Comments on: The End of Network News as We Know It? http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/ As The Media Watches The World, We Watch The Media Sat, 30 Aug 2008 05:29:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: TZ http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15112 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:58:44 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15112 TV news i particular, and TV content in general are for the most part, brainwashing. My TV has been cold and dark for about two years now. TV news i particular, and TV content in general are for the most part, brainwashing. My TV has been cold and dark for about two years now.

]]> by: (The Other) Katherine Harris http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15098 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:50:06 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15098 If broadcast news is ever to become relevant again, it will have to revert to telling us the truth -- not replacing it with the wrongheaded ideal of "balance" (which gives equal weight to the astute and the asinine). If just one network voluntarily reverted to the old standards of objectivity and fairness, not only would its news ratings soar, but its rivals would be exposed to all as the corporatist hacks they are. As others here have pointed out very capably, the viewers whom the networks have lost know where to get reliable information online and don't care to be propagandized or distracted by meaningless gossip. Unless they reform what they're offering, they won't attract us on the Net anymore than they do on TV. To preserve the one mass medium not yet hopelessly corrupted, we'd better fight like hell for Net Neutrality. If broadcast news is ever to become relevant again, it will have to revert to telling us the truth — not replacing it with the wrongheaded ideal of “balance” (which gives equal weight to the astute and the asinine). If just one network voluntarily reverted to the old standards of objectivity and fairness, not only would its news ratings soar, but its rivals would be exposed to all as the corporatist hacks they are.

As others here have pointed out very capably, the viewers whom the networks have lost know where to get reliable information online and don’t care to be propagandized or distracted by meaningless gossip. Unless they reform what they’re offering, they won’t attract us on the Net anymore than they do on TV.

To preserve the one mass medium not yet hopelessly corrupted, we’d better fight like hell for Net Neutrality.

]]> by: david cromwell http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15096 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:47:37 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15096 The beginning of the end actually started in 1987 with the Reagan administration's deregulating of broadcasting as a political payback to the corporate structure for 8 years of support. When the Fairness Doctrine died at this time, all requirments to be fair, objective, and truthful went by the wayside. It was no longer necessary to find 3 separate sources for a controversial story. One would do fine. This made it possible to go with more sensational crap and half truths which slowly erroded public trust and respect. Then came the birth of hate radio and all that we now hear from it. Then CNN decided it too need not deliver solid journalism. Then FOXNews came along and we all know how fair and balanced they are. Simply put, Joe and Freida Sixpak are tired of BS and fluff. The beginning of the end actually started in 1987 with the Reagan administration’s deregulating of broadcasting as a political payback to the corporate structure for 8 years of support.
When the Fairness Doctrine died at this time, all requirments to be fair, objective, and truthful went by the wayside. It was no longer necessary to find 3 separate sources for a controversial story. One would do fine. This made it possible to go with more sensational crap and half truths which slowly erroded public trust and respect. Then came the birth of hate radio and all that we now hear from it. Then CNN decided it too need not deliver solid journalism. Then FOXNews came along and we all know how fair and balanced they are.
Simply put, Joe and Freida Sixpak are tired of BS and fluff.

]]> by: Jud http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15094 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:17:37 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15094 The long chase after ratings and the almighty dollar has poisoned the news operation across the board. If the networks would recognize that the public interest requires that they have common cause in demanding access to public figures, rather than toadying up to one or the other in pursuit of a ratings-driven scoop, or would give the public credit for having some brains to digest and sort through complex issues that confront citizens in a democracy, rather than grabbing for the simplistic, titillating, or entertaining in the name of "holding viewers," we all would be better off, with possible exception of those who see it all in terms of whether it's lining their pockets. The long chase after ratings and the almighty dollar has poisoned the news operation across the board. If the networks would recognize that the public interest requires that they have common cause in demanding access to public figures, rather than toadying up to one or the other in pursuit of a ratings-driven scoop, or would give the public credit for having some brains to digest and sort through complex issues that confront citizens in a democracy, rather than grabbing for the simplistic, titillating, or entertaining in the name of “holding viewers,” we all would be better off, with possible exception of those who see it all in terms of whether it’s lining their pockets.

]]> by: Cord;ey Coit http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15090 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:51:44 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15090 The networks sealed their doom in 1951 when they chose not to interactive as was promised. They also drove the nail in the coffin by having their anchor format frozen in ice. By keeping interactive out and crushing content into a Wheaties box of pap they carried on dying from then on. When the Internet came along the were all zombies, empty suits or pretty faces. PBS was the real guilty party because the could have changed thing but only did the aping thing. I love it when the blame whatever anchor for sinking the ratings rather than the architects of disaster the suits. They are fish out of water and they are starting smell. They are dead, gone, no longer with us. And do not think for a second they will admit they have passed over. The networks sealed their doom in 1951 when they chose not to interactive as was promised. They also drove the nail in the coffin by having their anchor format frozen in ice.
By keeping interactive out and crushing content into a Wheaties box of pap they carried on dying from then on.
When the Internet came along the were all zombies, empty suits or pretty faces.
PBS was the real guilty party because the could have changed thing but only did the aping thing.
I love it when the blame whatever anchor for sinking the ratings rather than the architects of disaster the suits.
They are fish out of water and they are starting smell. They are dead, gone, no longer with us. And do not think for a second they will admit they have passed over.

]]> by: Francis Scalzi http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15088 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:48:16 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15088 Included in two cogent sentences in this article lies the underlying problem that has resulted in the decline of TV network news and the question whether the plans for the future will result in any better fortunes than they have had in recent years: "Even as the web beckons, broadcasters still have a obligation to act in the public interest - - -". "One of the big questions will be: What are broadcasters' public-interest obligations in the digital age?" THEREIN LIES THE RUB, If the MSM (not just TV news, but the entire complex of corporate newsmakers in the US) do not realize that their falling fortunes in the market place have been due merely to such things as the "age group they wish to attract are "at work " when the network news comes on TV", they are blinded by their own selfish and greedy corporate agendas to see the truth - that viewers are sick and tired of viewing pap, nonsense, biased reports, gratuitive editorializing, and worst, failing to see so much important news that the MSM regularly refuses to report, but that many people DO see reported on the Web. The failure of the MSM and the reason that broadcast TV news programs are also failing is that their corporate owners have refused to serve the public interest in order to pander to their corporate support Washington, to their usually politically conservative owners, or God knows who they really serve - -but certainly not the public interest. Included in two cogent sentences in this article lies the underlying problem that has resulted in the decline of TV network news and the question whether the plans for the future will result in any better fortunes than they have had in recent years:
“Even as the web beckons, broadcasters still have a obligation to act in the public interest - - -”.
“One of the big questions will be: What are broadcasters’ public-interest obligations in the digital age?”
THEREIN LIES THE RUB,
If the MSM (not just TV news, but the entire complex of corporate newsmakers in the US) do not realize that their falling fortunes in the market place have been due merely to such things as the “age group they wish to attract are “at work ” when the network news comes on TV”, they are blinded by their own selfish and greedy corporate agendas to see the truth - that viewers are sick and tired of viewing pap, nonsense, biased reports, gratuitive editorializing, and worst, failing to see so much important news that the MSM regularly refuses to report, but that many people DO see reported on the Web.
The failure of the MSM and the reason that broadcast TV news programs are also failing is that their corporate owners have refused to serve the public interest in order to pander to their corporate support Washington, to their usually politically conservative owners, or God knows who they really serve - -but certainly not the public
interest.

]]> by: mgm http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15085 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:32:34 +0000 http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2008/04/28/the-end-of-network-news-as-we-know-it/#comment-15085 Perhaps if the network "news" programs actually delivered news instead of banal talking heads spewing ignorant opinions they would fare better. Britney Spears' activities are not news, they are items of gossip. Hours and hours devoted to the latest rumor about a political candidate is not news, it is speculation. NBC is not a news network, it is a working branch of the Obama campaign. No wonder no one is watching. Perhaps if the network “news” programs actually delivered news instead of banal talking heads spewing ignorant opinions they would fare better. Britney Spears’ activities are not news, they are items of gossip. Hours and hours devoted to the latest rumor about a political candidate is not news, it is speculation. NBC is not a news network, it is a working branch of the Obama campaign. No wonder no one is watching.

]]>