothing whatsoever to do with what I used to know as news reportage. He will be yet another personality-plus, cute guy who smiles his way through the news and tries everything in his power to lighten the mood with trivia while throwing in a few harsh facts of life. Anything resembling real news will never make it's way from his desk to my living-room. I mourn the loss of real news and real reporters......I miss it and I feel that I am not as well informed as I could be as a result of what it has become. Edward R. and Peter J., may you rest in peace. You were the real deal and you have NOT been replaced. ------------ About the author: Meri has a Medical/Legal background and is a former forensic researcher specializing in psychological profiling. https://www2.xlibris.com/bookstore/bookdisplay.asp?bookid=27335 Email: writers2@cox.net Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
