Murdoch's brand of journalism

[Charles]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Fair enough, Chas. I just think the "dumbing down" of the news is not particularly helpful in a system of government that depends on a well informed electorate (or so said Thomas Jefferson).

I guess we're way past that though.

Reading that article, I was of the impression that Faux told their reporters to get off of their asses and go out and find a story.

Of course, if anyone is dumb enough to come back with his own bone, he'll wind up being marginalized by the rest of the lazy bastards simply because he's making them look bad.

Chas

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Charles

Reading that article, I was of the impression that Faux told their reporters to get off of their asses and go out and find a story.

Of course, if anyone is dumb enough to come back with his own bone, he'll wind up being marginalized by the rest of the lazy bastards simply because he's making them look bad.

Chas

I guess what caught my attention is the editor-in-chief's notion that "Egypt is over" (that would indeed be news if it were true) and the need to focus on fluff instead (e.g., America's oldest dog).

I'm not really concerned about this specific iPad app, but thought I'd throw it up here as a gratuitous slap at Faux and a commentary on the sad state of news in this country. OTOH, this is a paid app, meaning if people think it's worth money to have Murdoch feed them this drivel, so be it.

[Fast_Eddie]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I guess what caught my attention is the editor-in-chief's notion that "Egypt is over" (that would indeed be news if it were true) and the need to focus on fluff instead (e.g., America's oldest dog).

I know what you mean, I'm just looking at it differently.

I listen to an awesome radio show in the car in the morning. It's called "The Takeaway". I sent them a letter to tell them what a great job they did covering Egypt. They really explained what was going on, who the players were, what was really happening, how it all worked and what might happen next.

CNN, by comparison, pretty much said "Look, there's a tank! That guy has a rock! Oh, he threw it! That guy got hit in the head! Sure looks dangerous out there- hey, let's get a camera and go for a walk!" People like to see the pictures of a crowd in the streets. Once it all kinda calms down and there's no tank to shoot, or guy with a gash in his head, people don't so much care. Evidence PBS. People could watch Charlie Rose or The Newshour, but by and large, they do not. And broadcasting is a business. Doesn't take a brain surgen to say "hey, we might should get some more stuff to get folks to tune in or we'll lose our jobs".

Great journalism is great, but usually not real profitable. News theatre is a lot more profitable. And that means finding real life controversy. No controversy, no story. Overt controversy ended in Egypt - Egypt is over. Where's that cute dog picture!? But it is what it is and pretends to be nothing else. As soon as you see a paid ad, you know you’re looking at a for-profit product, not an objective news outlet. In this country, that seems to be what people want. They chose it over more objective coverage every day. In other countries they do it differently. But we have the choice and we get what we want.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

I know what you mean, I'm just looking at it differently.

I listen to an awesome radio show in the car in the morning. It's called "The Takeaway". I sent them a letter to tell them what a great job they did covering Egypt. They really explained what was going on, who the players were, what was really happening, how it all worked and what might happen next.

CNN, by comparison, pretty much said "Look, there's a tank! That guy has a rock! Oh, he threw it! That guy got hit in the head! Sure looks dangerous out there- hey, let's get a camera and go for a walk!" People like to see the pictures of a crowd in the streets. Once it all kinda calms down and there's no tank to shoot, or guy with a gash in his head, people don't so much care. Evidence PBS. People could watch Charlie Rose or The Newshour, but by and large, they do not. And broadcasting is a business. Doesn't take a brain surgen to say "hey, we might should get some more stuff to get folks to tune in or we'll lose our jobs".

Great journalism is great, but usually not real profitable. News theatre is a lot more profitable. And that means finding real life controversy. No controversy, no story. Overt controversy ended in Egypt - Egypt is over. Where's that cute dog picture!? But it is what it is and pretends to be nothing else. As soon as you see a paid ad, you know you’re looking at a for-profit product, not an objective news outlet. In this country, that seems to be what people want. They chose it over more objective coverage every day. In other countries they do it differently. But we have the choice and we get what we want.

Stratfor's been sending out a lot of newsletters on Egypt, and they show a considerable amount of insight on the subject.

If I turn on the 6:00 news I can't help but wonder if they're even talking about the same thing.

Can't believe Panetta came out and said he was getting his information from CNN (thanks Finn). If I were going to lie about what I knew, I'd come up with a better lie than that.

Scary thing is, he may have been telling the truth.

Chas

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Charles

Can't believe Panetta came out and said he was getting his information from CNN (thanks Finn). If I were going to lie about what I knew, I'd come up with a better lie than that.

Scary thing is, he may have been telling the truth.

Chas

The sad thing is that despite its lousy coverage (described perfectly by Ed), CNN has more of a clue than the CIA what's going on in the Arab world.

[merrylander]

Like I wrote earlier - central intelligence is an oxymoron.

[d-ray657]

I heard on the radio yesterday that Murdoch's London Times has made its on-line edition subscription only - about $16 per month. It's readership has dropped by 98%. He also charges for the Wall Street Urinal. If only he would make Fox News pay per view, the world would be a better place.

Regards,

D-Ray