Slashdot Mirror
Your Opinion Counts At CNN — But Should It?
theodp writes "Some people love how CNN employs Twitter to engage its audience. Not Steve Dahl. 'I am not interested in the take of @stinky on the Fort Hood shootings or any other current events,' complains Dahl of the access the media gives to Internet know-it-alls. 'I am watching CNN because I expect them to gather the news, not act as a clearinghouse for any bonehead with a computer, a cable modem and a half-baked opinion.'"
I am watching CNN because I expect them to gather the news, not act as a clearinghouse for any bonehead with a computer, a cable modem and a half-baked opinion
Yeah! That is slashdot's job!!
This question on a site like this seems incredibly ironic.
While I mostly love Slashdot for its comments and the talks between members, it just doesn't work everywhere. If I'm watching CNN from TV, I'm looking for intelligent, fact-checked news and opinions from professionals, not from some mommy who is twittering without understanding any of the issues behind specific things.
and why should I care...?
but half baked opions taste so good.
I would give everything i own for a little bit more.
I agree. News in America is dead. It turned into entertainment a long time ago. It isn't so much about news anymore as it is about yellow journalism or picking a station that validate one's political views. I stopped watching American news when I discovered BBC news.
I would say that Edward R Murrow is rolling in his grave, but he was cremated.
Don't like it, don't read it. Christ, the only reason why I read user comments on CNN, or Amazon reviews, or anything else where the wisdom of the masses extrudes itself is an urge to rubberneck. It isn't as if they're touting these commentaries as fact-- it's just a poorly moderated scribble board, and it says so on the flap.
How funny is that: A guy airing his opinion on a public medium about how other people's opinions shouldn't be aired on public media...
We need a CNN story on this (complete with tweets) to bring things full circle.
-b
No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
CNN will do anything to boost ratings, even fake war coverage Who would want to watch a news channel that puts corporate profit above journalistic integrity? These guys are right up there with faux news.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
I am watching CNN because I expect them to gather the news [...]
Yeah, that's definitely where you went wrong.
If I had a nickel for every time I had a nickel, I'd be richcursive!
I find it amusing that there's an opinion piece that's against opinion pieces. What's Dahl's claim to lipping off "you aren't allowed to lip off?"
This was a gem (emphasis mine): "I was held accountable by management, listeners and, most important, advertisers."
That's the ugly of a Dahl editorial and the beauty of a slashdot comment -- you can voice your opinion here without anybody threatening to fire you because you spoke out against the status quo.
"When did public opinion merit the same amount of airtime as the actual story?"
When we got the internet. It used to be that only the rich could use the freedom of the press, because you had to actually own a press to have freedom of it. Now we, the people, have freedom of the press, too. The rich and the corporatti don't like us unwashed masses having a voice one bit.
Free Martian Whores!
The way I see it, Steve Dahl is nothing more than a bonehead with a DS-3 connection. What's the difference other than the number of readers and the username? Isn't Steve Dahl voicing his opinion? Isn't he just a person, and doesn't that mean you or I could post our opinions? What makes him so special?
Sure, there are some brain-dead yokels on both sides of the spectrum. There are the idiots who worship trees and think that trees feel and believe the "global warming" er "global climate change" chant without asking for the evidence and the raw data (okay, I admit I'm a skeptic given the revelation of how temperature sensors are installed now vs. 40 years ago and what the guidelines dictate. Too many are installed over or next to heat sinks). Then, there are those on the right who pick and choose what to believe in Christianity, you know, pick the part about man having dominion over the earth but ignore the part about being good stewards, etc.
Both extremes of the spectrum should be totally ignored. Use your brain people, moonbats and neo-cons alike! We each have the biological equivalent of a cluster of supercomputers in our head for a reason: to use it! THINK! However, that still doesn't mean every moron doesn't have the right to voice an opinion.
That is just the reality of it when you open your news site up to comments. You're going to invite the whole spectrum, and the sad thing is both moonbats and neocons are equally stupid in equally loud ways, so their posts stand out.
Including this post. ;)
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
To be fair, the BBC are prime offenders at this vox populi crap too. Quite apart from the prime idiocy on display on their "Have Your Say" comments pages, they practically plead for viewers to text or email their views which they then proceed to display and read out live on air. Obivously this is driven by their need for content, any content to fill airtime on their 24-hour news channel, but it is ridiculous that they stoop to parroting some randomly selected half-wit's opinion on complex issues.
I remember my Dad Yelling at the TV for whenever those Darn Democrats did A n y t h i n g . And if the news covered too much positive that those darn Democrats did he would change the channel. Hence why like only watches Fox news now... However with CNN just posting the comments from other people it allows think their views have meaning and they may get 2 seconds of fame if they actually read them on the air. They will probably still stick to the station and watch it.
Just like in the old Roman Days right before the collapse lets hide all the problems of the world and give them a good show. As long as they are kept entertained they wont revolt.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I am watching CNN because I expect them to gather the news
That is his first problem right there. They don't gather news, they gather entertainment and they present that entertainment with whatever spin they feel will best cause the effect they're looking for whether that be sympathy, outrage, shock, etc.
Don't get me wrong either, I'm not saying CNN is the only one like this and this isn't a political viewpoint where I'm categorizing news media into good, bad, left, or right. I'm saying all "news" programs are like this and have been this way for a while.
As for the public interaction via Twitter I don't see how that is a bad thing. In fact I think its a great way for them to keep in contact with their audience, live, and get the pulse of the public. I think it's great that someone at CNN is at least making an attempt at keeping up with some current technology trends and have found a way to use it as a possibly useful communication tool.
The real problem: CNN has no real interest in facts anymore. interview the extremists on every side and leave it there.
Jon Steward has something to say about the problem
N P R
/...
I find CNN (and other "news" stations) too often use the internet as a way to inject opinions that they don't want to state themselves because it would make them look bias. For example, you read three message from intelligent people who are in favor of government health care, and one from some moron who is opposed. The message is that the majority of people are in favor and the few who aren't are morons. However, the anchors themselves didn't say anything. They were just giving viewer comments. It is a way to inject opinion in to the segments that are officially reserved for news.
I'd be cautious about creating a mechanism that defines and limits "legitimate reporters", as that's a pretty good way of limitting "legitmate news".
Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
While on one hand, I agree that a bunch of tweets from random people are not all that interesting or newsworthy, I also have to say that Dahl's column reads an awful lot like the same old media elitism we've become used to. Only the opinions of professional journalists are wanted, the unwashed masses should just shut up. It was a lot nicer in the world of journalism when you could say any old stupid thing and not get called on it. Nowadays, if a journalist says something stupid, he can expect to have his ass handed to him from some pajama-wearing blogger - oh, the humanity. But I do agree that it's primarily bloggers fulfilling this function, rather than random Twitterers, who for the most part are not contributing very much value.
I often wonder if the news was ever any better. I read recently in, I think, Time magazine an article about newspapers from the 1920s. They would also back candidates and bad mouth the opponents, take political sides when reporting stories (and which stories to report), etc. Nothing has changed there. I don't imagine papers weren't "making news" back in the day either -- it's hardly a novel idea. They need to sell papers and, just like Slashdot, there are slow news days. So you go and interview a politician or police captain or waitress and you hope that something more interesting comes out of it. If not, you have a nice "people" piece. But there wasn't any news until you started asking.
With the Internet news, it's likely not any different, it's just faster. 24 hour news can't possibly generate enough facts to keep people going, so even the "famous" journalists like Anderson Cooper are left with filling in the gap with their faces and open mouths. "Gosh, I remember when I was sick with the flu. I coughed and coughed. Really hurt. Really hurt my ribs when I coughed like that. With the flu. So...uh...so you don't want it. The flu. Or to cough."
I read Time magazine (paper edition) because they usually have one or two long, decently-researched articles (thrown in between what are essentially headlines for the rest of the "news" and some opinion pieces). Anything online is essentially under-researched nonsense -- I'd rather see constant updates, then, after a week, see a full write-up on the situation with sources, quotes, facts, etc. Let me know what's going on, as you hear it, but give me the NEWS at some point instead of just a bunch of repeated text.
Since FOX has more viewers than all other cable news outlets combined, I'm pretty sure they don't need any validation. Of course, the prevailing view is that FOX just attracts jingoistic idiots and that their ratings have nothing to do with the quality of their product being any good. There may be some issues of professionalism and qulity of product with other outlets. Then again I could have missed Shepard Smith calling the President's supporters "balls to face".
Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
What makes the know-it-alls and bone-heads that work in the news any better than know-it-alls and bone-heads who don't?
Most media people you see day-to-day have the mistaken impression that they actually know WTF they're talking about. Unfortunately, they don't.
CNN siding with democrats?
"I just got back from Washington DC at a huge protest."
A protest engineered and promoted by an ultra-right propaganda network for half a year.
"The lone dissenter to these guys is Fox News; funny how 'the fringe' has a typical FOUR TIMES the ratings of this and other, lesser outlets."
Those ratings are less indicative of the popularity of their viewpoint and more indicative of just how horrible the alternatives are. If I had a choice between a yugo and walking, i'd choose the yugo too!
please go back to your bunker, the rest of us in the real world want the government to step in to put a long overdue stop to the insurance industry's "death panels". According to the dingbat right, apparently corporations can never, ever do harm!
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
What your are talking abstractly about is the Sean Hannity's, Glen Beck's and Bill O'Reily's, Mike Pappantonio's and Keith Olbermann's of the world. These people are called commentators and they make their living saying outrageous things.
Fox doesn't have to "manufacture support" the proof is in their ratings which they continue to dominate. There was another network that tried to make a living pushing there own agenda. Air America went broke because no one wanted to hear what they had to say.
Before you call these events manufactured, you should probably try attending one.
I am a little confused. Is it really more important to you to criticize commentators on Fox News for being active participants in the political process than it is to criticize the other media for abjectly ignoring important stories? Which do you think is worse?
Are you honestly subscribing to Anita Dunn's assertion that Fox News is an active architect of Republican policy? As an active member of the Republican party, I can assure you that Fox News VERY often ignores things that the party would like covered and relentlessly pursues things that we wish they would leave alone.
Modern news agencies are strapped to find unique 24/7 content so they air this crap to fill up space between real events. its just the new version of showing the same damn Iraq vase being looted on a 24 hour loop.
The news isn't news any more. its 100% biased opinionated crap with economic and political motives. By acting like the tweets are valid content, the media will be able to say , "See - we want a completely unqualified yahoo in office. This is progress."
Informative and unilateral news in print, television, and radio is dead. To get that content, Google-it form the source. VIVA Idiocracy!
Anyone who has good karma isn't going to post GNAA posts.
You may notice that your karma maxes out at "excellent." In ancient times, slashdot used to have a points system with no ceiling, so you could accumulate karma levels OVER NINE THOUSAND!!! Trolls would karma whore until they achieved insane karma levels, then skydive from karma heaven with an epic trolling spree. That's why the new system has a ceiling - if you tried something like that now, your karma would run out quickly.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel