Guilty Pleasure TV shows

[amey01]

Nope, it's Nancy Grace and the latest soap opera murder case. The former "News" channels have become entertainment channels. They seek your tweets and then report them as news. They have idiots analyzing and arguing over the tiniest details of every news story. And every single channel on the dial has a "reality" show these days.

Because they don't want us to know the real issues. They want to hide the real issues behind all that crap. It is a decoy. A distraction from the issues that really matter. Mushrooms analogy.

Here a few months ago, a government agency was caught out releasing some really important transport information on January 5 or so - while everyone was on holidays, while there were games of test match cricket on to distract everyone, and the important information was about three lines of text buried in a 700 page report about nondescript rubbish. Media-management at its finest!

 

[Gordon Gray]

Dave,
Weather channel "talking heads" with cleavage. You are just too funny. :ROFL:

In the "ideal world", we will all be able to receive our desired stations "a la carte".

Too much money and too much control for that to happen in our lifetime.

Rich, absent Nancy Grace and the other drama folks, what's your call on CNN?

I watch it a bit and consider their "serious" reporting to be fairly neutral.

GG

PS: Are we finally seeing the media as an integral part of the overall "dumbing down" process in American society?

And yes I, for one, enjoy your rants. Unless, of course, they are directed at me.

 

[Rich]

Rich, absent Nancy Grace and the other drama folks, what's your call on CNN?

I watch it a bit and consider their "serious" reporting to be fairly neutral.

Gordon, my opinion of CNN is pretty low these days. I was one of their biggest fans when Ted Turner was in control. But over the past fifteen years, they have really been in a race to the bottom with FOX. I would say 75% or more of what they broadcast is "fluff." They spend a lot of time on weak human interest pieces, they waste way too much time on shock value crap, and they do precious little real investigative reporting. Compare them to something like the BBC and they fall woefully short of any real journalistic standard. Neutrality is nice and all (although I don't think they are even that), but I am looking for in-depth reporting of the news and I just don't think they do much of that any more. Lots of talking heads spouting off opinions and interpretations; very little digging, fact-gathering, and serious research or offering of reasoned analysis of the important events occurring around the world.

For instance, today I watched them a bit and they had lots of talking heads discussing all the emotional aspects of the Supreme Court debate on gay marriage. A pat-on-the-back interview with Rob Reiner talking about how he came to challenge the California law banning it. But there was absolutely no discussion of the actual legal arguments of the case being presented to the Court, nor any rational analysis of which Justices might come down which way based on their previous history and the questions they asked during the arguments. None. Zero. Zilch. But they spent tons of time reporting on the public opinion polls and how those polls have changed in the past few years. Overall, no investigative reporting or analysis of the legal issues, which is what the Court is actually going to consider in deciding this case.

So, in summary, CNN sucks almost as much as FOX in my opinion.

 

[jmschnur]

Try Rachel at msnbc.


J

 

[Len44]

Try Rachel at msnbc.
J

Gotta be careful. She is bright, articulate, well-reasoned, and makes one think.

Of course, some will feel like their heads are exploding... :devil:

 

[Gordon Gray]

Rich,

Thanks again for your insight and honesty.

It still begs the following question. Do the vast majority of people care anymore? And as a follow up, what percentage of people really want this type of "drill down, introspective, fact based / objective" reporting?

Sadly, not many, I think.

Folks that want the above are clearly in the minority.

Gordon

 

[twich54]

Gordon, IMo, folks that want it (like Rich) know how to research and find it, as for the majority........were a 'gobble and go' society !

 

[Gordon Gray]

Rich,

To your observation on CNN, the "fill in the blank" Italian Courts have decided to reverse the previous Amanda Knox verdict, which of course, was previously reversed.

And now CNN is obsessing about this issue, again. And showing the same old garbage from four years ago. And questioning whether she would return to Italy for another re-trial.

I think we all know the answer to that question. DUH!

Gordon

 

[Rich]

Gordon, in answer to your question, I just don't know about the vast majority of people. I know there are an awful lot of highly intelligent people in this country who would like some in-depth news on the tv, but I guess they are far outnumbered by those who are just looking for entertainment and for someone else to do their thinking for them. Our country has become very lazy in that regard. And as Dave said, the ones that want it can find it online. But online and print journalism can only go so far. I still think there is a place for hard core television journalism. Maybe someday.

And yes, I am sick of hearing about Amanda Knox, Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, etc., etc. Damn O.J. Simpson. I blame it all on him.

 

[eknuds01]

Sometimes I wish I could just "pay per view" for everything I watch vs some fee I pay each month and I don't watch/use 95% of it. I tend to be a creature of habit and watch the same channels over and over.

Maybe it is possible to to couple the internet with the TV and you can somehow download or stream that way, but I am not that savvy. I am also not sure if everyone program I watch is on the 'net and is able to be viewed via download or streaming.

I spend around $130/month for Verizon Fios, which is north of a $1000/year for cable and internet...ugh...to spend that much each year on TV!!!