Guardian UK: Why TV news in the US is utter rubbish

[marmar]

Why TV news in the US is utter rubbish
It's not just that world events are ignored in favour of celebrity gossip. News anchors skew the facts to provoke debate

Kieren McCarthy
guardian.co.uk, Thursday August 07 2008 19:30 BST



For years it has been a joke that news in the United States is terrible: obsessed with trivia and celebrity; fronted by Botox bimbos; forever interviewing citizens about some artefact of small-town life when a major news story is breaking elsewhere.

Well, the truth is that it's far, far worse than that. There are a multitude of news channels - CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, PBS, Fox. But after an hour of flipping between them during lunchtime last week, this was the sum total of information gleaned: there are two US presidential candidates; they have produced campaign ads; people have made video parodies and posted them on the internet; a US TV news host appeared on a US TV chatshow last night; and someone said something controversial (read ignorant) on a different TV show the day before.

In the meantime, one of the most sought-after war criminals in the world had been arrested and sent for trial; several new scientific breakthroughs had been announced; Zimbabwe edged carefully toward shared government; the Indian government dealt with votes of no-confidence and terrorist attacks; and countless other real stories came and went. For millions of Americans, these events appeared as 15-word tickertapes at the bottom of their 36-inch widescreen TVs.

It's not the absolute dearth of real news that is the problem, however. It's the fact that the news that is presented isn't news but mindless, misleading gossip. The clearest example of this is when one of the (between two and six) commentators on any given story provides their "analysis".

This comprises of showing a video clip and then talking with the assumed voice of the person in the clip. So, for example, Barack Obama gave a press conference. A clip of around four or five seconds of what he said is shown and then the TV studio people take over. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/07/usa.uselections2008

[NNN0LHI]

1. We can beat the Repigs

The media I am not so sure about.

Don

[spanone]

5. yep, obama's running against the entire press corps

[pansypoo53219]

19. i think he's playing them(i'm benign)

until in. then we must have open season on the gnews.

teevee is making life eternal high school. no news, just rumor and innuendo.

[Gabi Hayes]

28. smedley!

did you read the book?

or any of his bios?

[Overseas]

2. K&R and thanks to the Guardian for telling it like it is ! /nt

[YOY]

3. There's no constitutional way to fix it that I can think of unfortunately...

Freedom of speech works well when you've got an agenda to push and lots of money but when you have none you can't get the truth out easily...

[Marr]

9. Sure there is. Freedom of speech doesn't even come into it, IMHO.

They're using the commons (our airwaves) for profit. They can be required to conform to just about anything in exchange for that access.

Wouldn't do anything for cable, of course.

[warren pease]

16. Taking laws like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act out of cold storage and actually using them...

... to begin reversing the damage done over the past 30 years by corporate-sponsored legislation and FCC exemptions that have encouraged media consolidation to the point that, today, six giant holding companies control more than 85 percent of everything Americans see, hear and read. In other words, a wise and incredibly power set of tools to narrow the range of approved American opinion to a couple of degrees of arc.

This means the marketplace of ideas is reduced to a single stall selling bland, innocuous, corporate-approved messages of compliance, subservience, wage and debt slavery, and life-long oppression by those who are naturally selected for their sociopathic lack of conscience.

In 1983, when Ben Bagdikian wrote "The Media Monopoly" explaining the causes and effects of media consolidation, there were about 50 companies that controlled the content and "spin" of all mainstream information sources in America. We should be so lucky.

Lousy federal governance created these "media monopolies" and anti-trust legislation already on the books can break them into small pieces.

Assuming a congress not completely corrupted and bribed into submission by the reigning corporatocracy -- including those same six conglomerates -- this would be a no-brainer. But that also assumes a congress that acts in the interests of its constituents rather than its corporate paymasters.

So it's checkmate. Unless voters fire every single member of congress whose voting record matches the interests of their top 20 corporate sponsors, things will continue as they are -- government of, by and for the richest of the rich and screw the rest.


wp

[JDPriestly]

18. Yes there is. Turn off your TV and get your friends, neighbors

and family to do the same.

Go to the library. Check out books. Read.

Talk to your friends. Get on good websites on the internet and inform yourself. Read foreign newspapers. Just get the trash out of your life.

As part of your decluttering effort, shut out the noise -- the meaningless chatter.

We are responsible for what we hear and see.

[YOY]

23. Great personal fix...does nothing on a national level to fix things

n/t

[JDPriestly]

24. If enough people do it, it fixes everything.

Be the first to start the trend in your neighborhood. Stop complaining. Get active. You may lose a few pounds while you are at it. (assuming you need to lose a few pounds.)

[Solly Mack]

4. Dammit! The political leanings of that big ball of twine matters!

[marmar]

6. Teehee.....That reminds me of "National Lampoon's Vacation".....

Didn't they stop en route to see the world's biggest ball of twine? :)

[Solly Mack]

7. and they were the better informed for going too!

the twine spoke to their inner beings

[malaise]

8. Not critical enough

but a good start.

[Frustratedlady]

10. This article should be sent to all the major news agencies/channels

They've probably read it, but we need to let them know that WE have also read it and know what a farce they are.

This constant pounding and pounding over two or three sentences...hour after hour...program after program...rerun after rerun is an insult to our intelligence. It's like the only news is the election and the soundbite of the day. Sheesh! Give us a break!

[OneBlueSky]

11. wouldn't know . . . haven't watched tv news in over ten years . . . n/t

.

[barbtries]

12. he's right

no wonder i haven't looked at it except when forced to by being inside an office or a bank for about 10 years now. that mindless crap - i haven't missed it.

[LeftinOH]

13. Unless its a MAJOR disaster, or the death of a princess...its not worth risking low ratings

on political happenings in other countries. All the networks need sponsors, and sponsors aren't going to tolerate low viewership. The BBC is great, but a state funded news organization in the USA would not go over well.

[City Lights]

14. US News is "mindless, misleading gossip."

Nailed it.

[malaise]

27. And to reinforce her point

It's all John Edwards.

[Blue_Tires]

15. kick for truth

it seems like the more the talking heads moralize about minutiae and dumb down the coverage, the more popular it gets!

[hootinholler]

17. But they failed to mention that many of us also get news from the BBC!

I liked the bullet lines like "Jerry Springer School of Journalism." :rofl:

Nice find! Thanks!
-Hoot

[LeftishBrit]

20. Good points; BUT let it never be forgotten..

that if British TV news is better than its American counterpart, much of our press is right down in the gutter.

'The Guardian' isn't too bad, but far more people get to read the Daily (Hate)- Mail, Sun or Daily Express - and those aren't fit for loo paper.

[SalviaBlue]

21. This is a very good article. Lays it out. K&R

Thanks for posting.

[fla nocount]

22. What a doofus, watching TV news then writing an article to brag about their wasted time. n/t

[Solly Mack]

25. kick

[TheUnspeakable]

26. k&r

[girl gone mad]

29. You know it's bad whren the British..

tabloids, er, I mean, papers are complaining.

[marmar]

30. Umm, the Guardian is not a British "tabloid" in the figurative sense.

It's tabloid-sized, but I prefer that anyway.

[girl gone mad]

31. I read the Guardian online..

and the reporting is usually good. I was trying to make light of the fact that, at least the last time I was in London, the daily papers primarily led with gossip and tabloid-style journalism. Maybe things are different now?

[LeftishBrit]

32. No, the daily papers are and will probably always be the same!

And given to whipping up hate against immigrants (especially), Muslims, gays, single parents, etc.

You have the RW talkshows, we have the RW tabloids.