tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post4777943534488117695..comments2024-03-12T04:13:49.300-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: No (Network) News Is Good NewsGus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-13067397407729975842016-12-15T04:37:43.799-06:002016-12-15T04:37:43.799-06:00C.,
That one made me smile, and it goes double fo...C.,<br /><br />That one made me smile, and it goes double for the airwaves.<br /><br />GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-83325457829129487272016-12-14T20:40:51.072-06:002016-12-14T20:40:51.072-06:00Hi Gus, Dinwar,
The skepticism regarding the vera...Hi Gus, Dinwar,<br /><br />The skepticism regarding the veracity of newspapers goes back to the Founders.<br /><br /><i>"The man who never looks into a newspaper<br />is better informed than he who reads them;<br />inasmuch as he who knows nothing is<br />nearer to the truth than he whose mind<br />is filled with falsehoods and errors." </i><br /><br />Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Novell, June 11, 1807<br /><br />c andrewAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-28624278749816789942016-12-14T05:37:15.044-06:002016-12-14T05:37:15.044-06:00Dinwar,
I think you make many good points, but I ...Dinwar,<br /><br />I think you make many good points, but I wouldn't go so far as to say what you did in your last sentence. It's possible to find proper news, even on the airwaves. But doing so requires more effort than, perhaps, it should.<br /><br />GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-18883587742190558042016-12-13T16:24:58.285-06:002016-12-13T16:24:58.285-06:00I believe this is due to two combined factors:
1...I believe this is due to two combined factors: <br /><br />1) Fundamentally misunderstanding what news is. News isn't a way to become informed; it's a way to provide a broad overview of important information, which allows you to decide which to focus on. In a finite timespan breadth precludes depth; if you're going to cover local, regional, national, and global news (along with weather and devoting half your air time to sports) you'll necessarily have to only provide a shallow analysis of each event. This doesn't mean that the analysis is invalid or improper, merely that it is not--and cannot--in-depth coverage. <br /><br />2) The neverending news cycle. In the past, news was limited in duration--you had an hour, more or less. The term "newsworthy" became synonymous with "important" because only the most important events were discussed; the limited time required careful selection of which stories to present. In a neverending news cycle (which is what "a 24 hour news cycle" really means) the opposite happens. You have to fill time, and often this is done by inflating puff-pieces to the status of real news. That's not to say that this didn't occur when news had a more limited time frame, but the need to produce 24 hours of programming every 24 hours incentivizes this. <br /><br />To be clear, this isn't to say that the public are passive victims here. The former is entirely on us, and the latter only exists because we continue to participate in it (the sanction of the victim). But I do think that these are two large components of why news doesn't really exist in our culture anymore. Dinwarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06138006602385020048noreply@blogger.com