The valence-oriented pap that is US news reporting...
Just a quick entry to note that it struck me again last night, while trying to get the day's news from a reliable source, how truly BAD American network and major cable outlet news reporting has become. Edward R. Murrow is turning over in his grave. What used to be a magnificent public service which created some of the finest news organizations in the world has given way to entertainment-oriented news directors (or pressure on NDs from entertainment-oriented executives) who believe that everyone in the country just wants to "feel good" when they hear news reports-- which admittedly with limited exception-- even at the height of US news networks' glory-- has always been somewhat ethnocentric in its coverage. So what do we get today? Human interest "features"-- and lots of them-- which tell a wonderfully weepy story of tragedy and triumph, or feature yet another dumb 3-year-old who fell down a well because his white trash parents didn't keep an eye on him when they should have, or some allegedly "deep philosophical debate" over the Schiavo case in which the "philosophers" are partisan political hacks who come into the discussion with a specific agenda (my brother has a great resolution to the Schiavo case, by the way, given that she's in Florida, though Texas works just as well-- put a gun in her hand, fire it at one of the nurses, and Terri would be picked up by state authorities, tried and sentenced to lethal injection before the jury even got their seats warm).
The biggest disappointment in all of this "anti-news" or "entertainment news" garbage (lots of stories lately on the launch of Britney Spears' new perfume, even while thousands continue to die elsewhere around the world of starvation or civil war, and new dramas unfold every day in the U.S. of the sick "working poor" who have to choose between being non-compliant with needed medications or quitting their job to get on welfare to get the drugs) is Cable News Network and its bastard stepchild, Headline News. The latter, unconvinced that the word "News" in their name requires them to provide any of it whatsoever, has recently gone to this "PrimeSomething" format which basically means that after 6 pm in the evening, you can forget any hopes of getting serious information. You can, however, hear an increasingly whiny Nancy Grace spout her latest day's rubbish grumpily toward whatever guests are stupid enough to accept the invitation to appear on her show. I don't know where Nancy got her law degree offhand, but wherever it is, they owe her a refund.
This was part of the danger of Turner Networks selling the CNN franchise to Time-Warner, and we should have seen it coming. Entertainment.... sports.... all valence fluff that keeps the public from learning what governments are up to, and/or information designed to make us think about the situation ANYWHERE else in the world. And it marks a very sad turning point in the once-proud history of U.S. journalism.
Fortunately, there's an alternative option-- and I wish more cable systems across the country (and PBS) would take their "serious news" obligations more seriously and provide it to more subscribers or viewers with all deliberate speed. The BBC... yep, the British Broadcasting Corporation... continues fulfilling its weighty reputation as the finest broadcast news operation in the world. Some PBS stations run BBC World News once or twice a day, and BBC America (a cable network now available on many systems) also features it regularly throughout the day. I only wish that BBC had a "Headline News" service-- repeating major stories every hour, for example, 24 hours a day-- that more cable systems could take advantage of showing in the States. Sure, you won't find the same gussied-up pretty faces or laughing, joking, hyper-conversational anchor teams as on American news broadcasts-- but that, to me, is one of the Beeb's great strengths. They treat news AS NEWS... and realize that someone simply has to be semi-intelligent and articulate to provide it; it doesn't matter if they aren't particularly pretty or have a forty-syllable name from their family's days as part of the British Raj.
More considerably, one always gets a FULL smorgasbord of news which is truly from all over the world-- and it is information which is always timely, relevant and policy-oriented. Ironically, I've come to believe that BBC News even offers better coverage of major US news better than the US networks (including that sad excuse for an E!-wannabe, CNN/Headline News). We are truly the world's leader in out-sourcing stuff that we used to be the best in the world at providing.... and now, we've even out-sourced our traditional strength in giving a shit that our citizens are well-informed about the nation and the world around them.
So thank you, BBC, for coming through and filling the large and growing void of news needs for an increasing number of Americans (including this one) who really don't care which Hollywood couple has decided to separate this week. Now if only the American networks would take a page out of your book and rededicate themselves to the notion that broadcasting has a certain civic responsibility to educating and informing the public that goes beyond the trendy-hip-idea-of-the-day that seeing people engage in vacuous and vapid argument (I dare not call it "debate") somehow qualifies as something that will do them any good whatsoever.
What does this have to do with radio, or even internet radio for that matter? Well, not much of anything directly, I suppose, since PLANET ZEB! is admittedly an entertainment-and-not-news-oriented resource. I think this entry just comes from a very personal place in my historical soul that thinks broadcasting as a medium (both radio AND TV) once was so special... so remarkable... so brilliant.... and these feelings weren't solely a result of the technological breakthroughs we witnessed in the 60s, 70s and 80s. They were also engendered by a true appreciation for the communicative power of the medium. We have somehow lost that appreciation, and with it the quality news gathering and reporting which was its hallmark.
I hope to hell we rediscover it soon. For ALL our sakes. In the meantime, you'll find me watching BBC World News religiously, even when it means sitting through 120 seconds' worth of cricket scores to get to a recap of the day's major stories.
Z
The biggest disappointment in all of this "anti-news" or "entertainment news" garbage (lots of stories lately on the launch of Britney Spears' new perfume, even while thousands continue to die elsewhere around the world of starvation or civil war, and new dramas unfold every day in the U.S. of the sick "working poor" who have to choose between being non-compliant with needed medications or quitting their job to get on welfare to get the drugs) is Cable News Network and its bastard stepchild, Headline News. The latter, unconvinced that the word "News" in their name requires them to provide any of it whatsoever, has recently gone to this "PrimeSomething" format which basically means that after 6 pm in the evening, you can forget any hopes of getting serious information. You can, however, hear an increasingly whiny Nancy Grace spout her latest day's rubbish grumpily toward whatever guests are stupid enough to accept the invitation to appear on her show. I don't know where Nancy got her law degree offhand, but wherever it is, they owe her a refund.
This was part of the danger of Turner Networks selling the CNN franchise to Time-Warner, and we should have seen it coming. Entertainment.... sports.... all valence fluff that keeps the public from learning what governments are up to, and/or information designed to make us think about the situation ANYWHERE else in the world. And it marks a very sad turning point in the once-proud history of U.S. journalism.
Fortunately, there's an alternative option-- and I wish more cable systems across the country (and PBS) would take their "serious news" obligations more seriously and provide it to more subscribers or viewers with all deliberate speed. The BBC... yep, the British Broadcasting Corporation... continues fulfilling its weighty reputation as the finest broadcast news operation in the world. Some PBS stations run BBC World News once or twice a day, and BBC America (a cable network now available on many systems) also features it regularly throughout the day. I only wish that BBC had a "Headline News" service-- repeating major stories every hour, for example, 24 hours a day-- that more cable systems could take advantage of showing in the States. Sure, you won't find the same gussied-up pretty faces or laughing, joking, hyper-conversational anchor teams as on American news broadcasts-- but that, to me, is one of the Beeb's great strengths. They treat news AS NEWS... and realize that someone simply has to be semi-intelligent and articulate to provide it; it doesn't matter if they aren't particularly pretty or have a forty-syllable name from their family's days as part of the British Raj.
More considerably, one always gets a FULL smorgasbord of news which is truly from all over the world-- and it is information which is always timely, relevant and policy-oriented. Ironically, I've come to believe that BBC News even offers better coverage of major US news better than the US networks (including that sad excuse for an E!-wannabe, CNN/Headline News). We are truly the world's leader in out-sourcing stuff that we used to be the best in the world at providing.... and now, we've even out-sourced our traditional strength in giving a shit that our citizens are well-informed about the nation and the world around them.
So thank you, BBC, for coming through and filling the large and growing void of news needs for an increasing number of Americans (including this one) who really don't care which Hollywood couple has decided to separate this week. Now if only the American networks would take a page out of your book and rededicate themselves to the notion that broadcasting has a certain civic responsibility to educating and informing the public that goes beyond the trendy-hip-idea-of-the-day that seeing people engage in vacuous and vapid argument (I dare not call it "debate") somehow qualifies as something that will do them any good whatsoever.
What does this have to do with radio, or even internet radio for that matter? Well, not much of anything directly, I suppose, since PLANET ZEB! is admittedly an entertainment-and-not-news-oriented resource. I think this entry just comes from a very personal place in my historical soul that thinks broadcasting as a medium (both radio AND TV) once was so special... so remarkable... so brilliant.... and these feelings weren't solely a result of the technological breakthroughs we witnessed in the 60s, 70s and 80s. They were also engendered by a true appreciation for the communicative power of the medium. We have somehow lost that appreciation, and with it the quality news gathering and reporting which was its hallmark.
I hope to hell we rediscover it soon. For ALL our sakes. In the meantime, you'll find me watching BBC World News religiously, even when it means sitting through 120 seconds' worth of cricket scores to get to a recap of the day's major stories.
Z
posted by zebby rhoads @ 8:28 AM
3 Comments:
At 3:52 AM ,
Stewed Hamm said...
Chalk it up to the explosion of choices people have about what to watch (if anything) on TV. Given the chance, a frightening number of them will go watch something mindless and become unthinking vacuums, rather than concern themselves with what's going on outside their little island kingdoms.
I've said on many occasions that people are big dumb shep. It fully applies in this regard.
On occasion, I've stumbled across the BBC news on PBS and had to stop and watch. Mostly, it was out of the entirely different culture surrounding what they consider "proper" about a newscast. No flashy sets or graphics, no painted info-babes, no urbane jock-wannabe that thinks he's eye-candy. Essentially, 180 degrees from the bulk of US newscasts.
You'll definitely hear news from around the world that you would have to spend a few hours of dedicated searching to discover otherwise. That alone puts them over most US news, where the difference is the packaging on the same info... but we have the Associated Press to thank for that.
For all the praise I've thrown, the BBC has just as many biases as you'll find in American outfits. Once you know where they stand though, it's easy enough to filter that out.
That being said, it's all irrelevant. They could read the phone book for all I care, so long as I get to listen to sexy English accents.
At 11:15 AM ,
zebby rhoads said...
Ahhhh... so it's the ACCENTS that make you tune in to BBC (laugh)....
Admittedly, they've cheesed me off to some extent before as well-- but once again last night, I was reminded of how much I'd miss the BBC World News if it were taken away from me! I've had enough of the Schiavo case, what George Bush had for dinner and/or the "secret news" behind the Brad and Jennifer break-up. Heck, by the time we bought "Shark Tale" on pay-per-view, I was relieved that I had something more intellectual than CNN Headline News' latest pap to watch for a while. Loved the rasta jellyfish, too. :)
At 3:11 AM ,
Pat Cook (Pat's Podcast) said...
If it isn't one thing, it's another with the U.S. networks criticism of the BBC. Just today, I even heard that someone was blasting the BBC because they used the word 'bombers' instead of 'terrorists' in describing the London Terror Attack in an article on its website.
I always thought bombers WERE terrorists.
I say WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?? A TERRORIST IS A TERRORIST. It doesn't really matter what they have in their possession. All I wanna know is IF THEY USED IT IN THEIR ATTACK OR NOT.
That's all *I* care about.
Sheesh!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home