I just read through the article and then read through the blogs. %u201CJust 1vet%u201D, keep it up, we need informed people who have been involved. Those who %u201CYawn%u201D over an article like this are too use to being blasted by hype from the media. If they would take the time to read more substantial material rather then just read the news paper or watch TV for entertainment they would be applauding this article.
The problem is easily defined by one word...objectivity. It seems to the average "consumer" of news, I think, that everyone connected with the mainstream media has an axe to grind. Pure truth gets overwhelmed by personal feelings, concern for the bottom line, and even incompetence.
The only sources of news I trust for the unvarnished truth are PBS and NPR. I don't think it's a coincidence that both of them are non-profit organizations.
I actually feel sorry for people who work for the MSM. If they started out with any illusions at all of being true journalists, their bubbles must have been quickly burst when they found out that the advertisers and politicians wielded more influence than they could ever dream of.
I have nothing but respect for the job you're attempting to do but from here you look like Hans Brinker.
I travel the internet from msnbc.com, to abc, to cnn, to fox and then somewhere in between I ponder the source of information considering persons, places, and things that are relevant compared to my past, present and future. Most often the news is about people fighting over land, oil, water, drugs, religeon, ***, sports, the arts, power, space, and money (power again). I enjoy reading about these things happening naturally and not as contrived by the media. The media has a product and it comes with an unwritten warranty enforced by the human brain. This is the USA where you can take all you want and return the rest any way you choose. If you don't like the way one source is presenting the news - look at the options. It is wonderful to be in a country (the USA) where you are able to turn the media tools on and off of your on free will. I found this particular article very interesting but then again I am just1vet.
#1 Don't interview writers when they have a book coming out. Wait and see if the book is any good first. #2 Stop giving everyone a position forum. When you interview someone, make the interviewee list and describe counter-arguments before they offer their own. #3 Stop the teasers. If the news is worth hearing, then say it. #4 Take the ads off the website. How can we believe you about oil if this site is indirectly paid for by them. #5 Get rid of the pre-madonnas. No one deserves over a million dollars a year for reading the news. No one.
I am not terribly old (47), but when I was a kid living in the country, we got 3 channels on TV (antenna). You watched the evening news. That was it, other than the daily paper. No talk radio that I recall. No internet. What a huge difference in such a short amount of time.
When my parents were children, they had no electricity or telephone. And no access to a daily newspaper. Their only news was from the radio.
How much has changed in only 2 generations! And not for the better. I recall my parents always had time to make small talk, generally about the weather or some local event. They did not have their noggins crammed full of the garbage that now passes for news, the stuff that feeds the 24/7 news machine. I envy their time.
This looks like a one-way highway we are going down. I don't think it is going to get better...
I nearly fell asleep reading this boring article, his use of terms and phrases makes it look as though he was writing this for a high school essay, so if you all do not mind I am off to bed to dream about how much our mass media" contributed to making society passionless, "leveled," and superficial" "yawn" good night
To Mr. Meyer, Thank you for your commentary. It is very refreshing to read your work and you are an important journalist. Although I consider myself a capitalist, I believe this discussion is coming to a point where we have to consider the ill-effects on society of solely for-profit public media, particularly where political information is concerned.
As an example, in Switzerland, the government issues information to the citizens on each referendum, pro, contra and the government's own recommendation. This does not preclude private parties from publicizing their viewpoints.
Also, I would support a restriction on political advertising that candidates may not mention or discuss their opponents by name, but remain focused on themselves and their own achievements.
Finally, we need to restrict the amount of money spent on political advertising and elections. We are making a circus of our democracy and we will go to the dogs unless we sober up and regain responsibility and civility.
re:"due to the consistent misreporting or not reporting by our liberal MSM wolfpack "...
I completely disagree as the last time I checked *ALL* the major media outlets were owned by huge corporations, most of their CEOs having endorsed GW in the 2004 election (Viacom's/CBS CEO endorsed GW in a trip to Asia in early 2004). Even most newspapers are owned by media conglomerates interested in increasing profits and keeping advertisers happy rather than reporting ALL the news...
I heard a radio broadcast of a press club luncheon several years ago where a now retired major newspaper editor said the owners of the paper used to be happy with an 8% margin, but the new owners were upset with 16% and he was told he couldn't report certain stories that would shine a bad light on major advertisers. He was happy to retire...
The media is 'liberal' just like the the Republicans really want to make abortion illegal and lose one of their hot button issues...
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
%u201CJust 1vet%u201D, keep it up, we need informed people who have been involved.
Those who %u201CYawn%u201D over an article like this are too use to being blasted by hype from the media. If they would take the time to read more substantial material rather then just read the news paper or watch TV for entertainment they would be applauding this article.
The problem is easily defined by one word...objectivity. It seems to the average "consumer" of news, I think, that everyone connected with the mainstream media has an axe to grind. Pure truth gets overwhelmed by personal feelings, concern for the bottom line, and even incompetence.
The only sources of news I trust for the unvarnished truth are PBS and NPR. I don't think it's a coincidence that both of them are non-profit organizations.
I actually feel sorry for people who work for the MSM. If they started out with any illusions at all of being true journalists, their bubbles must have been quickly burst when they found out that the advertisers and politicians wielded more influence than they could ever dream of.
I have nothing but respect for the job you're attempting to do but from here you look like Hans Brinker.
Randi
Otherwise the media is only there to keep the people HIGH on MONEY, but LOW on CASH.
#1 Don't interview writers when they have a book coming out. Wait and see if the book is any good first.
#2 Stop giving everyone a position forum. When you interview someone, make the interviewee list and describe counter-arguments before they offer their own.
#3 Stop the teasers. If the news is worth hearing, then say it.
#4 Take the ads off the website. How can we believe you about oil if this site is indirectly paid for by them.
#5 Get rid of the pre-madonnas. No one deserves over a million dollars a year for reading the news. No one.
More to come...Watch for it!
I am not terribly old (47), but when I was a kid living in the country, we got 3 channels on TV (antenna). You watched the evening news. That was it, other than the daily paper. No talk radio that I recall. No internet. What a huge difference in such a short amount of time.
When my parents were children, they had no electricity or telephone. And no access to a daily newspaper. Their only news was from the radio.
How much has changed in only 2 generations! And not for the better. I recall my parents always had time to make small talk, generally about the weather or some local event. They did not have their noggins crammed full of the garbage that now passes for news, the stuff that feeds the 24/7 news machine. I envy their time.
This looks like a one-way highway we are going down. I don't think it is going to get better...
Thank you for your commentary. It is very refreshing to read your work and you are an important journalist. Although I consider myself a capitalist, I believe this discussion is coming to a point where we have to consider the ill-effects on society of solely for-profit public media, particularly where political information is concerned.
As an example, in Switzerland, the government issues information to the citizens on each referendum, pro, contra and the government's own recommendation. This does not preclude private parties from publicizing their viewpoints.
Also, I would support a restriction on political advertising that candidates may not mention or discuss their opponents by name, but remain focused on themselves and their own achievements.
Finally, we need to restrict the amount of money spent on political advertising and elections. We are making a circus of our democracy and we will go to the dogs unless we sober up and regain responsibility and civility.
re:"due to the consistent misreporting or not reporting by our liberal MSM wolfpack "...
I completely disagree as the last time I checked *ALL* the major media outlets were owned by huge corporations, most of their CEOs having endorsed GW in the 2004 election (Viacom's/CBS CEO endorsed GW in a trip to Asia in early 2004). Even most newspapers are owned by media conglomerates interested in increasing profits and keeping advertisers happy rather than reporting ALL the news...
I heard a radio broadcast of a press club luncheon several years ago where a now retired major newspaper editor said the owners of the paper used to be happy with an 8% margin, but the new owners were upset with 16% and he was told he couldn't report certain stories that would shine a bad light on major advertisers. He was happy to retire...
The media is 'liberal' just like the the Republicans really want to make abortion illegal and lose one of their hot button issues...