WC > Politics
media "coverage"
Page 1 / 1
media "coverage"
05/03/2011 5:28 am

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE
you know i get so sick of the way the media covers the news now. it used to be that there were certain big stories that dominated news cycles, but now it seems there are exclusive stories, where nothing else gets mentioned for days. okay, osama is killed, but does that mean every other big issue in the world has gone away? i mean seriously, that's all the media has talked about for the past 24 hours. and i was even flipping through news channels to see if they were covering anything else. before that, it was the royal wedding. before that, it was libya. before that it was japan.
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
05/03/2011 1:31 pm

Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/20/2010
Topics: 63
Posts: 949
OFFLINE
I've noticed that too.  I guess it's all about ratings.  Talk about the hottest, most exciting story of the hour.  I must admit, however, that I am enjoying all the coverage of the Bin Ladin thing.  I'm very proud it was the US Navy Seal team that got this murderer.  But yeah, the news does seem to focus one 1 big issue at a time.  I got soooo tired of listening to the media (on every channel) go on and on about the protests in Wisconsin.  Boooriiing.  But the Osama thing is exciting.  =)
................
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r49/DrHesper/Misc/TributeMartinGrelle.jpg
Quote   
05/03/2011 3:27 pm

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE
and then equally irritating is how the media completely stops talking about events once they've sensationalized it out of the headlines. like what's going on with that japanese nuke plant? i guess that issue has just gone by the wayside. and now that osama is dead, what about the people in tuscaloosa?
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
05/03/2011 7:18 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 131
Posts: 466
OFFLINE
Is a chicken and egg situation: the media don't show more than one "spectacular" story at a time because a lot of people don't have the attention span any more to cover more than one story, and ppl don't have the attention span any more because he media only feed them one story at a time.

Is better over here actually, you still get several stories at a time on the news, the issue is with the 24/7 news channels who always have to be showing something spectacular to grab people's attention.
Quote   
05/03/2011 10:37 pm

Forum Fanatic


Regist.: 04/10/2011
Topics: 12
Posts: 284
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:
Is a chicken and egg situation: the media don't show more than one "spectacular" story at a time because a lot of people don't have the attention span any more to cover more than one story, and ppl don't have the attention span any more because he media only feed them one story at a time.

Is better over here actually, you still get several stories at a time on the news, the issue is with the 24/7 news channels who always have to be showing something spectacular to grab people's attention.



Obviously since we are bitching about, and we are not the only ones, there really is nothing wrong with our attention span.

Your second statement is more correct.
Quote   
05/03/2011 11:58 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE
I agree, its incredibly frustrating.  We have tornadoes that killed hundreds of Americans, floods threatening several cities along the Mississippi/Ohio/etc rivers, wars in multiple countries, an election in Canada, etc, and yet for over a week all we would hear on the news was about how the princess to be was concealing the maker of her dress.  While I understand its good to make the Brits think we care and all, but why neglect all the other important things going on in the world (a touch of irony in that particular situation was that the BBC seemed to be providing more diverse coverage on world and US events during the damn wedding than most American media outlets were).
Quote   
05/04/2011 5:08 am

Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 131
Posts: 466
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Mark Simmons:

Obviously since we are bitching about, and we are not the only ones, there really is nothing wrong with our attention span.

Your second statement is more correct.



Aye, but the people in this forum are obviously part of the intelligent minority ;-P


Quote   
05/04/2011 5:18 am

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:
Is a chicken and egg situation: the media don't show more than one "spectacular" story at a time because a lot of people don't have the attention span any more to cover more than one story, and ppl don't have the attention span any more because he media only feed them one story at a time.

Is better over here actually, you still get several stories at a time on the news, the issue is with the 24/7 news channels who always have to be showing something spectacular to grab people's attention.



but where is a conservative to get their tv news then? all the network news programs have a liberal slant, and local news is all about local stuff. but speaking of attention spans, i don't know how talking about the same thing hour after hour isn't bad for their ratings. i mean how long do they expect people to pay attention to the same story?
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
Page 1 / 1
Login with Facebook to post
Preview