Or, as Jerry Seinfeld said, "It's amazing that the amount of news that happens in the world every day always just exactly fits the newspaper."
Do you ever get the idea that sometimes you are getting stuff just to fill the space/ time - info about Tiger's "Transgressions" and the like?In the age of the Internet, do you feel overloaded with info? Is the news cycle/ production schedule of newspapers and broadcast news outdated? Are the traditional news outlets making themselves irrelevant because they treat people like morons?
Can you do a day without traditional news? How about a week?
9 comments:
Really up until a few months ago I didn't want to go without traditional news. But it really is like a bad record: so much filler.
I rarely look for traditional news at all. My homepage is aol.com so I click on any of their links that spark my interest, but that's about it. I never watch the news or read the paper, so the only other way I really get news is if I hear about something from a friend or whatever.
Interested in adopting a dog? Check out my blog http://danpov.blogspot.com/
If newspapers and news channels were more interesting I would be reading / watching them more.
I like to use the internet to search out what I want to know.
I think the overload of information is apparent on broadcast newscasts and the Internet--as they try to mention something about everything they consider "news." Those outlets do not adequately cover the big local issues the way newspapers do and that is why traditional papers will not become irrelevant anytime soon.
All newspapers and broadcast news are desperate for information to survive. However, depending on how lazy they are, in terms of depth of reporting and synthesizing ideas to create something new and different, results in their quantity of "bullshit" news. "Bullshit" news is easy for journalists to find and perhaps it is necessary for daily news because perhaps they have to keep their audience entertained while they search for and develop more important and interesting news. But then again I do believe people think "bullshit" is important. Now whether the news manipulates and brainwashes them into thinking "bullshit" is important or whether there is some truth to its important is a matter of opinion. If the former is true and they are indeed brainwashing us into thinking "bullshit" is important than I do believe this is unethical journalism whether the brainwashing is intentional or accidental. Now News not only independently monitors power but must have independents whose jobs it is to monitor the news, i.e. "The Daily Show", and "The Colbert Report." They consistently exploit their "Bullshit" and it is so easy for them because there is so much of it.
I actually rarely watch the news, the only times I may watch the news is if it is required for an assignment. I tend to only really be interested in celebritiy/media news so I tend to look on blog sites and thats if you consider that "real" news.
It is difficult to understand why BBC can cover stories constantly without fluff, but CNN, FOXnews, and MSNBC all need to waste time with fluffy stories and idiotic headlines. I feel overloaded with pointless info on the private lives of people, it's just not important at all. I like traditional news and not having it would make me totally unaware of what was going on in the world.
I could easily go a week without traditional news. The only traditional news I really read is music magazines. Most of the information I get are from various blogs and online communities.
I don't have television at my house. So I guess I can go weeks without watching traditional news but because I find other ways to know what's going on, like reading the paper, I don't feel like I'm really missing out.
Post a Comment