Could Mainstream Media's biggest enemy be itself? One source in this article suggests that alternative media is not the greatest threat facing traditional newspapers. Is it possible that the media is making their situation worse by believing their situation is bad? Maybe its some kind of psychosomatic disease or vicious cycle. The disease exists because they say it exists and others start believing it, which in turn makes the problem worse.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20090318/newspapers18_cv.art.htm
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Why All the Craziness?
This is a little old but I thought it was a really interesting interview
Two things that I think are pertinent to our class were CNN parting ways with Dobbs so they could be "neutral" and Stewart laying the blame for all the craziness on certain reporters (i.e. Fox). But I'm also curious to hear what you guys think about their main discussion on whether there is legitimate concern about "losing the country" or not. To be honest I'm not really sure on this one.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 1 | ||||
| ||||
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 2 | ||||
| ||||
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 3 | ||||
| ||||
Two things that I think are pertinent to our class were CNN parting ways with Dobbs so they could be "neutral" and Stewart laying the blame for all the craziness on certain reporters (i.e. Fox). But I'm also curious to hear what you guys think about their main discussion on whether there is legitimate concern about "losing the country" or not. To be honest I'm not really sure on this one.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
Act Nine: The Resurgence of McCarthyism???
I have been thinking over the lecture we had in class on Friday a lot this weekend, and one thing I couldn't get out of my head was the striking similarity between the Van Jones issue and McCarthy's Communist Witch Hunt of the 1950's.
The way Beck took down Van Jones was not so different from the formal tribunals the HUAC used to destroy careers and lives, but the striking similarity is the format of Beck's posting on the internet. "Find me dirt on so and so and so and so." I could see McCarthy doing the same thing if he were alive today. Maybe it's just me but the power Beck and the blogosphere has is very, very scary.
It is interesting because McCarthy's witch hunt was perpetuated by politicians against many Americans, including members of the mass media like Edward R. Murrow. But with Beck, it is a complete reversal. Interesting.
Any comments?
Here is this video. I know it comes from a liberal think tank, but it's the body of the video that matters.
The way Beck took down Van Jones was not so different from the formal tribunals the HUAC used to destroy careers and lives, but the striking similarity is the format of Beck's posting on the internet. "Find me dirt on so and so and so and so." I could see McCarthy doing the same thing if he were alive today. Maybe it's just me but the power Beck and the blogosphere has is very, very scary.
It is interesting because McCarthy's witch hunt was perpetuated by politicians against many Americans, including members of the mass media like Edward R. Murrow. But with Beck, it is a complete reversal. Interesting.
Any comments?
Here is this video. I know it comes from a liberal think tank, but it's the body of the video that matters.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Act Seven: Obama still failing?
Confidence in Obama slips more, poll shows
Wave of optimism that swept president into office turns more pessimistic
 Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP President Barack Obama walks across the tarmac at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, Tuesday, Nov. 10, prior to boarding Air Force One for a trip to Fort Hood, Texas to meet with families of the those wounded and killed in last week's shooting. By LIZ SIDOTI AP National Political Writer  updated 1 hour, 45 minutes ago WASHINGTON - The euphoria of 2008 is over: America is in a funk. Elected last November on a wave of optimism, President Barack Obama now finds himself governing an increasingly pessimistic country in recession while muscling through Congress a health care reform overhaul and weighing whether to commit more troops to the 8-year-old Afghanistan war. The latest Associated Press-GfK They were more pessimistic about the direction of the country. They disapproved of Obama's handling of the economy a bit more than before. And, perhaps most striking for this novice commander in Ambitious agenda
The findings underscore just how quickly the political environment can change, a lesson in cautiousness for out-of-power Republicans salivating at the murky state of the electorate and buzzing with energy after booting Democrats from rule in Virginia and New Jersey governors' races last week. It was just over a year ago that Obama won the White House in an electoral landslide and Democrats padded their congressional majorities. The country was riding high with optimism by just about all measures when Obama took office in January. "Hope" and "change" were en vogue back then. But "change" didn't happen overnight, as the rhetoric of campaigning crashed headlong into the realities of governing. And "hope" slipped in a country that always has clung to it. Approval at 54 percent
The economy is by far the most important issue on the minds of Americans given a crushing recession that's erased jobs. Unemployment hit 10.2 percent last month even though the administration has promoted glimmers of improvement and most economists say the recession is over. Those jobless figures help explain why as many people said the economy got worse in the past month as said it got better — and it's not many people who thought it got better, just 22 percent. Most say the economy stayed the same, and most don't approve of how Obama is handling it — just 46 percent approve compared with 50 percent last month. The country also has grown even more lukewarm on Obama and the wars as he tries to wind down the one in Iraq and considers ramping up the one in Afghanistan. Compared with October, 45 percent of people now disapprove of Obama's handling of Iraq, up from 37 percent, while 48 percent now disapprove of his handling of Afghanistan, up from 41 percent; a majority of people in the country opposes both wars. And more than half — 54 percent — now oppose sending more troops to Afghanistan, an increase from 50 percent last month. Obama in tough spot
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACT OCHO
Can the media detract from issues with substance by reporting on issues with not substance?
When I loaded MSN today to read the latest headlines my eyes were immediately and instinctively drawn to this article. http://www.slate.com/id/2235064/?GT1=38001. I should explain that my mom doesn't have a mustache so this is not exactly a personal issue for me. Nevertheless, I was intrigued by the article and I used the only ten minutes of precious free time I had to read this saucy news bit from slate. Meanwhile, articles on Afganistan and the Healthcare bill, located at the bottom left of the screen, were conveniently neglected . It was like I opened a fridge full of fruits and vegetables shoved in the back and saw the only the half eaten piece of cake from two weeks ago and decided to eat that for lunch. I wonder if its the same for the public. They overlook important issues because they're distracted by the trivial stories and gossip. Is this the public's fault or the media's?
When I loaded MSN today to read the latest headlines my eyes were immediately and instinctively drawn to this article. http://www.slate.com/id/2235064/?GT1=38001. I should explain that my mom doesn't have a mustache so this is not exactly a personal issue for me. Nevertheless, I was intrigued by the article and I used the only ten minutes of precious free time I had to read this saucy news bit from slate. Meanwhile, articles on Afganistan and the Healthcare bill, located at the bottom left of the screen, were conveniently neglected . It was like I opened a fridge full of fruits and vegetables shoved in the back and saw the only the half eaten piece of cake from two weeks ago and decided to eat that for lunch. I wonder if its the same for the public. They overlook important issues because they're distracted by the trivial stories and gossip. Is this the public's fault or the media's?
Monday, November 9, 2009
Act Six: Inaccuracies in times of turmoil
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
What are your opinions on how many inaccuracies where reported about this story?
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
A Special Act: Endorsing Your Opponent
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Another Act: of Palin ignorance
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Monday, October 26, 2009
Response to Act Three
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Check these further responses to the White House v. Fox News debate. I know I picked a Rachel Maddow clip, but she brings out some good points.
Very interesting round table on Meet the Press. Check it out.
Act Four: Pseudo-News Reigns King
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Better Know a District - Utah's 3rd - Jason Chaffetz | ||||
| ||||
With the rise of satirical pseudo-news shows ,such as "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and "The Colbert Report," more teens and young adults have been delving into the world of politics. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have made big issue stories more accessible for the younger generation.
Do pseudo-news shows have a lasting effect on the media landscape? Will pseudo-news shows continue to grow in popularity? How much power do pseudo-news programs have?
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Act Three: "Opinion journalism masquerading as news"
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
This video might seem long but worth every minute. I hope its stirs up opinions for you like it did for me.
Is this squabble between Fox and the Obama White House legitimate or has this issue been a long time coming? (Hello, we all saw Outfoxed)
What about Fox's new angle in using Obama's tough love to commercialize their brand?
Will Fox get in too deep by calling out other news organizations who are approved by Obama?
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Act Two: "Yes Men"
This story was featured today on "CNN Newsroom with Rick Sanchez."
A huge media fiasco occurred yesterday when a group known as the "Yes Men" pulled off an elaborate hoax that fooled multiple news stations.
The "Yes Men" posed as officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and called a press conference in which they revealed false information that the Chamber was going to support climate control legislation, which is contradictory to what the Chamber stands for. Many news organizations were present, (Fox News, CNBC, the New York Times).
After a while, a representative from the real U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Eric Wohlschlegel, burst into the room declaring that the meeting was a "stunt" and that the man at the podium was not a legitimate member of the Chamber. The Yes Men retorted asking for Wohlschlegel's business card. Wohlschlegel in turn asked for his, and left the room handing out business cards to members of the press who were in attendance.
Watch these videos:
We have talked a couple weeks ago about the nature of breaking news. Could this situation been handled better instead of turning into a media fiasco? Should the media (one lady in the first video says she knew the guy wasn't from the Chamber) have caught on that this was a hoax before it happened? Clearly some people in the room knew he wasn't a legitimate representative. What should have happened?
A huge media fiasco occurred yesterday when a group known as the "Yes Men" pulled off an elaborate hoax that fooled multiple news stations.
The "Yes Men" posed as officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and called a press conference in which they revealed false information that the Chamber was going to support climate control legislation, which is contradictory to what the Chamber stands for. Many news organizations were present, (Fox News, CNBC, the New York Times).
After a while, a representative from the real U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Eric Wohlschlegel, burst into the room declaring that the meeting was a "stunt" and that the man at the podium was not a legitimate member of the Chamber. The Yes Men retorted asking for Wohlschlegel's business card. Wohlschlegel in turn asked for his, and left the room handing out business cards to members of the press who were in attendance.
Watch these videos:
We have talked a couple weeks ago about the nature of breaking news. Could this situation been handled better instead of turning into a media fiasco? Should the media (one lady in the first video says she knew the guy wasn't from the Chamber) have caught on that this was a hoax before it happened? Clearly some people in the room knew he wasn't a legitimate representative. What should have happened?
Monday, October 19, 2009
Act One: Balloon Boy Lives
Considering the events of the this past weekend, I thought it a good idea to start out on the topic of Balloon Boy. I kept up to date on all of the events that transpired around "Balloon Boy," from the breaking news coverage during CNN's Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer on Thursday, to the revelation by the sheriff of Larimer County, CO that the whole situation was a hoax Sunday morning.
As the news broke on Thursday, CNN was the only major network covering Balloon Boy. CNN broke the story in the early afternoon and didn't leave it for at least two or three hours. I tuned into MSNBC and Fox News at around four o'clock to see if they were covering the footage but all I saw was the usual mug of Chris Matthews playing Hardball with someone and Glenn Beck ranting about God knows what on their respective networks.
My question is, how do you think the media handled the situation? The media, namely CNN, played a huge part in revealing this situation to be a hoax. Is this a pseudo-event that received too much attention when other issues like the Pakistani war against the Taliban could have received more air time? Or was it necessary to spend hours reporting this story?
As the news broke on Thursday, CNN was the only major network covering Balloon Boy. CNN broke the story in the early afternoon and didn't leave it for at least two or three hours. I tuned into MSNBC and Fox News at around four o'clock to see if they were covering the footage but all I saw was the usual mug of Chris Matthews playing Hardball with someone and Glenn Beck ranting about God knows what on their respective networks.
My question is, how do you think the media handled the situation? The media, namely CNN, played a huge part in revealing this situation to be a hoax. Is this a pseudo-event that received too much attention when other issues like the Pakistani war against the Taliban could have received more air time? Or was it necessary to spend hours reporting this story?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)