The - I hate my media - thread

[Farm Boy]

It used to be good. Now it's very bad.

It was never good.

"When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers — nothing is better.

But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite each of you to sit down in front of your own television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.

You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials — many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you'll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it." --- Newton N. Minow, FCC Chairman, 1961.

 

[Tahuti]

I sort of agree. As a whole, television was never worthwhile, given how news programmes and cheap game shows make up the majority of the repertoire. However, in the 1990s, there was still stuff on TV that was actually fun to watch. Most stuff today is unwatchable, save for pay-channels like HBO.

 

[downtown]

I actually think we have lots of pretty good TV shows now...more than I remember over the past few years.

But yeah, TV news has sucked for decades. All media is bad except for what I make or that I personally like.

 

[Lohrenswald]

What I think is regarded as the most prestigious newspaper in Norway (at least excluding the papers targeted to economist jerks) made a story of an owl that flew into their building.

 

[sophie]

I actually think we have lots of pretty good TV shows now...more than I remember over the past few years.

But yeah, TV news has sucked for decades. All media is bad except for what I make or that I personally like.

Yeah I have no problem with television programming. We are in a golden age of quality cinematic original television programming. My beef is with news programming which, at least on tv, is almost universally awful, vapid stuff.

 

[gay_Aleks]

What I think is regarded as the most prestigious newspaper in Norway (at least excluding the papers targeted to economist jerks) made a story of an owl that flew into their building.

It was a Swedish owl! Sent to steal our oils!

 

[bhavv]

But Fox News is the bed comedy channel ever.

 

[Lohrenswald]

What I think is regarded as the most prestigious newspaper in Norway (at least excluding the papers targeted to economist jerks) made a story of an owl that flew into their building.

Same newspaper just had this headline:

"Good mood makes you smarter "

A bloody smiley in the headline.
I sometimes feel bad for not following news enough, but what should I do when the "golden standard" of newspapers throw this?

 

[classical_hero]

This why I hate the local media, they are basically gossip rags the way they are reporting the news.
http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/media-watch-dog/

t was revealed in Senate Estimates on Wednesday that the 25 November meeting was in fact a dinner party at Parliament House to honour the Chief of the US Air Force, Geoff Brown. MWD just loved Mr Lyons sources for his story. Namely “one military official”, “insiders”, “one cabinet minister’s staff member”, “one minister”, “one Liberal power broker”, “another influential Liberal”, “one guest”, “one of those in the [Expenditure Review Committee] meetings”, “one cabinet minister’s staffer”, “one of Abbott’s oldest friends”, “many who know Abbott well”, “one Liberal senator”, “another insider”, “another source from the [Prime Minister’s] office”, “another insider”, “some”, “one leading journalist”, “another political observer”, “one of Abbott’s close friends”, “parliamentary colleagues”, “one guest” and, wait for it, “seasoned political observers”.

Not one named source and of course the story blew up in the journalists face.

 

[Borachio]

What I think is regarded as the most prestigious newspaper in Norway (at least excluding the papers targeted to economist jerks) made a story of an owl that flew into their building.

That's actually a sign of a really, really good country to live in.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Same newspaper just had this headline:

"Good mood makes you smarter "

A bloody smiley in the headline.
I sometimes feel bad for not following news enough, but what should I do when the "golden standard" of newspapers throw this?

Now this:
"These graphs crush the myths about immigration from Sweden"

It's not the topic, it's the word crush and the apparent fact that they just found a couple of graphs and made an article.
This sounds like a buzzfeed article or something.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Hard time to be a newspaper with this Internet business.

 

[Borachio]

Do you know what? I've very little sympathy for newspapers.

I can see the point of journalism - in keeping the public informed and making corruption harder to get away with.

I just don't see much journalism going on in newspapers.

 

[Atlantic Pacf.]

*Blah blah Nick inevitably misrepresenting Korean pop culture blah blah not including Asians blah blah blah.*

In other "news," a few days ago there was this CNN interviewee who said something about the Shia-Sunni divide existing for "thousands of years." Sure, because Islam totally existed for thousands of years.

 

[Farm Boy]

Has it been a divide for a thousand of years yet?

 

[Borachio]

Yes. They schismed within months of the prophets death, I think. It's an argument about succession, after all.

 

[jackelgull]

It's actually more complicated than that. The secession a few months after the Prophet's death weren't fatal, and Abu Bakr managed to keep the Caliphate united. The official schism didn't began developing until Uthman. The shortest way to explain it is that many Muslims lost faith in the Caliphate during Uthman's administration, and Uthman didn't really help matter along. Add to foreign aid to malcontents and you get the makings of a political schism that eventually developed into a religious one.

Don't take this to mean that Sunni and Shia had formed. It isn't until the Prophet's grandson that the Shia consciousness began to coalesce, but the seeds can be found in the political split during Uthman's time.

I hope I haven't confused or bored anyone.

 

[Borachio]

Not at all.

But that the schism is well over a thousand years old is true, isn't it?

Sunnis believe that Abu Bakr, the father of Muhammad's wife Aisha, was Muhammad's rightful successor and that the method of choosing or electing leaders (Shura) endorsed by the Quran is the consensus of the Ummah (the Muslim community).

Shias believe that Muhammad divinely ordained his cousin and son-in-law Ali Ibn Abi Talib (the father of his grandsons Hasan ibn Ali and Hussein ibn Ali) in accordance with the command of God to be the next caliph, making Ali and his direct descendants Muhammad's successors. Shias believe that Muhammad quoted this, in Hadith of the pond of Khumm. Ali was married to Fatimah, Muhammad's daughter by his wife Khadijah bint Khuwaylid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia–Sunni_relations#Historical_beliefs_and_leadership

 

[Lohrenswald]

The front page on this news paper's web page has featured a story about some [Oh no autocensor] that didn't go to furthergoing school having made sick moneyz on let's plays for quite some time now.

 

[tilamook]

Well media captures and shares everything even it's not worth to share in the world. It can also be exaggerating plus always give bad news but it also give you an update for everything. I could still say that existence of media is important no matter what.