The one function that TV news performs very well is that when there is no news we give it to you with the same emphasis as if it were. David Brinkley
I say prayers of thanks for the fact that I have reached this great age with fairly good health and a mind still intact. I can still think, reason and remember.
I remember the ways things were--I'm just not referring to the nostalgic musings about a childhood lifestyle that we see on social media, but things like real history playing out in the living room on the evening news. TV news, a new medium when I was a kid, was serious business and not to be missed; dinner time was planned around it and adults didn't go to bed without watching the nightly broadcast. News was presented in an impartial responsible way and TV anchormen such as Chet Huntley, David Brinkley and Walter Cronkite, were almost deadpan in their delivery, not wanting to influence viewers even with their expressions. Information was delivered in the similar format as newspapers: News, Editorial, and Commentary and never should the three be mixed.
As time went on, the news sets became more appealing, the newscasters more personable, and we liked how the new was presented to us and we trusted it. But by the 1980's I began to notice the television news axis begin to subtly shift away from its original standards. Not only the national news but the local news as well. Twice, in two different states, I was aware of difficult neighborhood issues. When the local news stations reported the conflicts, they used creative video images, and clever dialogue editing to present a story that wasn't even close to the truth. I remember a stunned neighbor, who had been interviewed, saying, "But that's not what I said!" This was a profound letdown. I continued to watch the news on a national level but I didn't trust it anymore, but my interest in local news diminished.
By the 2000's, it appeared to me, that the main stream media axis was so tilted, the sphere was about to spin off into space... or maybe it already had. I watch FOX news for awhile and it was better, but I eventually stopped watching it all. Mistrust of the news sources and emotional overload from the 24 hour news cycle of terrorism, shootings and disasters brought me to a point where I stopped watching. I had reached a saturation point. I was going through some other stuff in my life and just didn't need the stress. I don't even have cable anymore. I've streamed TV for years and I am vigilant about what I let into my living room. I get the news the old fashioned way, by reading it--online or in an occasional newspaper. I don't even need headlines; all I have to see is "thoughts and prayers" posts on social media and I go look it up. That's worked for me for a long time.
Eventually, I became more interested in the news again and started exploring alternate news streams. Mainstream media is everywhere, even on YouTube, but I generally ignore them, digging deeper --even into underground news.
What has brought me to telling this story in my blog are the events of the past few months. While I was watching coverage on the disastrous floods in Texas, I came across a video reporting the President's visit to the area and I wanted to see what he had to say. The newswoman played a very bad soundbite of his speech and then... heaved a sigh and rolled her eyes and made a derogatory comment. This is far from the way news reporting should be. I looked where video came from and it was CN & the other N. Oh yeah. It was them.
And then there's the news of the Charlotte NC murder of Iryna Zararutska, a young Ukrainian woman, by Decarlos Brown, a black man; this news was severely under-reported. The story actually appears to have been suppressed, it didn't reach the rest of the country for two weeks. Why would the powers that be do that? Were they afraid of a reverse Ferguson effect? Riots and city burnings? Or were the authorities embarrassed that they missed 14 opportunities to get a dangerous man off the streets? The under-reporting of the death did an injustice to Iryna's family and loved ones, and simply added another reason not to trust the media.
And finally, we come to the murder of Charlie Kirk. It seems mainstream media personalities have been fired for their negative comments soon after his death. I can see where they thought that as unfair, because they have always had carte blanche to speak ill of anyone they wanted without consequence and that perk was removed without warning. Traditionally in the news industry, one didn't speak evil of the deceased until after the funeral, while respecting the grieving family and followers of the departed. Perhaps that item should be included in the employee contracts.
TV news will never be the same, and I am not the same either. I want to be informed but I no longer take things at face value any more; I don't want to keep them buried inside until I melt down, either. I am a skeptic and I intend to dig for the truth, while keeping a sane balance of news intake in my life. However, I am done with CN & the other N, and all the other alphabet channels; I believe their outlook is biased--the thing that the pioneers of television news didn't want--for good reason--it's detrimental to all of us.
If you made it this far, thank you. If you disagree, I hope it is respectful; there is a big hole in our society needs to be filled with love and kindness. Maxie
No comments:
Post a Comment