A while back, I ran across this Pearls Before Swine cartoon.
It got me to thinking about why I have been dissatisfied and unhappy with so much of the available news coverage compared to, when I was growing up. On the one hand, I figured, what passes as “news” does have considerably more time to fill on TV, even if I ignore the “all-news” cable channels as a mostly lost cause. Unfortunately, that increase in time means that they HAVE to find SOMETHING to fill it up, even if it’s commentary, or “fluffy,” “feel-good” stories (which AREN’T actually real NEWS).
Perhaps it’s just because I’m getting older, but I have to admit that I do wonder if what we consider to be the “marvel” of news via modern “VIDEO” (which isn’t just “television” any more because that was an “over the air” video form) is really all that helpful. In the "old days” we didn’t have as many options available, it’s true, but what we had WAS something of an improvement over just radio and newspapers. (And it tended to be confined to actual NEWS coverage, not “filler”) Thatababy commented on this not too long ago:
Perhaps it’s just because I’m getting older, but I have to admit that I do wonder if what we consider to be the “marvel” of news via modern “VIDEO” (which isn’t just “television” any more because that was an “over the air” video form) is really all that helpful. In the "old days” we didn’t have as many options available, it’s true, but what we had WAS something of an improvement over just radio and newspapers. (And it tended to be confined to actual NEWS coverage, not “filler”) Thatababy commented on this not too long ago:
On the other hand, we “olders” did have: Huntley & Brinkley, Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Edward R. Murrow, John Chancellor, John Cameron Swayze, Eric Sevareid (to name the ones I remember most), and a good many more doing actual, “on air” reporting of actual news. Those folks, generally, had considerable experience as actual reporters and took considerable effort to continue being actual “news reporter - journalists,” not just “entertainers,” so that the “Nightly News” wasn’t as close to being the sort of thing discussed in this The Flying McCoys cartoon (below) as much of it is today:
Nowadays, of course, many of us choose to use cable or satellite, or just “stream” whatever we can find, or rely far too much on social media (which must frequently be considered as both biased and “not really journalism) for what we consider to be NEWS, but often seems to really be just “filler.”
Then I saw this Pearls Before Swine cartoon.
Then I saw this Pearls Before Swine cartoon.
It reminded me that the whole idea of “Broadcast News” seems to have been revised a few years ago, perhaps, at least in part, because of the movie of that name. I believe that thought helped some of the reasons for my concerns to become a good deal clearer to me.
I did know, of course, that the “News” was now generally expected to be a revenue stream, not a civic/public service/duty. AND, I knew that the old “equal time” rules had been abandoned when cable came in, because cable was determined to not be subject to the same legal regulations as the media which used the “publicly owned” airwaves. This, of course, meant that attracting “eyeballs” became more important (for the most part) than actual clear, concise, factual “news” coverage. And, that soon became the rule for “broadcast” media, as well. My opinion is that this led to the practice of having, much of the time, what was covered in “news” broadcasts just being whatever seemed “popular,” outrageous, or simply attention-grabbing, whether or not it had any basis in actual fact or value as real information. This meant that the old “If it bleeds, it leads” notion of “tabloid “journalism” made sure that things were “reported” because they were “good stories,” meaning they would attract attention, not because they were important, or even factually correct. They could help sell advertising time, which was now the point. I believe quite strongly, that this alteration of motive on the part of “news media” accounts for much of the change of style we have seen.
Now, I’m not such a curmudgeon that I don’t believe that, at least occasionally, actual, significant information is reported in the “news,” but I will suggest that, especially since “social media” and “the internet” have reported so many (often ill-sourced and/or highly opinionated) sources as if they were actual “news” available, it has become extremely difficult to separate the garbage of rumors, lies, and forms of MISinformation from actual, legitimate facts.
This is quite disturbing, at least to me. I was trained (in a high school Journalism class) to engage in my own research; to evaluate sources; to check for accuracy, not just of what was said, but of its resemblance to established fact; to consciously seek multiple sources; and to understand that REAL “experts” generally are willing to admit that they COULD be incorrect (or lack complete information). Too many people seem to think that something MUST be true just because “SOMEONE” (an “influencer”) said so, especially if it gets repeated frequently enough. Well, I would suggest that the appropriate response to that notion is: “NO!”
It’s worth remembering that for a VERY long period of time it was an accepted “fact” that the Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow people of the world, who were, of course, non-Caucasian, non-European, and non-Christian, were clearly “PROVEN” to be inferior to those who were Caucasian, European, and Christian. This was, of course mostly because the Caucasian, European, Christian “educational system” (controlled by Caucasian, European, and Christian aristocrats [political and religious] leaders) said so.
Did you get that? Does it make any sense to YOU? Is it as COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS as I think it is? Remember that these “inferior” peoples built the Pyramids, Stonehenge, the cities and monuments of South America, the Greek, Roman, and Chinese Empires (among others), etc. They also (probably) crossed the Bering Land Bridge to North America, or sailed across the oceans and actually settled significant parts of the world which those Europeans knew nothing about. It’s also true that THOSE (non-Caucasian, non-European, and non-Christian) PEOPLE had generally well-functioning governments, societies and cultures while their counterparts in Europe were still trying to figure themselves out of their caves. They may have had what Europeans considered problems, but (if one is honest), so did those Europeans.
Then, we should consider that there was the “clearly established fact” that the Earth was flat (with edges, yet), and was the center of the Universe, with the stars and planets revolving around it in/on “crystalline spheres,” at least to the Caucasian, European, and Christian folks. And, those ideas were, of course, “OBVIOUSLY TRUE” for quite a while, as I remember my study of history, which has NOT been modified by the current “culture warriors.” Also, of course, the “Black Plague,” which wiped out a significant portion of the European population was the result of “breathing bad vapors.” The list COULD go on and on ….
My point here is not to “knock” Caucasian, European, and Christians (after all, I AM one), but to say that there is a long history of many sorts of humans establishing beliefs that some things were/are ABSOLUTE FACTS, which, after further information was available, turned out to be just as obviously, untrue.
I’d suggest that a certain amount of pessimism isn’t a bad thing these days when listening to what almost anybody says (including ME!). I’d also suggest (it’s probably the “Sherlockian” in me coming out) that determining what’s actually important may (in most cases) involve the need for some careful examination, observation and verification of the underlying assumptions. This Wizard of Id cartoon isn’t as far from a general truth as many of us would wish when applied to some “news sources.” A good-looking, glib “reporter” does NOT really make something more likely to be actually TRUE!
I did know, of course, that the “News” was now generally expected to be a revenue stream, not a civic/public service/duty. AND, I knew that the old “equal time” rules had been abandoned when cable came in, because cable was determined to not be subject to the same legal regulations as the media which used the “publicly owned” airwaves. This, of course, meant that attracting “eyeballs” became more important (for the most part) than actual clear, concise, factual “news” coverage. And, that soon became the rule for “broadcast” media, as well. My opinion is that this led to the practice of having, much of the time, what was covered in “news” broadcasts just being whatever seemed “popular,” outrageous, or simply attention-grabbing, whether or not it had any basis in actual fact or value as real information. This meant that the old “If it bleeds, it leads” notion of “tabloid “journalism” made sure that things were “reported” because they were “good stories,” meaning they would attract attention, not because they were important, or even factually correct. They could help sell advertising time, which was now the point. I believe quite strongly, that this alteration of motive on the part of “news media” accounts for much of the change of style we have seen.
Now, I’m not such a curmudgeon that I don’t believe that, at least occasionally, actual, significant information is reported in the “news,” but I will suggest that, especially since “social media” and “the internet” have reported so many (often ill-sourced and/or highly opinionated) sources as if they were actual “news” available, it has become extremely difficult to separate the garbage of rumors, lies, and forms of MISinformation from actual, legitimate facts.
This is quite disturbing, at least to me. I was trained (in a high school Journalism class) to engage in my own research; to evaluate sources; to check for accuracy, not just of what was said, but of its resemblance to established fact; to consciously seek multiple sources; and to understand that REAL “experts” generally are willing to admit that they COULD be incorrect (or lack complete information). Too many people seem to think that something MUST be true just because “SOMEONE” (an “influencer”) said so, especially if it gets repeated frequently enough. Well, I would suggest that the appropriate response to that notion is: “NO!”
It’s worth remembering that for a VERY long period of time it was an accepted “fact” that the Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow people of the world, who were, of course, non-Caucasian, non-European, and non-Christian, were clearly “PROVEN” to be inferior to those who were Caucasian, European, and Christian. This was, of course mostly because the Caucasian, European, Christian “educational system” (controlled by Caucasian, European, and Christian aristocrats [political and religious] leaders) said so.
Did you get that? Does it make any sense to YOU? Is it as COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS as I think it is? Remember that these “inferior” peoples built the Pyramids, Stonehenge, the cities and monuments of South America, the Greek, Roman, and Chinese Empires (among others), etc. They also (probably) crossed the Bering Land Bridge to North America, or sailed across the oceans and actually settled significant parts of the world which those Europeans knew nothing about. It’s also true that THOSE (non-Caucasian, non-European, and non-Christian) PEOPLE had generally well-functioning governments, societies and cultures while their counterparts in Europe were still trying to figure themselves out of their caves. They may have had what Europeans considered problems, but (if one is honest), so did those Europeans.
Then, we should consider that there was the “clearly established fact” that the Earth was flat (with edges, yet), and was the center of the Universe, with the stars and planets revolving around it in/on “crystalline spheres,” at least to the Caucasian, European, and Christian folks. And, those ideas were, of course, “OBVIOUSLY TRUE” for quite a while, as I remember my study of history, which has NOT been modified by the current “culture warriors.” Also, of course, the “Black Plague,” which wiped out a significant portion of the European population was the result of “breathing bad vapors.” The list COULD go on and on ….
My point here is not to “knock” Caucasian, European, and Christians (after all, I AM one), but to say that there is a long history of many sorts of humans establishing beliefs that some things were/are ABSOLUTE FACTS, which, after further information was available, turned out to be just as obviously, untrue.
I’d suggest that a certain amount of pessimism isn’t a bad thing these days when listening to what almost anybody says (including ME!). I’d also suggest (it’s probably the “Sherlockian” in me coming out) that determining what’s actually important may (in most cases) involve the need for some careful examination, observation and verification of the underlying assumptions. This Wizard of Id cartoon isn’t as far from a general truth as many of us would wish when applied to some “news sources.” A good-looking, glib “reporter” does NOT really make something more likely to be actually TRUE!
Still, I have great sympathies for the feelings expressed in this New Yorker cartoon from some time ago.
I DO believe that being at least reasonably well-informed is, in the long run, a desirable thing, but it also appears to be true that it’s getting harder to be so and the “news media” (not just on television, but ALL of it) doesn’t seem to be doing much to make it any easier. I DO have considerable sympathy for local newspapers, local TV stations and other, at least semi-independent information sources, many of whom are trying to survive in what has become truly “cutthroat” businesses while making real efforts to actually be fair and objective, even if they don’t always succeed completely.
Garfield had an idea back a ways which, I suppose, MIGHT help to attract “eyeballs” to such news, but, I confess, I’m unconvinced that much in the way of the subtle details of real news could be captured very successfully by this technique.
Garfield had an idea back a ways which, I suppose, MIGHT help to attract “eyeballs” to such news, but, I confess, I’m unconvinced that much in the way of the subtle details of real news could be captured very successfully by this technique.
I wish that I had better answers to the difficulty of getting people to actually take this concern with some degree of seriousness. I DO think being informed and aware is important and that it has become/is becoming more difficult to be so. That is, of course, if one truly wants FACTUAL information, as opposed to “what someone on the Internet said twelve times.”
Personally, I confess that I do, on occasion, have a strong desire to simply avoid the whole mess using the process suggested in the Luann cartoon shown below,
Personally, I confess that I do, on occasion, have a strong desire to simply avoid the whole mess using the process suggested in the Luann cartoon shown below,
but that seems to be a bit too much of a cop out. I DO believe that reality is important and it’s probably worth the effort to at least attempt to determine what it truly is, especially in an election year.
The real challenge, I believe, is being well enough informed to vote intelligently, without having to make it a full-time job (while avoiding heart attacks, strokes, and other assorted psycho/medical difficulties) and still actually obtain the needed information.
Assuming that I make it through the next couple of weeks, I expect I’ll return with something else to rant on about. I wonder what it might be? Maybe, I won’t rant, but just write something amusing? We’ll see. I think I’ll give that some thought, but first I have to shut off the “news.”
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
The real challenge, I believe, is being well enough informed to vote intelligently, without having to make it a full-time job (while avoiding heart attacks, strokes, and other assorted psycho/medical difficulties) and still actually obtain the needed information.
Assuming that I make it through the next couple of weeks, I expect I’ll return with something else to rant on about. I wonder what it might be? Maybe, I won’t rant, but just write something amusing? We’ll see. I think I’ll give that some thought, but first I have to shut off the “news.”
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
RSS Feed