• #16
    Well said, Zazz... "Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century, and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press." -Alexander Solzhenitsyn
  • #18
    Yes, however, we also know that in general the news is about an hour, then repeated 24 times. So turn it off after 1 hour.

    Message to Broadcast providers: make all channels icons like on the iPhone. Send us alerts by push notification to let us know there is something new to look at - like Politix here.

    Of course, to the point as in here we can have "new" news which is just modified old news introduced as nauseum. So nevermind.:)
  • #21
    Yeah, the media is keeping war sterile for us... But anyone who frequents YouTube can see servicemen-submitted reports and videos all day long... And not all domestic terrorism is reported by media either... There have been more than many IED explosions in the US just in the past 6 months...
  • #27
    "This is a self perpetuating phenomenon that would go away if people changed the channel." Oh, now that makes way too much sense! LOL
  • #13
    Yes, it's FAR too much... to the point where when a tragedy happens I stop watching news for a while since it's all you hear about. Sandy hook? No news for 2 weeks. Bombing? Haven't turned the news on since.
  • #6
    According to Grinberg's analysis of the Liberal Media, aka the Mainstream Media, the Gosnell trial should have been "above the fold" for weeks and "journalists" would be fighting over seats in the courtroom.

    I wonder why that wasn't the case?
  • #23
    I agree with the writers view. But it's not going to change because ratings drive the business. And who drive the ratings? the Public. The American public is like a 10 year old peeking between their fingers at a late night horror movie. They can't wait to be shocked and terrified. There is no reason at all for some fat women like the Khardashians to be making millions for being stupid. But they do. That's not the media's fault. It's your fault. Those who follow them. No following, no Khardashians.

    I have tired to not draw conclusions from the Bombing. It will be some time, if they're honest about it, before they've even sifted through all the phone videos, store video cameras, thousands of people who "saw someone". Nobody is making claim to the act so it could be some time. But the media lives in an instant gratification society. And who drives that need for instant gratification? How bout the public at large? It's no different from the 1970's when a housewife standing in line at a supermarket leafed through a National enquirer and then swore it to be fact that a woman in Florida had given birth to a half alligator half man baby. Only difference today is how quickly bullshit travels.
  • #11
    Today's media is out of control and is a force for evil and civic disruption. They act like a gaglle of Tween girls who think they know everything about everything.
  • #9
    No. I do not agree. I can edit my viewing of the media with the "Off" button. There are far more photos and conspiracy theories floating around the internet than on television. What I want are the facts as they are known. What I dislike is censorship. I suspect that far more has occurred on American soil than we have been made aware of, under the guise of protecting us from fear and panic. As a result, a great many Americans have been living as if we have not been at war for over a decade.
  • #15
    Politix Op-Ed Contributor
    Interesting point, Dan. Thanks for your astute comments.
    FYI: I'm against media "censorship" as well. However, as "gatekeepers" of news, the media ALREADY decide what to report, what not to, and how much of it. This may be considered a mild form of censorship in the broader sense of the term.
    I like your point about going to the web, like YouTube, if one chooses to watch the bombing video 25 times in a row, pausing and examining each frame, etc. But broadcast news reaches the masses of Americans and still has tremendous influence.
    Moreover, with today's "Digital Divide" not all Americans have easy acesss to the Internet or cable TV (sadly).
    I'm referring to low-income and indigent citizens, as well as a segment of the elderly population, who rely on broadcast news as their main -- and perhaps only -- news source. They may even still have those rabbit ear antennas on their tubular TVs.
    Just something to consider. Thanks again.
  • #22
    @DB-Grinberg I do grant you that broadcast TV does repeat news reports endlessly, and sensational news keeps the audience attentive for the stream of commercials. Sometimes it seems as if the repetition is itself a smokescreen, much like a magician uses distraction to keep his audience from seeing what he is really up to. Personally, I do not pay for TV and get by on only what is available from an antenna, and the pickings are sparse. I wonder just how many low-income and indigent citizens do actually have access to the internet and cable TV. I have seen homeless people with cellphones and even hauling around laptops that they use to tap the internet from free wireless nodes. I know that it seems like skewed priorities when a person has next to no wealth to speak of, but then homeless people well spend their last dime on liquor or drugs, as well.
  • #8
    I don't believe the spread fear, we did see close and up front what happened. They over did it with the number of times they showed the same scenes and the bomb going off. Thats our news media these days. Would have enjoyed the straight news more than news with a twist.
  • #40
    also they do not show the war going on a few 100 miles from us right now. mexico is a war zone and just about a failed state.
  • #2
    Yes I do. It's too much. There is no journalism here, just hogs for ratings and sharks at a feeding frenzy. I watched the first hour or so and that's it.

    Every "event" gets worse and worse with more and more incessant blabbering from these people. Enough is enough.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #42
    The media spreads and promotes fear, panic, blood and guts, and sex, because that is what sells. The more of it, the better for their bottom line.
  • #38
    I wandered into the living room to sit in my big purple velvet easy chair and look at the news just after the news of the bombs broke. I fell asleep and woke up just in time to realize an hour or so had passed and that the mane on the screen was saying that at that moment what they actually knew about who had planted the bombs and why was exactly zero. Yet the live coverage continued.
  • #35
    Politix Op-Ed Contributor
    ...And wouldn't you know it, as Politix put it a bit earlier today:
    "CNN reported early Wednesday afternoon that an arrest was made. The Associated Press said a suspect had been taken into custody. But the authorities said they jumped the gun. The FBI denied that an arrest was made, slapping the media for being too hasty in reporting it:"
    "Contrary to widespread reporting, there have been no arrests made in connection with the Boston Marathon attack," the FBI said in a statement. "Since these stories often have unintended consequences, we ask the media, particularly at this early stage of the investigation, to exercise caution and attempt to verify information through appropriate official channels before reporting."
    ...And as journo Karen Tumulty put it in a Tweet:
    ‏"@ktumulty 2h Dear Media: Tomorrow, try decaf.Reply Retweet Retweeted
    760 Retweets, 186 Favorites - 3:21 PM - 17 Apr 13"
    Thus the media need to be more concerned about accuracy in reporting generally and less concerned about reporting "breaking news" prematurely and incorrectly.
  • #34
    I agree that media over hypes everything from LiLo to winter storms to bombings. However it has a purpose, which is to make you believe there is a justification for the inappropriate and incredibly disproportionate reaction to the attack. There will be a further erosion of our Bill of Rights. I keep remembering what they told us after 9/11: Basically, it was "they attacked us because of our prosperity and freedoms". So what do we do? We pass the Patriot Act, NDAA 2012, FISA, and a slew of other illegal laws, and then ship all of our jobs overseas. There. We are no longer free or prosperous. Maybe the terrorists will leave us alone now??
  • R Load more comments...