General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Newsroom is making the MSM look like FOOLS.
When a fictional tv show does more hard hitting investigative & truthful journalism about the radical right-wing in 3 episodes than the entire MSM has done in the past decade you know the MSM has reached a new loooow.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)I should invite myself over to my has-HBO friend's place to watch it
Atman
(31,464 posts)They are poo-pooing it all over the place. Meanwhile, everyone I've talked to about it thinks it is one of the best new shows they've seen in years. Hmmm...something doesn't add up here.
.
DCKit
(18,541 posts)Farther downthread someone mentioned it's already been renewed for a second season (after only three episodes?????), but I have to wonder how much pressure HBO is under to kill it.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Bill Maher for one?
The MSM can't stand HBO because its shows are so good. If I could have cable that delivered only MSNBC and HBO, I might subscribe. But as long as Fox is on the must-have menu, I will not. I will not pay one cent to support Fox News or even their other shows.
RZM
(8,556 posts)That's your business and I'm not knocking you, but it seems a small price to pay if the tradeoff is quality entertainment that you'd enjoy.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)yes, I am that adamantly opposed to Fox News and to bundled cable. We should be able to select what programs we want in our bundle. Cable will find itself out of viewers if it doesn't change.
A simple cable from our computer to our TV and we get all kinds of internet fare online. I really don't care whether I watch shows when they are broadcast or later.
And it's easier to wash dishes or do something during TV commercials than during computer commercials (at least for me because I learned to time those things as a child), so advertisers get a better deal with internet showings than with cable in my opinion.
bloomington-lib
(946 posts)shagnasty
(21 posts)I looked for a long while to find a package without FOX and with MSNBC and access to HBO. Dish Network has a 14.95 package that fits the bill. You can add HBO to it. Includes CSPAN, Commedy Channel among others. You can find it on their web site and it's called "Welcome" package.
GTurck
(826 posts)that HBO, and most of the other cable channels, are owned by consortiums of the MSM. I have not seen Newsroom as I refuse to pay more for channels I would rarely watch but have heard the good buzz about it. In the end it is a show intended to make money for the owners of HBO. If it doesn't do that then it won't last no matter how refreshingly frank it may be.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)wilsonbooks
(972 posts)1monster
(11,012 posts)against me for clicking the "download" button.
dmr
(28,347 posts)wilsonbooks
(972 posts)No reason to download and no telling what viruses and malware you would pick up if you did.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)and I am sure at night. I watched it on rerun.
catbyte
(34,375 posts)ocd liberal
(407 posts)I stood up and gave it a standing ovation!!
Lionessa
(3,894 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)We've got in the UK on Sky Atlantic ,which shows HBO stuff , and it on tonight, Tuesday , @10pm here.
The Guardian didn't seem to appreciate it either but then I generally regard that outfit as a bunch of losers anyway.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2012/jul/04/the-newsroom-review-jonathan-bernstein
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)you have to log in to your account because it's rated MA:
rocktivity
april
(1,148 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I don't really do that much on the internet, but I object to the idea that Google can go keep a record of every gardening question I ask or everything I write or read.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)indie journalism at this point. To think that the big boys will go against their corporate bosses is crazy.
National Reader Supporter News or truth out are your two best bets right now
If you can afford to throw a few bucks to your local (in my case it would be the East County Magazine), we'd love you too.
It is time to realize the big boys are NOT going to do that... so we need to grow an alternate, independent media.
I mean, covering things like fires runs us gas and time, and well gear.
Covering hard hitting investigative pieces takes TIME, and resources are thin at best.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)Found it because of your post. I'm assuming you mean this site http://readersupportednews.org/, if not lemme know.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)annabanana
(52,791 posts)global1
(25,242 posts)I think around the time he owned CNN. Fonda plays Leona Lansing the CEO of Atlantis World Media, the parent company of ACN (Atlantis Cable News).
I'm wondering if she brought any personal touches to her role in the Newsroom from actual events that happened to Turner and her during this period.
In the program she is putting pressure on the President of the News Division - Charlie Skinner- played by Sam Waterston - to have Will McAvoy the anchor played by Jeff Daniels to ease up on the political commentary and banter because it could make life uncomfortable for her in her dealings with the politicians in Congress.
Episode 3 came down real hard on the Tea Party - and rightly so. They said things that weren't said on the run-up and the outcome of the 2010 elections where the Tea Party hijacked the Repug party.
What a great show. Can't wait for the future episodes. Sorkin is a genius.
But I would really like to get some comments from Jane Fonda on her role in this show and if she brings anything to the table because of her marriage to Ted Turner.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)From what you wrote I'll be able to figure which episode I watch tonight here in the UK.
tblue37
(65,336 posts)comments to Charlie (Sam Waterston), the director of her newsroom. The character, who owns the TV station, is a left-leaning Dem, but she threatens to fire the anchorman if he keeps saying the truth about the far right and its take-over of the Republican Party, and especially if he keeps alienating the Koch brothers by revealing their take-over of our entire country.
She admits that she agrees that the Tea Party and its recently elected candidates are idiots and dangerous to our entire political system, but she keeps yelling, "I have business before this congress, Charlie!"
In other words, even those who want to tell the truth, no matter how rich and supposedly powerful they are, are frozen in fear, because they know that they will be destroyed by the fascist powers of darkness if they dare to make a peep in the direction of telling the truth.
It's only partly a fear of losing ratings and thus advertising dollars. It is even more powerfully the fear of what those fascist powers will do to their ability to function at all. When Charlie says he thought she got where she was by being fearless, she sayd, "No, Charlie. I got where I am by knowing whom to fear"
I consdider this message so important because it emphasizes the degree to which fear of terrible reprisals operates to keep in line those whom we might ordinarily expect to rally to our side.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)If you don't pay on time....a well known device of control dating back to The Prince and Machiavelli.
And that is how it is done folks.
Stardust
(3,894 posts)It's amazing that we even have MSNBC and Current. And I wonder how much longer they can last. They aren't perfect, but I seethe when other liberals berate those networks. We are so close to not having either of them. Even if 99% of the viewers wanted this type of programming, it would make no difference to the PTB. If they feel threatened by an enlightened electorate, then whatever is fueling the enlightenment is walking on very thin ice.
I thought Jane gave a very heartfelt performance. Real insight into the dilemma facing left-leaning media moguls.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)If they feel threatened by an enlightened electorate, then whatever is fueling the enlightenment is walking on very thin ice.
You've stated succinctly why the corporate megalomaniacs have worked diligently to destroy our system of public education.
Critical thinking skills lie dormant within most of us, at the ready--I hope--to respond to the clarion call of social
Stardust
(3,894 posts)of higher order thinking skills program (HOTS).
chervilant
(8,267 posts)I started on my path to certification in Texas, a mistake that I am still working to overcome. God forbid you lean Democratic if you want to teach in Texas...
tblue37
(65,336 posts)just writing, but critical thinking, because decent writing skills derive from solid thinking skills.
I have often said that is is a mistake to think humans are rational creatures. We are not. We are creatures of instinct, emotion, and impulse--as are all other animals.
The difference, though, is that we can learn to think rationally and to hold those other motivating factors at bay while we do so. Even then, however, it takes will and effort to quiet such powerfully antirational tendencies while we critically analyze the issue at hand.
Over time, thank goodness, such suppression of antirational impulses becomes more or less habitual, so that thinking rationally gets easier with time and practice--and with age, becuase certain hormones quiet down with age.
But time can also reinforce the antirational impulses if one habitually surrenders to them instead.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)was teaching college algebra at a small community college. During my brief tenure there, I learned that the vast majority of our young adults are seriously deficient in their critical thinking skills, AND that they've been trained to rely on rote memorization to 'make good grades.'
Toward the end of my time there, I got a referral to privately tutor a young honors student who was attending a prestigious private school in a distant wealthy suburb. This student did well on homework (high Bs and an occasional A), but could not earn above a C on exams.
During our second session, I had an opportunity to assess this student's critical thinking skills, with a homework problem that challenged students to take a basic concept and apply it to a more abstract situation. I was so very hopeful, given how well the child seemed to understand the concept we covered.
However, it took this child almost 20 minutes to determine how to apply what was given, and to suss out HOW the given information led to the solution. I was tempted several times to just spoon feed this student, but I knew that I wouldn't be helping improve those test scores by so doing. I DID throw out a few hints--to no avail. When the student FINALLY prevailed, instead of celebrating this personal success, I was told, "I don't have time to figure out these types of problems!"
Needless to say, the parental units wanted a tutor who WOULD spoon feed their student, and I didn't get another opportunity to help this child flex those critical thinking skills.
BTW, you might appreciate Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind, which fully addresses your sage point about humans a rational beings.
Grins
(7,217 posts)That's why Fonda's character wanted the anchor to "tone it down" or she would fire him.
The Tea Party was just the icing.
It is a good show. Better than I thought it would be.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)The interview with the tea baggers...informing them that their
"grass roots" conference was paid for in full by the billionaire Koch brothers,
whom they had never heard of after boasting that all of their movement was
paid for by checks for 5 and 10 dollars by regular Americans-
Bwhahahahah!
Loved it!
BHN
EmeraldCityGrl
(4,310 posts)in which she stated she was bringing her exposure to the business while married to Turner
in her role. Unfortunately, I can't remember which interview. May be the one on On Demand
promoting the show, not sure.
Stardust
(3,894 posts)proud patriot
(100,705 posts)about Fonda and Turner
Esse Quam Videri
(685 posts)Man did they give it to the teabaggers and Koch Bros. Makes me have a smidgen of hope that there are some repugs who are sickened by what has become of their party.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)rocktivity
(44,576 posts)rocktivity
Enrique
(27,461 posts)proud patriot
(100,705 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,700 posts)hay rick
(7,607 posts)"Liberal media" is a bipolar phrase. It can be either a term of derision or a wildly inaccurate self-portrait. The Newsroom is what tv news might look like if it adhered to professional journalistic standards and ethics instead of pushing corporate agendas.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)tblue37
(65,336 posts)reporting at all, but centrist reporting--i.e., unbiased reporting of the truth.
Whereas Stephen Colbert says truth has a liberal bias, Charlie says "The truth is centrist." or "Facts are centrist." (I forget which phrasing he uses.)
The point is that reporting truth or facts should not be seen as biased or "liberal." It's only seen that way because the RW has gone so far toward blanket denial of anything that is in any way supported by verifiable facts.
eaglesfanintn
(82 posts)I've only watched the first two episodes, but I'm really enjoying it so far.
The MSM and, I'm sure, Faux News are hating it, but screw them. It does make them look foolish and like they're just following the dollars.
I'm a big fan of Sorkin anyway - just like The West Wing showed us how a President should act, The Newsroom shows us how the media should work.
randr
(12,411 posts)Last episode should not be missed.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)bulloney
(4,113 posts)and question whether they were off target or negligent in their coverage. Then they'll look at each other and give a collective "Meh!" and resume their wall-to-wall coverage of the Kardashians or give the RW spin of the political stories.
The fact that the MSM gerbils are lambasting this show is a ringing endorsement to watch it in my view.
Callmecrazy
(3,065 posts)Ep. 3 makes a good point about information broadcasting. It should not have any advertising during their show. If a company that advertises during the news hour becomes part of the news there is an obvious conflict of interest for the broadcaster. By being responsible and reporting the news they cut their own throat by losing that advertising revenue. There should be nothing that gets in the way of the truth. And maybe there would be a lot less grandstanding on television by the likes of Bill O'really, Sean Vanity, Glenn Bark and Rush Linbarf. If they couldn't attract advertising dollars, who the hell would let them spew that crap on their stations.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)they generally don't need much help looking like fools.
It's a matter of shame and disappointment for me, because were our MSM not so pathetic I would probably be thinking seriously about a career in Journalism. It can be a noble calling, but sadly, our MSM is corporate owned, corporate controlled and corporate serving.
Newsroom is a great show - and has made me wonder if maybe there's hope that we might possibly recover from the insanity one day. Not much hope, but perhaps a tiny bit.
Jessy169
(602 posts)you should try Public Relations. It isn't investigative reporting, but there is a lot of writing involved which if used for a good cause, can really make a difference. I started out in Journalism, switched to Public Relations, but ended up just a computer software engineer. But it isn't too late for you!
108vcd
(91 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Also called The Newsroom, but it aired in 1996.
Not Aaron Sorkin show.
but I will add: the 1996 show was good, and funny. I watched it all.
CrispyQ
(36,460 posts)wrongly report a Supreme Court ruling because they wanted to be first, over being correct.
Sounds like a great show. Will look for it on Netflix when it comes out.
DCKit
(18,541 posts)Gothmog
(145,136 posts)The second episode was weak but the pilot and the third episode were great.
dmr
(28,347 posts)the sausage is made, so to speak. Learning to know the inner workings is important to understanding the show. I thought the whole thing was fascinating & nervewrecking all at the same time.
I tried to imagine Maddow or O'Donnel, here.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The voice and language remind me of Keith Olbermann.
HIlton Brackett
(26 posts)With the Court upholding Citizens United, they spin every issue to create a coin flip out of every political race. sucking the maximum profits from the soul of America
EmeraldCityGrl
(4,310 posts)could ever be. Watching true events which occurred over the past decade,
reported clearly and accurately by a fictional news anchor with impressive
credentials is a fantasy given the slanted/ propaganda and bullshit that passes
for most news today. Even though the character, Will McAvoyis a moderate republican,
a network like Current(Al Gore's network) could pull this off.
The second episode is a bit muddled trying to establish characters.
The third episode (the latest) was dynamic. Jane Fonda's performance
as the network owner, CEO, whatever, may be the best work of her life.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)but I thought the third episode was great. I'll keep watching.
My only issue is all the little interpersonal drama stuff that seems a little "fluffy" for my tastes.
Daphne08
(3,058 posts)My husband and I love it!
Pisces
(5,599 posts)Women do not become hysterical or act like silly high school girls in front of their colleagues. I am sick of the cutesy, dumb but I'm really smart act who needs a good male boss to help her along.
Women in a male dominated field do not act like simpering fools.
Other than that it is a great show.
proud patriot
(100,705 posts)The women are strong STRONG ... The books are the song of fire and ice series. I believe the HBO series season 1 is available on dvd.
Season 2 just finished ......I can't wait for season 3
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)I can't see it ever having a definitive ending.
I'm still annoyed about Carnivale being dropped.
lob1
(3,820 posts)wickerwoman
(5,662 posts)I love the show but the two female leads are *so* irritating. They're like a throwback to lazy 1980s writing where you had a perfect, gorgeous, brilliant woman but you have to give her a flaw so you make her "clumsy" or "neurotic". Any woman (hell any person) in a real work environment who behaved even a fraction as unprofessionally as those two would be fired in a heartbeat.
I also think hiring the supermodel economist completely undermines the premise of News Night 2.0 where the only consideration should be facts, not sensationalism. Mackenzie basically admits that there are brighter economists (although she's "qualified" but she's not considering them because they're too ugly.
Anyway, yeah. It has all the makings of another West Wing but they need to seriously retool the female characters.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Here's some additional discussion on the issue:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/02/hbo-s-the-newsroom-aaron-sorkin-s-women-problem.html
http://www.vulture.com/2012/07/olivia-munn-defends-the-newsroom-topless-magic-mike.html
proud patriot
(100,705 posts)one thing i've been pondering is Fonda's character and the things ted turner had to face with CNN or maybe Gore with currentTV
pwb
(11,261 posts)It is nothing but opinion and I have my own.
upi402
(16,854 posts)I may check this show, though.
Mosaic
(1,451 posts)Any corporate media is suspect at this point in history. Newspapers, magazines, web sites like cnn.com, and even blogs that are run by corporations. I call them the one percent media, not the 'mainstream' as they would like us to call them.
GiveMeFreedom
(976 posts)The show is smacking the repubs, teabags, the rich, and corporations, etc. Now I can watch John Stewart, Steven Colbert, and The Newsroom to get real investigative journalism. Of course Bill Moyers and Dan Rather are also great, in my humble opinion.
davidwparker
(5,397 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)Haven't seen Newsroom yet,
but it is now on my list.
Thanks.
dotymed
(5,610 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"Suit the action to the word, the word to the action, with this
special observance, that you o'erstep not the modesty of nature:
for any thing so o'erdone is from the purpose of playing, whose
end, both at the first and now, was and is, to hold as 'twere the
mirror up to nature: to show virtue her feature, scorn her own
image, and the very age and body of the time his form and
pressure."
Hamlet, William Shakespeare
Moonwalk
(2,322 posts)a measure for how bad MSM was. Aaron Sorkin has the advantage of 20/20 hindsight and, thanks to this being fiction, the ability to stack the deck in his favor with fictional heroes. MSM had real people doing real reporting real time. Sorkin can use his fictional newsroom to criticize, but we have to be careful when it comes to viewing it as a valid argument as it's a strawman argument. Like pitting a real person against Superman in a comic book in order to show how weak the real person is.
Sorkin can certainly use his fictional newsroom to criticize how the media is manipulated now as well as then, and who pulls the strings, now as well as then. However, if we want to honestly argue how bad MSM really was, we need facts and comparisons to other, REAL news organizations that did better at the time, not to a fictional organization reporting news that happened two years ago--meaning news where the writer knows which events were important and which ones weren't. Newsrooms at the time didn't have the advantage Sorkin has for his fictional newsroom, the benefit of hindsight, etc.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)I recorded it on the trusty Sky Box hard drive and only just watched it. Excellent opening sequence with him and nice shot of her legs at the end as she walked down the corridor.
Hadn't realised she was a Mortimer. I used to fix her dad's tv back in the early sixties before she was born.