|
|
I just love how when they refer to Fox, it's "partisan journalism". |
Posted on 09/12/2004 12:11:15 PM PDT by John Jorsett
Regardless of who wins the election, the campaign of 2004 has already made history. For the first time, a cable news channel -- Fox -- attracted more viewers than a broadcast network when they were competing head to head, covering the Republican National Convention.
Was this a watershed for a new partisan journalism in America? I think the real meaning is something else.
What happened this summer, and particularly last week, is likely to be recalled as the end of the era of network news. At the very least, mark this as the moment when the networks abdicated their authority with the American public.
Should we care? Consider: The rise of network television news was arguably the most important development in American politics in the latter half of the 20th century. The arrival of news divisions in the 1950s and '60s meant that for the first time citizens could regularly see events for themselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
CBS is just praying something comes along to distract the American public. They're stalling.
Excellent memo.
The writer of this column in the Post just doesn't get it. Oh, he sees that network news is losing its importance. But he thinks it is caused by them not covering the conventions. Nonsense.
People have turned to places where they can hear honest analysis and give-and-take, not the stacked deck that the networks present. People are sick of the "party line". Liberals have nothing to say, including liberal news commentators.
But if you're looking for a recent cause for loss of viewers (and hopefully readers - time will tell), you don't have to look any further than the past few days. The other networks can thank Dan Rather and CBS.
So they have done themselves in.
Note the "particularly last week" part.
Now what was the big story last week involving the networks? Methinks these three words speak volumes and are a major sign that the rats are definitely leaving the sinking CBS/Dan Rather ship. Given this "catastrophe" and the terrible poll numbers for Kerry the smart guys in the media may be thinking it is time to take the foot of the Kerry gas pedal and start thinking about their reputation as news reporters. We'll see. I'm hopeful.
Well, it seems to me that fact checking has never been a priority. A little fact checking by some Freepers turned up the fact that a man interviewed for one of AP's hit-pieces was not, as he claimed, a Navy SEAL.
|
|
I just love how when they refer to Fox, it's "partisan journalism". |
The TRUTH flew around the world in it's pajamas.......isn't that the best part of it all.
Wait to we have time to get our pants on.
These changes were managed by controlling the information itself -- i.e. which news was "newsworthy" and how it was described -- and by subtle editorializing in the course of news pieces.
The destruction -- ranging from the New Deal to the Great Society to the moral decay and collapse of the last 25 years -- has been incalculable. People whose personal experiences told them that something they were hearing was wrong were isolated, and had no way to communicate broadly their knowledge to others.
I'm not going to miss the days of Big Journalism one bit. Are we still going to be lied to and deceived? Of course. Are we going to hear nothing but the same 5-tongued lockstep lies that we all grew up with? No.
The fragmentation of the country that is going to accelerate as a result of the New Media will have good effects and bad effects both. But all it all, I'd rather have part of the country knowing the truth, than have all of the country believing a lie.
Good riddance.
The internet has made it possible for all interested parties to see the documents for themselves. "Fact-checking" is an obsolete concept. The editor is a dead job. Put the documents on the web and the market will correct the errors.
This is not a fad. It is not reversable. It is, to use an over-used phrase which really does apply here -- it is a PARADIGM SHIFT.
They will never get it. The old school never updates; it always just dies off.
Down here in the middle of the night, curlers, pjs and a cuppa tea.
Just surfing and thinking and voila!!!
The ba$tard$ never saw us coming.
In that respect, I would say it's a job well done.
First, they abdicated their responsibility
This is not a fad. It is not reversable. It is, to use an over-used phrase which really does apply here -- it is a PARADIGM SHIFT.
Actually, the Paradigm shift is more encompassing. Rather than waxing on in my own words the three links below add more macro pieces to the puzzle.
How separation of powers has been virtually eliminated, and it's so obvious: Citizens Sue Kerry and Edwards-charge Violations of Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances.. ^
Understanding Sustainable Development (Agenda 21) A Guide for Public Officials -- http://www.freedom21santacruz.net/guide.pdf
I read the 14 page pdf document, it's very good and a quick read.
Also, from the USD thread read post #15.
Actually in the 10PM boradcast hour, FOX had more viewers than ALL THREE brodcast networks combined..
I don't think so. I remember seeing the figures as reported on FNN (Brit Hume, IMS)--as I recall them, there was one evening when Fox outpulled ABcBS combined, and the beat NBC by more than a million, but they never surpassed the three "bigs" combined total. IIRC, on Thursday night, they had around 7.3 million, and NBC (in second place was around 5.7. ABcBS had around 4 million apiece.
This is a fascinating article. It offers an explanation for the growing loss of influence of the MSM. It stems from two firm beliefs seemingly held by Tom Rosenstiel and his over-schooled journalist ilk. These are (1) capitalist greed is the enemy of quality and (2) folks who are not journalists are too childish and dumb to take care of themselves without the help of journalists advising politicians. These beliefs are both nutty and wrong. Aside from being at odds with precepts on which our Country was founded, they are belied by the events of our daily lives; i.e, the daily lives of the very audience that the dying MSM have alienated and must regain to survive. The explanation is as nutty and wrong as its assumptions, but because it squares with the false assumptions it is comforting. Of course, it also postpones a realistic look at why the MSM are blissfully flushing themselves with the Johns.
Amen. The elites are just angry there are now alternatives to the liberal spin of the networks.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.
CBS took the time to "double-check" the Bush story? I've seen network news - it has the feel of DNC legwork.
The Washington Post drank the KoolAide with this stupid, lacking any glimmer of insight, puff piece.
What is lost in the cable obsession with "live" is the chance to double-check, to rewrite, to edit -- and often to even report. What is lost with the passing of network TV, in other words, is the journalism of verification. It is gradually yielding place to a journalism of assertion.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
