At least we have Olbermann.

R @ 2:

At least we have Olbermann.

Even Olbermann couldn't resist doing Paris Hilton stories. The second half of his show usually stinks anyway, unless he decides to emote with one of his "special commentaries". Even the best lack all conviction.

War is a bore, bring forth more Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan anicdotes!

We haven't watched television at all in years. This is one of the reasons why. There's nothing but garbage and commercials on it. Commercials were one of the biggest incentives to give it up - we didn't want our kids exposed to the barrage of constant corporate brainwashing. But once you walk away from it and have really given it up - the thought of going back is unthinkable. It's been about 14 years for us now.

A television is a black hole. It sucks in all your time, your life, intelligent thought and even your soul as it makes you a slave to corporate interests. "Think like we think" - "go out and buy what we say you need to own or you won't be a happy person" - it's all bullshit.
*

anonymous @ 4:

R @ 2:

At least we have Olbermann.

Even Olbermann couldn't resist doing Paris Hilton stories. The second half of his show usually stinks anyway, unless he decides to emote with one of his "special commentaries". Even the best lack all conviction.

Or perhaps he's had to compromise with his producers to retain the half of the show he wants? I don't know - just a thought.
*

Trittydi @ 8:

We haven't watched television at all in years. This is one of the reasons why. There's nothing but garbage and commercials on it. Commercials were one of the biggest incentives to give it up - we didn't want our kids exposed to the barrage of constant corporate brainwashing. But once you walk away from it and have really given it up - the thought of going back is unthinkable. It's been about 14 years for us now.

A television is a black hole. It sucks in all your time, your life, intelligent thought and even your soul as it makes you a slave to corporate interests. "Think like we think" - "go out and buy what we say you need to own or you won't be a happy person" - it's all bullshit.
*

No kidding. Cancel cable TV, and your subscriptions to Newsweek and Time. It's all republican cheerleading BS anyways. Television media panders to it's audience. If you keep subscribing to it, you are only announcing your support for it. Crying about it on some blog while still writing checks to them is an exercise in futility.

Trittydi @ 10:

anonymous @ 4:

R @ 2:

At least we have Olbermann.

Even Olbermann couldn't resist doing Paris Hilton stories. The second half of his show usually stinks anyway, unless he decides to emote with one of his "special commentaries". Even the best lack all conviction.

Or perhaps he's had to compromise with his producers to retain the half of the show he wants? I don't know - just a thought.
*

Ah...that could well be, considering the network he works for.

last nite on PBS they had the Kalb report that addressed similiar issues.
Sean McManus of CBS stated they do get the news out there, but there are limitiations as it does have to look out for the interests of the share holders..

(thats what I got out of it...)

Anyway here is the blurb, feelfree to trackit down and listen.

Monday, July 30, 9:00pm

CHANNEL 32 (WHUT)

The future of journalism is discussed with Chicago Tribune editor Ann Marie Lipinski; CBS News and Sports president Sean McManus; Slate publisher Cliff Sloan; Wall Street Journal managing editor Paul Steiger.

As for the left liberal blogs, more often than not, "Liberal Blogs" such as Cnl link to objective stories that are missed in the mainstream. They invite debateto acquire more accurate and informative details. True, there are opinions expressed, but if a person is trained to do objective closed reading, vs the usual subjective interpretation practised in the private, theological home schools of the neo con elite, they can find the truth.

ITs in the details...

anonymous @ 4:

R @ 2:

At least we have Olbermann.

Even Olbermann couldn't resist doing Paris Hilton stories. The second half of his show usually stinks anyway, unless he decides to emote with one of his "special commentaries". Even the best lack all conviction.

But KO doesn't pretend he's doing serious news when he's not.

Television should be considered luxury like owning a motorcycle, a boat, or even an RV. Angry that your purchase is crap? then get rid of it like your motorcycle, boat, or RV. Of course you won't get any money back when you get rid of cable like you would selling the above, but at least you will stop sinking money into it.

Bonkers @ 15:

Trittydi @ 8:

We haven't watched television at all in years. This is one of the reasons why. There's nothing but garbage and commercials on it. Commercials were one of the biggest incentives to give it up - we didn't want our kids exposed to the barrage of constant corporate brainwashing. But once you walk away from it and have really given it up - the thought of going back is unthinkable. It's been about 14 years for us now.

A television is a black hole. It sucks in all your time, your life, intelligent thought and even your soul as it makes you a slave to corporate interests. "Think like we think" - "go out and buy what we say you need to own or you won't be a happy person" - it's all bullshit.
*

It's astounding, isn't it? When I moved to another apartment a few years back my new roomie and I decided against cable for various reasons, but one of my paramount reasons was that I just hated watching the garbage on every channel, starting with Fox and going all the way down to, yes, even channels like Discovery. Two years later, I had to move again, this time into a place with free cable and broadband access. The few times I have turned the tv on, it feels like I am being assaulted, having my intelligence insulted and otherwise being shouted at. It is amazing what just a few years of non-cable/non-tv living did to me. I think I knew, but could never quite appreciate just what a noise machine television is until I had turned it off for awhile. The good news is that I still do not watch tv, even with a borrowed set sitting in a corner of my room. I often forget that it is there for days at a time! And when I do turn it on, I can only take an hour or so of regular programming before it gets switched off again.

You're right. Seeing any TV (maybe at a party) is always an amazing experience for me. You have the ability to analyze it for what it is - I'm always amazed at just how really bad it all is - the tone of the commercials makes me near nauseous. This really is the most offensive aspect of it all. I don't know how people can stand the supreme idiocy of them.

will bushco cancel the 2008 election?
Just heard on neil rogers ( the article will be posted on his website tommorow).

Is this it?

Is this the straw?

WTF!!

Also with cable or satilite TV, I've been told, a person can get as few as 60
and as many as 155 channels...How many channels can a person watch at ONE
time(retorictical question)? Of those apparent numbers, how many programs are worth
spending more than one hour watching? How much of that one hour is taken up by
automobile/pharma/drug/etc. advertising commercials? I don't know because I would
much prefer to listen to some good classical music and read a book. But, from what
I have observed, it seems that a very, very high percentage of American have a love
affair w/their TV sets and would not know what to do if it went on the blink. Pathetic...

I watch TV. Recently I got a DVD copy of The Lone Ranger of 1939 with Lee Powell as the Masked Man of the Plain and Chief Thundercloud as Tonto, Jim Sharpe in Tarzan and the Golden Lion, Frank Merrill in Tarzan the Tiger, as well as all the Kirk Alyn Superman's, both Lewis Wilson (my favorite) and Robert Lowery's Batmans, and I just got The Haunting with Julie Christie, and am waiting on the 1919 version of L'Inferno.

But damn it all to Hoboken, they're still having trouble releasing the 1909 version of Frankenstein with Charles Ogle.

tyree @ 27:

murdocks buying the wall street journal just on cnn ,

With existing group of hacks and ultra-conservative journalist already w/WSJ,
Murdoch and they should fit together very well.

Now that Murdoch is now the owner of the Wall Street Journal. It won't be too long until we consider this once mighty paper Faux News Lite. I feel sorry for the true journalist working at the Journal, your days are numbered.

myiq2xu @ 29:

I wondered what had happened to all those young people who were inspired by All the President's Men and decided to become fearless muckraking journalists.

Then I realized what must have happened. They met Bob Woodward and decided to sell-out just like he did.

Sometimes I think the entire post-war baby boomer generation (of which I belong) sold out. Actually, I think that ALL the time.

Tom A. @ 34:

myiq2xu @ 29:

I wondered what had happened to all those young people who were inspired by All the President's Men and decided to become fearless muckraking journalists.

Then I realized what must have happened. They met Bob Woodward and decided to sell-out just like he did.

Sometimes I think the entire post-war baby boomer generation (of which I belong) sold out. Actually, I think that ALL the time.

I didn't sell out. But I feel like Chief Dan George in The Outlaw Josey Wales":

"I didn't surrender neither. But they took my horse, and made him surrender."

I know the Fairness Doctrine applied to the airwaves and not newspapers, but its death was the beginning of the end for REAL balanced news in America. And I do believe we can thank Reaganites for it.

I recently attended a Q&A featuring my Democratic (note, the Rahm variety) Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). An audience member asked her a well-phrased question about her willingness to support the return of FCC balance requirements and the dismantling of the dangerous media conglomerates and SHE DIDN'T EVEN SEEM TO KNOW WHAT THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE WAS.

That's what we're dealing with now, folks. So-called liberal legislators who don't even know what the rules used to be.

News as a public service!!??? Now that's something... A real blast from the past.. A crazy quaint idea that's just not profitable these days... And if nothing else has become clear in the last few years, it's that media moguls like Murdock and all the rest of em do like their profit.... Raking in big bucks... At any and all expense, including real news or something as quaint as the actual truth....JD

In 1999, I retired after just under fifty years in broadcast journalism. That period of time included employment at NBC-News, CBS-News, CNN, Scripps-Howard, and several other newspaper owned radio and television stations. I was at various times a news anchor, a news producer, a writer and a field reporter. I point this out in order to states that at only one time was a directed how to report a story. The majority of the time, I was under a standing that I was to report the story as I saw it because I was the guy on the scene. That standing order also applied to my time as in-studio anchor and writer.
I am now so glad that I am no longer a member of such a once proud profession. Just watching news organization ignore stories that during my active years, would have been headline, lead stories. I am nauseated at the dishonest way other stories are covered with an energy level equal to a dead fish.
And today I wonder what has become of the reporter whose joy in life was digging up the facts surrounding one or another story and where is the evidence that these people actually attended J school? I see and hear reporters who are grammatically challenged, fact challenged and even sementically challenged and they they are on the air and in some cases, are referred to as "pundits".
During my career, I worked alongside some of the best including John Cameron Swayze and Chet Huntley. Many of them took time out to teach a then novice such as I was. One thing I was told.....be truthful, be accurate and be complete. Thats a hell of a lot more important than being first. And when you report something, be ready to back it up...you might have to defend your work.
The problem actually has a second villain......the viewer and/or reader. They enjoy being voyeurs and as a result, they watch those show business gossip progr.ams where the lead story is more often than not what some celebrity has done to her hair. And they take one story and work it to death. I wont say how the newspapers cover that type of story such as the death of a celebrity because I find the print media has become as bad as radio & tv. But the readers and viewers dont stand up and complain. They dont insist that they are not uneducated and that they really want their news to cover important stories, even talking head type stories, because with the world in the shape it is, why should I be concerned about Paris Hilton or Britany Spears?

Bravo to Mika- and f@ck those two tools an either side of her.

The Wall St. Journal? Yeah, like I'm going to read that. Murdock can have it.

[...] Efron Contact the Webmaster Link to Article paris hilton Why TV and Radio Journalists Can’t Be Like Murrow Anymore » Posted [...]

The problem actually has a second villain……the viewer and/or reader. They enjoy being voyeurs and as a result, they watch those show business gossip progr.ams where the lead story is more often than not what some celebrity has done to her hair. And they take one story and work it to death. I wont say how the newspapers cover that type of story such as the death of a celebrity because I find the print media has become as bad as radio & tv. But the readers and viewers dont stand up and complain. They dont insist that they are not uneducated and that they really want their news to cover important stories, even talking head type stories, because with the world in the shape it is, why should I be concerned about Paris Hilton or Britany Spears?

I certainly don't stand for the declining state of journalism. In fact I don't think most people do. We just can't take it seriously anymore. If I could I would write to the networks and tell them what I think of their form of journalism. But who would listen to me? I'm only a minor. This is the perversely painful situation of being a minor: your opinion will be ignored, so why even bother trying? I think most of America is currently stuck in this 'I-will-be-ignored' mindset. It's self-defeating, and it's doubly terrible for people like me, who see that there are so many problems in the world, and want to fix them, but don't feel like they will be heard.

I'm sorry about that psudeo-rant, but I really needed to let it out.

newspapers have proven themselves to be obsolete. those that have moved online, are going to survive. However, they have to outperform sites like this one to earn what they thought they deserved.
remember, only truth in reporting matters, and if that is done without comment, it is a news site.

but we can't let them die until a president comes along and makes the toobz free can clear, permanently.
since this is all wishful thinking, we must realize that news and information is one thing they can't allow to promulgate without control. without their control. this exu has realized they aren't as smart as everyone thinks they were, and now must negate the flow of information as do other totalitarian states do.

will they get away with it?

Or the Weekly World News.

ysbaddaden @ 1:

Lung cancer?

I love your sense of humor - you're one sick puppy, my friend.

what about jon stewart, duh.

So long as net neutrality can be protected, the MSM "journalists" of print and broadcast media will become progressively more irrelevent.