CNN has been watching its viewership decline against compeitiors like Fox for years. What you’re seeing is CNN’s attempts to capture the Fox audience. These are Fox tactics.
Welcome to the new millenium :rolleyes:
I like the dramatic dog slo-mo clip near the end.
None of them are perfect. The best is probably NPR, but there’s a definite left-wing slant to some of the content. That said, it’s simply the only widely-available source of news in the US that provides some straight news and commentary allowing both liberals and conservatives a forum for intelligent debate. That more conservatives don’t tune in and encourage more of such debate is too bad. Maybe the majority of conservative listeners aren’t interested in being challenged, I don’t know.
I have noticed that CNN and in fact, most entertainment that comes out of the States (more than other countries), tends to think that the audience is stupid.
It doesn’t have to be this way - wonder when it started happening? We all know there are no more stupid people in the US than in any other country, why pander to them?
If you watch the differences between the same show made in UK or Aus, and in US - it is very revealing. eg. The Nanny. In the UK version, it flows and lets the progress speak for itself. In the US version, we keep having to hear from all the participants explain what was happening, like we, the audience, are dumbasses who can’t work it out for ourselves. eg. TV bloopers or takeouts. In the UK version, we just watch the clip and work out for ourselves what we find amusing. In the US version, we have an explanation of what we should be looking for and we get additional visual aids such as circled areas or arrows - to make sure the dumbasses watching, aren’t being distracted by other non-funny things. I could go on. Not to say that excellent and clever stuff doesn’t come out of the US entertainment industry, because it does - just seems that there is more pandering to the thick in the states than in other countries (and in NZ, I am qualified to say this as we have UK, US, Australian, Canadian and NZ tv shows).
Kinda sounds like the original rationale for invading Iraq …
No no, you fool! They’re making germs that kill guns!
That’s the third (essentially identical) Iraq/WMD one-liner so far. Did you miss the first two?
He found them the same way we found WMDs: not at all.
And yea, I don’t watch news anymore. These days I mostly read the BBC or Guardian from time to time, since they seem to be slightly less sensationalist than CNN, MSNBC, or the utter tripe that is Fox and friends.
Why can’t we have an entire station of people like Anderson Cooper?
They’re doing the same thing with the “crystal meth epidemic sweeping our nation.” The real numbers don’t show any such thing.
Yes. I’m a fucking idiot. Don’t forget to mark your scorecard.
I like NPR and the BBC radio service. Other than that, there’s a whole lotta nothin.
What’s really depressing is that just about all tv news is now pure garbage. It’s not as if you can switch the station to the good news channel and support it. All you can attempt to do is find the lesser of the evils.
As mentioned, because those who don’t fail in a mass market. They succeed if they represent a niche who doesn’t need advertising, like NPR. I get most of my information from the New York Times - not perfect, but pretty close.
I listen to the BBC World Service on my NPR station every so often, and the difference is amazing. BBC correspondents know their stuff, and they both ask hard questions of the world leaders they interview and don’t let them get away with the evasive answers so common from US politicians.
As the familiar misquote of Mencken goes “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”
Yeah, I try to read what I can at the BBC and New York Times.
It’s interesting that even in Ravenman’s experience on a jury, the gun was always in someone’s hands. That makes sense. Of course a crackhouse will have arms, and sometimes a gang member will take it out for some job. The stupid CNN piece tried to imply there are guns squirreled around town like Otis the drunk’s moonshine.
How come other countries don’t have the same “system” then?
Will the BBC get more money if they underestimated the intelligence of the British public?
Hence the tie to Clorox! 
The BBC doesn’t try to maximize profit, being government-owned.
In Canada, I consider the national newscasts of CBC and CTV to be quite reasonable. Both are ad-supported, although CBC is publicly funded.
No comparison to Fox or CNN, from what I’ve seen of them.
Well, of course it’s zero! What do you think the CNN reporters are, a bunch of gang members
… uuhhh, there should be a question mark at the end of my post. Everybody just pretend it’s there, okay?
The guns issue seems to be the most dramatic issue when it comes to propoganda/slant. You will never, ever see guns in the news portrayed as anything but evil killing machines that come alive at night and shoot cute kids. I exaggerate slightly.
Of course, in this case, this is more a crime issue than a gun ownership issue - but as something I’ve been sensitive to, the media coverage is so ridiculously slanted as to qualify as propoganda.