Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 31 Jan '14 09:58
    I guess this is a worldwide problem, but it seems more dire in the US.

    A congresswoman was talking to a news anchor. The news anchor interrupts her mid sentence, to switch to a breaking news:

    Justin bieber appears before a judge.





    This wasn't even fox news.

    Is this what we want from news agencies? Seriously? We are the most responsible for this idiocy, for not taking a stand.
  2. 31 Jan '14 10:48
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    Is this what we want from news agencies? Seriously? We are the most responsible for this idiocy, for not taking a stand.
    TV news is entertainment.
    If you really want to know what is going on in the world, you need to watch well made documentaries, read things like police statistics, government budgets, Wikipedia etc.
    So called 'news' is so heavily biased towards what they think you want to hear that it is almost worse than useless ie it gives you the wrong impression of what is really going on.
    Of course the real question is why you watch the news at all. What benefits do you think you derive from it?
  3. 31 Jan '14 12:03
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    I guess this is a worldwide problem, but it seems more dire in the US.

    A congresswoman was talking to a news anchor. The news anchor interrupts her mid sentence, to switch to a breaking news:

    Justin bieber appears before a judge.





    This wasn't even fox news.

    Is this what we want from news agencies? Seriously? We are the most responsible for this idiocy, for not taking a stand.
    Never mind that man, what happened to Justin?
  4. 31 Jan '14 22:39
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    TV news is entertainment.
    If you really want to know what is going on in the world, you need to watch well made documentaries, read things like police statistics, government budgets, Wikipedia etc.
    So called 'news' is so heavily biased towards what they think you want to hear that it is almost worse than useless ie it gives you the wrong impression of w ...[text shortened]... e real question is why you watch the news at all. What benefits do you think you derive from it?
    news are supposed to inform. yes, for the really dedicated, the internet is better. one can stay up to date with current events if one works hard enough for it.


    most people however are not dedicated. they do not have the time to surf the web for reliable news sources. they do not have the computer literacy necessary. maybe they do not even speak english (non-americans/non-british).

    they already made the choice to get information rather than watch snookie or biebs. instead, sensationalist journalism floods them with crap.
  5. 01 Feb '14 00:38 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    I guess this is a worldwide problem, but it seems more dire in the US.

    A congresswoman was talking to a news anchor. The news anchor interrupts her mid sentence, to switch to a breaking news:

    Justin bieber appears before a judge.





    This wasn't even fox news.

    Is this what we want from news agencies? Seriously? We are the most responsible for this idiocy, for not taking a stand.
    If it's TV broadcast news, the networks have to broadcast news programming to get and keep their FCC licenses. They eventually found that news programming was not producing the ad revenue that entertainment programming was, and made entertainment/human interest a bigger part of the news to draw audiences. Also, I noticed something happened about the time of the recession. The advertisements went downhill to local car sales (screaming at me) and pitching pharmaceuticals to old people (like me).

    That's before even talking about the cables, that don't have this FCC requirement to present actual news.

    The only news worth watching or hearing is the PBS newshour.

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/