[Beyond Borders]

At first when I watched this I thought "so fucking what. Of course they're reading from scripts." But I guess the scary part is they're ALL reading from the SAME script. Meaning their content is not created in-house.

So the question is then, where does it come from? And whose agenda?

Also reason for concern is:

Quote:

In those cases, the wire story will come down and a station reporter or producer will copy and paste it word for word into a newscast. The problem with this policy is that reporters and producers simply take that content as gospel and no one in any newsroom ever bothers to fact check or verify if the wire story is correct. Simply put, in a newsroom, if it is on the wire it has to be true.”

Just some things to keep in mind before taking your truth from the news.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/definit...ripted-is/

[vinman]

   
   

I'm pretty certain that charts like this have been posted on the forum before. I can't remember who the OP was so I can't give them the credit.

[Patriarch]

It's ok, you can admit it, if we've ran this same script on two, or three, or ten local news networks.

And vinman, there is a similar chart like that for food products as well.

   

[Tail Gunner]

This is scary, but what is even scarier is that certain organizations acts as shills for the political parties and crank out false information as news, which is then picked up by lazy reporters who fail to fact-check the "stories."

The biggest culprit is the George Soros-funded "Media Matters for America," which is a liberal propaganda machine that masquerades as a non-profit group. Research has shown that many news rooms mindlessly parrot the same news stories, which are eventually traced back to e-mail blasts from Media Matters.

Ironically, things have gotten so bad that even some liberals have criticized Media Matters.

Quote:

Yesterday, Media Matters, the liberal media watchdog group, sent out to a fairly massive email list a talking points memo defending the Obama Justice Department’s obtaining of Associated Press phone logs. The talking points were distributed to 3,000 “progressive talkers and influentials,” according to Media Matters head David Brock. (But not me, for the record. I am not an influential.)

Like all talking points, these talking points were dumb and full of weird weaselly language and made worse by the fact that each claim was designed to be repeated by people on TV who presumably don’t believe what they say or at least don’t really care that much.

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/sorry_me...ng_points/

How could you possibly defend obtaining reporter's phone logs in a free country?

[Dr. Howard]

damn, this really burst my bubble. Why not just replace news anchors with speech to text robots? It really is "I'm Ron Burgundy?"

[WestIndianArchie]

Who still gets their news from local broadcasters?

[The Beast1]

(01-09-2014 09:46 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Who still gets their news from local broadcasters?

Who still watches the news?

I can't stand TV news. When I worked as a student for the student run TV show, I could not believe how low the bar was for everyone around me. It's crazy to think I felt like the most intelligent person in the room. To think, the majority of those people I thought were idiots are now working in the industry.

[kosko]

(01-09-2014 09:49 AM)frenchie Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 09:46 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Who still gets their news from local broadcasters?

Who still watches the news?

I can't stand TV news. When I worked as a student for the student run TV show, I could not believe how low the bar was for everyone around me. It's crazy to think I felt like the most intelligent person in the room. To think, the majority of those people I thought were idiots are now working in the industry.

A lot of people still do. The 11pm news is still a ratings leader and major AD revenue generator for local stations.

[Wahawahwah]

(01-09-2014 08:57 AM)wiscanada Wrote:  

damn, this really burst my bubble. Why not just replace news anchors with speech to text robots? It really is "I'm Ron Burgundy?"

Because unlike you, most people still live in the bubble.
Human anchors keep the illusion alive.

Robots do not.

[Dr. Howard]

(01-09-2014 09:46 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Who still gets their news from local broadcasters?

I still get my local news from local broadcasters. There isn't really some sort of underground news blogger for rural county X in tennessee. The closest thing to that is the barber shop.

[Suits]

I hate TV news. If I wanna get the stuff right off the wire, I can get it a lot faster and a lot more of it from an online newspaper. TV news is sooooo lame. They just cycle a few shots from a story that basically tell you nothing and they read the story slower than you could read it
yourself.

And they only cover like three stories in 20 minutes, given commercial breaks and their efforts to fluff up pointless "news" into something anyone cares about.

Newspapers are great. You can skim headlines and just read what is relevant to you. Given the inverted concept of newspaper writing, you can stop reading any story as soon as you've absorbed enough information as far as what you consider important.

[Timoteo]

And they'll all tell you they had to run with it because you can't have your competitors going with a story, and you're left out. It's a race to get it out there first, and brag that you got it first. They don't really care if it's true or not, because they'll just move on to the next story anyway. Being a reporter means never having to say you're sorry...or you were wrong.

[Sombro]

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

― Michael Crichton

Remember this the next time you see a topic in the news on which you know better than the reporter.

Also:

'LORRAINE' NEEDS OUR HELP: HOW AND WHY LOCAL TV NEWS TRIES TO SCARE WOMEN

Quote:

The content of any newscast is designed to drive female viewers to the shows. Whether you have a woman delivering the news or not, it’s more important that the content drive her to the newscast and keep her coming back. Think about it, what are the stories that fit in virtually every opening segment of a newscast? “High chairs that could kill your baby!” “Toys from China that could destroy your life!” and “Are the walls in your home safe?” With intros like those, you would be an unfit mother if you didn’t stay around through the break and watch the next segment. Child Protection Services may be knocking at your door if you grab the remote and turn to Judge Judy.

For thirty years in the TV news business, I sat through more meetings with management and consultants than I care to count, and the general tone of those meetings was usually this: the viewers don’t know crap, and without our help, they/she would wither into oblivion.

Quote:

I recall a time when jokingly a reporter actually used the graphic of “Lorraine” as the name of a person because he forgot to get her real name for the interview. It was an inside joke that made for a great laugh, but I did wonder what the lady thought was she watched herself misidentified for her barely 15 seconds of fame The foolishness is not lost on the people in the building, but if you want to keep your job, you give them what they want, no matter what you may think as a journalist. Fred may have a great story to tell, but it would get dumped in the digital dungeon if you brought it back to the station.

She “Needs our help” is perhaps the most demeaning line in the research. Forget the line about her “shopping at Wal-Mart” or is a “NASCAR fan”, those are other issues for another time, but she “Needs our help” caused me to react at the time it was presented to us in a staff meeting. I asked the simple question, “Who are we to put ourselves in a position that we know what she needs and how to help her?” You have to know that newsrooms are typically made up of young, single, 20-somethings who are working to find their own way in life, much less be there to help save somebody else. Good, hardworking people, but put in a position by management of authority over “Lorraine.” Now you know why you find TV news so silly, and insulting at the same time. It’s the game plan.

It should be mentioned that there are many times where TV news does a great job investigating and uncovering wrongdoing. But, on the rare occasions that that happens, the awards are handed out and promos are produced with praise heaped upon praise for all involved in the story that “Saved Lorraine from the Evil Business that tried to rip her off”. The reward is that the reporter gets a trophy that helps him/her get out of Yakima and on to Portland and the station gets to remind the viewers how they could not survive without them.