Beachlover
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,573
- Points
- 0
Interesting reading for those of us who read the 'news' for Michael Jackson information and have read the news in the past only to find it is filled with lies. Just something I thought all of us fans should read and understand about how the press reports the news and why.
http://www.emorywheel.com/detail.php?n=27784
Tabloid journalism has consistently been shunned as a lesser, illegitimate — albeit popular — form of news. The paparazzi journalists are deemed an unethical group of scavengers who will do anything to uncover a celebrity scoop. And as someone who has grown up in a household where USWeekly magazines are piled up in the living room, I can attest that a large majority of the stories reek of pseudo-journalism. Many stories are backed with anonymous testimony from sources so far removed from the actual celebrity in question that it is wholly embarrassing editors would even attempt to disguise it as news. But although Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt could not possibly have been fighting every day for the past 10 years, as these magazines would make you believe, there are an alarming amount of parallels between what the general public would describe as illegitimate tabloid and respected news.
Like anything in today’s news world, ratings are king. Although they purport to be news organizations — and therefore ratings should not be the end goal — the major television networks are obsessed with their numbers. In succeeding toward this end, these news outlets will report incessantly on topics that they believe their audiences want to hear as opposed to those with -more relevant urgency.
FOXNews’ summer coverage of health-care protests, ranging from opinion pieces analyzing the effect on President Obama’s integrity to the news dedicated to covering the events as they unfolded, unnecessarily displaced more pressing issues from being discussed. For example, the actual facts underlying how health care would affect Americans. In a recent montage, Jon Stewart and company prepared a five-minute clip displaying the incessant coverage the Tiger Woods saga received from seemingly everywhere.
Who could forget the 24-hour Michael Jackson coverage? CNN ran more specials to honor the fallen pop star in the two weeks following his death than MTV did. And that might be okay in a time when Afghanistan, the economy and health care — essentially the future of this country — are not more pressing issues. So how is that any different than a tabloid running a juicy story multiple times from week to week? Other than the content, not much.
A key argument against tabloids lies in their spreading rumors that are without proper facts. The comparison here is almost depressing to mention. On a recent episode of Campbell Brown’s show on CNN, Brown and political analyst James Carville engaged in a discussion regarding the midterm elections and their effect on Obama. The exchange ended with Carville explaining that they are essentially locally-charged elections and that Republican victories do not necessarily indicate any ill will toward Obama. Brown, perhaps because she had forgotten her lines, blurted out that although that may be true, Carville should refrain from saying it because she still needed to discuss the story. This example serves as just one of many in which a world of 24-hour news rely on tabloid methods to fill content in a 24-hour news world. Just watch the “Daily Show” for more proof.
It’s perhaps most difficult to reconcile a disdain for completely anonymous sources with respect for tabloids, but this past year’s events have led me to place more credence on their work. Both the aforementioned Woods and Jackson stories were broken by USWeekly and TMZ.com, respectively. Mock the sources all you want, but at least in areas addressing the most major public figures, the tabloids provided leading coverage. Also, it isn’t uncommon for the real news to rely on testimony or opinion from those with incorrect facts. The Richard Jewell 1996 Atlanta bombing scandal and the WMD myth during the lead-up to the Iraq War both come to mind as real stories in which legitimate news agencies failed to engage in proper reporting and fact checking.
In the end, tabloids focus solely on mindless fodder and distraction from more important issues. But it is undeniable that their news sells. And in an age where Obama is just as likely to appear in the “Celebrities: they’re just like us!” section of any major glossy magazine, it has followed that the major news organizations have adopted the tabloid method for covering stories. That is, do what it takes to draw in people.
Perhaps that statement serves as an unfortunate observation that the news desiring public would rather read about Aniston’s continuing struggle to find love than on world events. But that doesn’t allow the major broadcast networks to deviate from covering these stories with more integrity than the tabloids use to cover their work. And if they choose not to, there is always one more spot on the Kroger magazine rack for a weekly political gossip journal. But for some reason, I don’t think Nancy Pelosi bikini pictures will sell quite as well.
http://www.emorywheel.com/detail.php?n=27784
Tabloid journalism has consistently been shunned as a lesser, illegitimate — albeit popular — form of news. The paparazzi journalists are deemed an unethical group of scavengers who will do anything to uncover a celebrity scoop. And as someone who has grown up in a household where USWeekly magazines are piled up in the living room, I can attest that a large majority of the stories reek of pseudo-journalism. Many stories are backed with anonymous testimony from sources so far removed from the actual celebrity in question that it is wholly embarrassing editors would even attempt to disguise it as news. But although Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt could not possibly have been fighting every day for the past 10 years, as these magazines would make you believe, there are an alarming amount of parallels between what the general public would describe as illegitimate tabloid and respected news.
Like anything in today’s news world, ratings are king. Although they purport to be news organizations — and therefore ratings should not be the end goal — the major television networks are obsessed with their numbers. In succeeding toward this end, these news outlets will report incessantly on topics that they believe their audiences want to hear as opposed to those with -more relevant urgency.
FOXNews’ summer coverage of health-care protests, ranging from opinion pieces analyzing the effect on President Obama’s integrity to the news dedicated to covering the events as they unfolded, unnecessarily displaced more pressing issues from being discussed. For example, the actual facts underlying how health care would affect Americans. In a recent montage, Jon Stewart and company prepared a five-minute clip displaying the incessant coverage the Tiger Woods saga received from seemingly everywhere.
Who could forget the 24-hour Michael Jackson coverage? CNN ran more specials to honor the fallen pop star in the two weeks following his death than MTV did. And that might be okay in a time when Afghanistan, the economy and health care — essentially the future of this country — are not more pressing issues. So how is that any different than a tabloid running a juicy story multiple times from week to week? Other than the content, not much.
A key argument against tabloids lies in their spreading rumors that are without proper facts. The comparison here is almost depressing to mention. On a recent episode of Campbell Brown’s show on CNN, Brown and political analyst James Carville engaged in a discussion regarding the midterm elections and their effect on Obama. The exchange ended with Carville explaining that they are essentially locally-charged elections and that Republican victories do not necessarily indicate any ill will toward Obama. Brown, perhaps because she had forgotten her lines, blurted out that although that may be true, Carville should refrain from saying it because she still needed to discuss the story. This example serves as just one of many in which a world of 24-hour news rely on tabloid methods to fill content in a 24-hour news world. Just watch the “Daily Show” for more proof.
It’s perhaps most difficult to reconcile a disdain for completely anonymous sources with respect for tabloids, but this past year’s events have led me to place more credence on their work. Both the aforementioned Woods and Jackson stories were broken by USWeekly and TMZ.com, respectively. Mock the sources all you want, but at least in areas addressing the most major public figures, the tabloids provided leading coverage. Also, it isn’t uncommon for the real news to rely on testimony or opinion from those with incorrect facts. The Richard Jewell 1996 Atlanta bombing scandal and the WMD myth during the lead-up to the Iraq War both come to mind as real stories in which legitimate news agencies failed to engage in proper reporting and fact checking.
In the end, tabloids focus solely on mindless fodder and distraction from more important issues. But it is undeniable that their news sells. And in an age where Obama is just as likely to appear in the “Celebrities: they’re just like us!” section of any major glossy magazine, it has followed that the major news organizations have adopted the tabloid method for covering stories. That is, do what it takes to draw in people.
Perhaps that statement serves as an unfortunate observation that the news desiring public would rather read about Aniston’s continuing struggle to find love than on world events. But that doesn’t allow the major broadcast networks to deviate from covering these stories with more integrity than the tabloids use to cover their work. And if they choose not to, there is always one more spot on the Kroger magazine rack for a weekly political gossip journal. But for some reason, I don’t think Nancy Pelosi bikini pictures will sell quite as well.
