lwien said:
VWFringe said:
......that the news paints a blacker picture than exists in the real world, and they do it knowingly to manipulate us and our behavior.
I don't agree with this. I don't think that network news, cable news or radio news paints a blacker picture to manipulate us at all, but rather they paint a blacker picture simply because a blacker picture sells better. It's all about the money, and in the news business, money is all about the ratings because good ratings allows them to sell airtime to their sponsors.
I think you will agree with me on these points...
they use
Modern PR to help them decide how to portray stories, to pull emotion out of us.
And, at the same time they use Political Analysts to help with content selection, and the best ways to frame things, and to try to work-in the government talking points and those of their other clients.
That and the fact that the narrative or dialog they go with is echoed throughout their family of companies, because they need to save money, and re-use resources, like any company.
they can't report on everything, so they have to pick and choose, and if reporting on Wisconsin is going to alienate all of their Republican advertisers, and generally disrespect the product, they'll show Charlie Sheen instead.
If the government asks them to do a drive-along during a high-profile bust, an exclusive story, and all they need to do is work in the talking points, they'll do it... it's free content, and it suits their over-arching objectives to show it. (I guess they just passed a law that they can't just show clips sent in by the federal government, but they can still use content provided by political parties and other sources (hey, free content)
it's a big business, they've cut budgets and workforce with each merger and each wave of off-shoring, and were also hit hard by the economic downturn: they don't have the time or the interest to do hard-hitting investigative reporting, everybody's satisfied finding the content that suits them on TV, some watch Dateline, some 60 Minutes, but it's all highly scripted, watered down propaganda (whether intentional or just out of respect for the product)
they're main clients are the corporations and news providers, like our government.
#1 rule of journalism: don't disrespect the product
you may not agree with these points tho...
If doctors and scientists said eating meat/diary/eggs is bad for you
[it is and they have], TV is not going to report it, not like that at least, they'd frame it differently
If England said eating baby aspirin is a cure for cancer
[it is and they have], TV is not going to race to get you to start taking it, there's no money in aspirin, and Pharmaceutical advertisers probably won't like it.
There are
a lot of people who say Ruppert Murdoch intentionally frames the news to create a sense of fear, and that he has a reason for doing it. I know Fox news gets a lot of air-play on other networks, and i believe everyone is so willing to echo his content because it saves money, keeps a sense of continuity across the networks, and actually suits the other network's agendas and political interests as well.
Station Owners get to voice their political opinions thru their local stations, we see it all the time, Channel 7 trashed this or that because he's a Republican. just shrug it off i guess, nothing we can do if he asks his reporters to make it sound bad.
Networks want to cultivate an environment that is friendly to their clients and their own interests, I believe. And I think that means softening us up on certain topics, like
Tort reform, corporations have wanted Tort reform for many years, so television networks have shone a negative light on court cases where people sue corporations & doctors, and take excessive settlements (or that's the way they frame it).
They have us convinced we need milk for calcium, and that meat is concentrated veggies, and that we should and need to eat meat (my mouth just watered).
in the filtering, and the 'painting in a certain light' they are a political machine, able and willing to sway public opinion. no wonder they could not (and would not) do anything to stop the Iraq war.
I don't think we can trust them for news anymore, and they get their digs in even between commercial breaks
It all just seems so politicized to me now....they should really do something about this. ?we?
if you read all that, thanks, Now what do you think?
I was also afraid of getting shot for trespassing- in rural Delaware (I think it was) driving through I noted loads of signs on fences saying 'No Trespassing' every few metres, like loads of these signs. I concluded that such signage was the minimum legal requirement if you wanted to shoot a trespasser ? Maybe I was well wide of the mark! lol Anyway, it was pretty foreign to me as here in Scotland we have a legally established 'right to roam' across the land. As long as you are not causing damage and respecting privacy, there's no such thing as trespassing on open land. In a land where the old aristocracy and wealthy still own massive estates that they would love just use as their own hunting playground I really treasure this right to be able to access my countryside.
, but it's also illegal for us to carry knives on us in public, or anything that could be used as an offesive weapon (including those kubotan key rings) even for protection, which I expect is an odd concept in the US.