Cable and Internet News Networks

Tarkus · 02-11-2003, 06:30 PM

After viewing that the Iraq War game is one of the top news items on msn.com I starting thinking. Were we better off before cable and internet news networks? Are things so blown out of proportion and hyped up that we don't respond appropriately to certain news? Would OJ be behind bars (and rightfully so) if it weren't for Court TV? Would people be against war as much if we couldn't see it "up close and personal"? What's your view on this?

Tarkus

bosshogg23 · 02-11-2003, 06:36 PM

I love cable news networks. I watch MSNBC frequently(apparently the only person who does).

I cant watch local news so I absolutely feel we are better off now with the internet/cable news networks.

We didnt get to see the Afghanistan war as much as we got to see the Gulf War and people certainly supported it. Granted VERY different circumstances but I think the options are a good thing.

ice4277 · 02-11-2003, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bosshogg23
I watch MSNBC frequently(apparently the only person who does).

I thought I was the only one who watched it

Less left-leaning than CNN and nowhere near as opinionized as Fox News.

sterlingice · 02-11-2003, 06:52 PM

I'm really glad for the internet. The news networks bother me for reasons stated a while ago in the "no more heroes" thread (or whatever it was called). My favorite thing is to hear people call Fox news "unbiased"

SI

Tarkus · 02-11-2003, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ice4277
I thought I was the only one who watched it Less left-leaning than CNN and nowhere near as opinionized as Fox News.

Umm, Fox News is by far the best IMHO. CNN I won't even look at anymore, and MSNBC is almost as bad. Too liberal and too biased for my tastes.

Tarkus

bosshogg23 · 02-11-2003, 06:54 PM

Ive heard Democrats call Fox News conservative and Republicans call it liberal. All I know is Fox News is LOUD!

HornedFrog Purple · 02-11-2003, 07:01 PM

When exactly in the good old days did the media not contain some form of bias?

These cable/internet networks are simply an extension of what had been going on locally since the public news formats came into being. In other words, "no" has flawed reasoning. Even a stringent news source such as the AP has a slant to it. Inevitably there is no such thing as news without a slant.

The only difference is you are getting more access to different slants.

Tarkus · 02-11-2003, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bosshogg23
Ive heard Democrats call Fox News conservative and Republicans call it liberal. All I know is Fox News is LOUD!

Well that makes my point. I believe it's as close to center as the networks get.

Tarkus

Craptacular · 02-11-2003, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tarkus
Would OJ be behind bars (and rightfully so) if it weren't for Court TV?

So Court TV caused the jury to find him not guilty??

kcchief19 · 02-11-2003, 10:40 PM

There is a BIG distinction between being a good broadcaster and being a good journalist. You can be both (Cronkite and Murrow are the classics; I think Bernie Shaw was the modern day best), but it's hard.

Fox News is good broadcasting, but it's not good journalism. Case in point was the shuttle disaster. I found it on CNN first and flipped around to the other networks to see what they had, being the journalism junkie that I am. It was a good half hour after CNN began airing video of the breakup before Fox acknowledge that video existed -- and it was at least another 15-20 minutes after that they finally aired their own video.

I still give CNN the nod for best overall coverage. Fox is entertaining, but the ratings still show that when big news happens, CNN is the network of choice. MSNBC is Hollywood. I can't tell the different between that damn channel and E! half the time.

As for whether we are better off, I say no. I think there are one or two too many Internet/cable news operations, and as a result the talent pool is diluted. I see a lot of people on cable and network news who are not ready for prime time.

As usual, I beg to differ about the "bias" in the media -- and I've done plenty of research to back it up. My senior project in the J-School at Mizzou was on the "bias" of the media. One of my test projects was taking a group of people -- 1/3 each identified themselves as Democrats, Republicans or Indpendents -- and had them rate a series of stories on whether they had liberal or conservative bias. Invariable, the Republicans though the stories had a liberal bias, the Democrats thought they had a conservative bias and the independents thought the stories were in the middle.

I also have an interview with Tom Brokaw, who pointed out that in 1992, when Quayle was running nuts with the whole "liberal bias" angle that there was no reason for a single network reporter/anchor to be rooting for Clinton -- his quote essentially was, "We all make a lot of money and Clinton is going to take a lot of it away."

View Poll Results: Are we better off with cable and internet news networks?
No, I liked it in the good old days prior to all this media bias	3	23.08%
Since these shows don't impact viewer opinion, it doesn't really matter	0	0%
Yes, I can now make much more informed decisions	10	76.92%
Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll

02-11-2003, 06:52 PM	#4
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	I'm really glad for the internet. The news networks bother me for reasons stated a while ago in the "no more heroes" thread (or whatever it was called). My favorite thing is to hear people call Fox news "unbiased" SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

02-11-2003, 07:01 PM	#7
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	When exactly in the good old days did the media not contain some form of bias? These cable/internet networks are simply an extension of what had been going on locally since the public news formats came into being. In other words, "no" has flawed reasoning. Even a stringent news source such as the AP has a slant to it. Inevitably there is no such thing as news without a slant. The only difference is you are getting more access to different slants. __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

02-11-2003, 06:36 PM	#2
bosshogg23 College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Philly	I love cable news networks. I watch MSNBC frequently(apparently the only person who does). I cant watch local news so I absolutely feel we are better off now with the internet/cable news networks. We didnt get to see the Afghanistan war as much as we got to see the Gulf War and people certainly supported it. Granted VERY different circumstances but I think the options are a good thing.

02-11-2003, 06:54 PM	#6
bosshogg23 College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Philly	Ive heard Democrats call Fox News conservative and Republicans call it liberal. All I know is Fox News is LOUD!

02-11-2003, 10:40 PM	#10
kcchief19 Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Kansas City, MO	There is a BIG distinction between being a good broadcaster and being a good journalist. You can be both (Cronkite and Murrow are the classics; I think Bernie Shaw was the modern day best), but it's hard. Fox News is good broadcasting, but it's not good journalism. Case in point was the shuttle disaster. I found it on CNN first and flipped around to the other networks to see what they had, being the journalism junkie that I am. It was a good half hour after CNN began airing video of the breakup before Fox acknowledge that video existed -- and it was at least another 15-20 minutes after that they finally aired their own video. I still give CNN the nod for best overall coverage. Fox is entertaining, but the ratings still show that when big news happens, CNN is the network of choice. MSNBC is Hollywood. I can't tell the different between that damn channel and E! half the time. As for whether we are better off, I say no. I think there are one or two too many Internet/cable news operations, and as a result the talent pool is diluted. I see a lot of people on cable and network news who are not ready for prime time. As usual, I beg to differ about the "bias" in the media -- and I've done plenty of research to back it up. My senior project in the J-School at Mizzou was on the "bias" of the media. One of my test projects was taking a group of people -- 1/3 each identified themselves as Democrats, Republicans or Indpendents -- and had them rate a series of stories on whether they had liberal or conservative bias. Invariable, the Republicans though the stories had a liberal bias, the Democrats thought they had a conservative bias and the independents thought the stories were in the middle. I also have an interview with Tom Brokaw, who pointed out that in 1992, when Quayle was running nuts with the whole "liberal bias" angle that there was no reason for a single network reporter/anchor to be rooting for Clinton -- his quote essentially was, "We all make a lot of money and Clinton is going to take a lot of it away."

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)