Slashdot Mirror
Local News Anchor Feels Pain from Afar
In times when Clear Channel makes up "local news" reports from central studios and broadcasts them over radio stations around the country, it's worth asking the question: when does it cross the line into deception?
This is an excellent example of how easy it is to dupe the public into believing something that is not entirely factual. It also drives home the importance of our taking what we hear on radio/TV and what we read in the newspapers with a very big grain of salt.
"When he's talking about how cold it is, that's not news, it's entertainment. It's cosmetic," Harrison added.
That sounds like a lot of so-called "news organizations." Their #1 purpose is to entertain, lest they lose a large chunk of their audience. Actual news content is secondary.
"It's no more a lie than putting makeup on a TV anchor to make them look younger. The main thing is that his information does not deceive the public."
One more step in virtualizing the whole world. How soon can we have virtual war, where nobody dies?
So who, exactly is he harming? He's telecommuting - and he's not claiming to investigate these things. It's not like those journalists who fake stories that happen in places they've never been. He's just reading a weather report off a computer, which every radio news anchor does, anyway - it's not as if he's claiming to be out there with a thermometer. And to say things like "when do we get a break" does not constitute lying - it's not as if he said "I'm here in Boston, reporting on blah-blah-blah".
I have many issues with ClearChannel, but frankly, this isn't one of them.
I mean really, does it?
I've wrestled with reality for 35 years and I'm happy to say, I finally won out - Elwood P. Dowd
it's not just ClearChannel, everybody's doing it.
That doesn't mean it's ethical - or the right thing to do.
"Where he's reporting from is irrelevant. I'm not wasting my airtime to tell people where Gary is."
I a standard my mom taught me probably would let him know: if you can't admit what you are doing, then you probably aren't doing the right thing.
In the article they make statements like "location doesn't affect reporting," and "the DJ never actually says he's shivering."
OK. If you don't think it makes a difference, take two seconds to say "my name is John Deaux, and I'm coming to you from Northern Florida. In Where-ever-you-are, USA, it's a bone-chilling five degrees..." If you are afraid to make that little disclosure, then you are implicitly admitting that it does make a difference.
Of course, I've been thinking that Clear Channel is evil for a while now, for totally different reasons.
It must be a slow news day... because this has to be one of the most pointless stories around, whether on slashdot or any other news site.
--Wow some guy broadcasts a news show from home...big freaking deal- The former prime-minister of Canada had a vacation house in Florida as well, and he managed to "run the country" while he was away.
Look at the logo: News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
Someone enlighten me, why should anyone care?
...and how much is enough to be providing accurate information honestly.
This will happen more and more - the recent financial industry news about dishonesty in companies, mutual funds, is just the beginning. As it becomes easier to do things virtually (ie, they have the capability now to edit live braodcasts, and the capability to replace existing ads with digital ones (see Spider-Man)), guideliness will have to be drawn up to make sure that what people see is actually real. If it's not actually real, people should be informed so that they can make decisions based on actual facts, not supposed ones.
libertarianswag.com
Aren't there more constructive ways of spending energy than complaining about a guy who is lucky enough to be able to work from his vacation home?
Yeeesh.
P.S. What does Clear Channel have to do with this, anyway?
Just a quick question. Since there is absolutely nothing in the linked article about Clear Channel or anyone else making up news from central studios, would you care to post us a link to THAT story too? It sounds like a good one.
do not read this line twice.
It's simple, journalists must broadcast verifyable facts and speak the truth. Or else they are columnists and should identify themselves as such.
I'd recommend everyone to watch the movie Shattered Glass, it's a good thriller about a reporter who gets caught on a minor error and then sees his house of cards he built by going further and further by inserting false facts and bogus stories into the magazine he wrote for, untill his fall. He was eventually fired on the spot. It's based on a true story.
The US Adminstration does pretty much the same thing.
"The villianous Saddam Hussein is stockpiling mountains of weapons of mass destruction. He strides from his palace, his aides cowering in terror. With a stony hatred in his eyes, he points to a small town in north Idaho. 'Kill them all,' he commands. His aides jump to action.
Meanwhile, in the White House, George Bush is informed of the Evil One's plans. 'Bring it on,' the President states flatly."
Etcetera. It's the fairy tale everyone in the government loves to tell its adoring public.
Meanwhile, the frontline boys continue to die.
Because so many people love to hear the fairy tales, I'm sure to now lose karma.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Local Clear Channel stations make their own music decisions. We all share our local research, but the company NEVER dictates which songs we play. Period.
Yep. People are all up in arms about the DJs being from out of town, but DJs have had little to no say in what songs get played for years. The computer generates a playlist, with maybe a few holes for requests or DJ selections... any deviations from the computer-asigned schedule are logged and subject to review by the PD after it happens, override the schedule the wrong way and the PD will want to have a talk with the DJ...
"Would you believe it's 5 below zero right now, back in Boston?"
"The only thing worse than the actual temperature where you are right now is having the wind chill factored in."
"It doesn't get any worse than this, when do we get a break from temperatures in the low 60's?"
Happens all the time in politics -
"I did not have sex with Ms Lewinsky, if we're not counting that oral stuff."
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most conventional lethal weapons ever devised."
With apologies to Mr. Cronkite -
And that's the way it is - according to news feeds, the internet, and my web cam.
This is an excellent example of how easy it is to dupe the public into believing something that is not entirely factual. It also drives home the importance of our taking what we hear on radio/TV and what we read in the newspapers with a very big grain of salt.
I think what irritates people such much about this is that this time it was the PRESS in a BLATANT attempt at disception. People like to believe that even though commericals are filled with lies and deceipt and politicans' televised speeches are full of fabrications that somehow the press is above all this and has a responsiblity to be as open and honest with their audience as possible. Now, you and I and most slashdotters know better. But the average person really trusts the media to keep them informed. Sure, this is a relatively small breech of trust. "Who cares?" you might be tempted to ask. And, yes, the actual location of some TV personality doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. However, the very idea that this station is involved in deception and, when caught, claim there is nothing wrong with what they are doing is what upsets people so much.
GMD
watch this
NB: I'm a fan of Clinton in most respects, just not how he handled a certain affair. This isn't flamebait, only a joke :)
Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
Forgot all the angels on pins arguments, all the quibbling about telecommuting and whether or not everybody is doing it. Forget ALL that. Cut to the chase.
Both the anchor and the radio station don't want the audience to know. Therefore they know they are being deceptive and that it is wrong.
Infuriate left and right
If there were no people, there's no way people can use drugs and get behind the wheel of a car.
So, kill all the people.
This is America, damnit. Speak Spanish!
An audience passively consumes what it is served.
So tell me, how much input do you get on which articles get posted and which rejected?
We passively consume the articles, occasionally getting our suggestions accepted. But the real active part only comes *after* the article is posted, and we get to discuss it. Even if the vast majority of us agreed that an article was crap, and should never have been posted, we couldn't change it one iota.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
"We live in times where Clear Channel makes up "local news" reports from central studios. Tsk? Eh? What's the world coming to. Here's another example of radio dishonesty, makes you wonder doesn't it? Where does one draw the line? Huh? Where? Makes you think. Oh, if you're asking, I'll have anuvva Guinness. Cheers."
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Very easy. If there's no drugs, there's no way people can use them and get behind the wheel of a car.
Sure! And if there are no guns, no one will be shot and killed. And if there are no elections, we can't vote for the wrong person. And if we aren't allowed freedom of choice, then we can't make the wrong decisions.
Great logic...
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
Google news is a prime example of this. It is easy to find a story, and the mass media stories are lumped on the front page. A 'more like this' link allows you to view multitudinous other reports on the subject. Most of those are exactly the same, spread by the wire services and posted to myriad web pages. However, this makes the ones that are different stand out precisely because they are different. In fact, it is often striking the difference between western reports and those from Al Jazeera or other non-western source.
On the other hand, this really only applies to the internet right now. Television and radio are still controlled by the corporations you mention. Newspapers are a mixed bag. Some are huge corporate entities, but there are also many neighborhood papers that mainly discuss evening entertainment. I think some of them have room for actual news, but they aren't frequent enough to be useful as a news source. Newspapers are, in general, too slow to be responsive to people's news needs, when stories can break on television immediately (such as the 9/11 attacks).
This story of the news anchor reporting from his home in Florida seems to point more toward the distribution of the media than the consolidation of it. That is, if studio equipment is cheap enough that it can now be installed in someone's home, how far away can we be from the common man putting together his own news outlet for local stories or commentary on international issues. Distribution is the biggest problem, but moving data gets easier every day. I have tuned into some pretty outlandish political internet radio stations that are not at all in tune with the prevailing groupthink (not mainstream media by any means), so how far behind is streaming video? The only problem with the media today is that it is so damn easy to get news while sitting on one's couch with remote in hand. So, for now, television rules. Technology is about making things easier, though. Some day, many different news sources will all be easy to see. First hand web-cam footage of newsworthy events will probably be among the choices. What happens when a tourist can film a significant event with a digital camcorder and use a mobile phone to put the footage on the internet for all to see? It won't happen tomorrow, but probably will within my lifetime.
One of the pitfalls of predicting the future is to extrapolate current trends without end. Often, that makes for good science fiction, but in reality, trends taper off and counter trends take over. There was a book written (about this) in the early 80's called The Third Wave by Alvin Toffler. Many of the references are dated, but the parts about 'electronic cottages' allowing workers to work from anywhere is pretty interesting. The Amazon reviews are probably a better analysis than I can give. Anyway, major point to take away: Trends don't continue as far as we might think.
Language students: Don't try to learn English here. This ain't it.
I'm a New Yorker, and I'd flay bin Laden alive if I had the chance. That deluded story posted to kuro5hin would give me a chance to say so to the poster, as well as other commentors. As well as a chance to distinguish my personal interest from a proper US government policy and strategy for fighting terrorism. If it had been suppressed, that chance would have been lost. So posting it doesn't seem to be a problem, unless the system had been somehow gamed to post it contrary to the expressed decisions of the moderators. Or unless actual reality is subservient to expressions on websites, justifying supression of expression to control real events.
You might say that the k5 moderators suck, in which case you could participate and influence to change things for the better. Controversy is not a social problem, unless it's an unmanageable din, or freedom of expression is constrained. What actual "social problems" have k5 people experienced?
--
make install -not war
Freedom of speech implies allowing other people's opinions to be heard and debated, no matter how distasteful they may be to you.
There are probably a (large-ish?) number of people in the (Arab) world who feel like this; if you want to change that, one important thing is to *understand the way they think*. That doesn't mean that you agree with it, of course.
(Also, I note that the story was written in June 2001 -- ObL wasn't really "Public Enemy #1" then. I wonder if that story would have been voted up six months later?)