Tuesday, October 13, 2009

The Media Conundrum

TW: Not sure what the answer is. The free market has figured out folk like to bounce around inside their own echo chambers (see the cable ratings which are dominated by the most biased cable "news" shows). Public funding or at least civic-minded philanthropists may be the last hope.

From Tom Barnett:
"...no one seems to be going into journalism anymore (especially the horrific TV version) with any pretense of being anything other than biased infotainer. It's getting really sad.
I mean, I still find newspapers pretty good, and certain mags are solid, but TV is more of a vast wasteland than it's ever been, with Jon Stewart preening as our "most trusted TV newsman," according to polls. Yuck, say I. Parody as a full-time news screen is just plain unhealthy, because it's still being fed to you in a highly packaged, biased manner. You simply don't develop your own screens or analytical capacity. I'm certain it also reduces your sense of humor for similar reasons, increasing only your cynicism.


Fox, in my opinion, not only ruined a lot of conservative thinking, it ruined CNN through and through--including my beloved Headline News (which is now MTV-like in spending most of its time providing everything but its primary product). Try listening to any of these channels without looking at the screen and you'll simply be amazed at the low-bit rate transfer--as in, there's almost no useful information and just a lot of speculation over the most minute tactical details. My favorites are the experts tapped to comment as news breaks. Seriously, just close your eyes when you listen to them and 99% of what they say is pure drivel--the equivalent of junk food...

What's weird is that TV sports coverage in America arguably outperforms the news coverage by a ways, as does weather. There the bit rate flow is amazing. I watched the SNF tape of the Packers and Bears five times last week and Collinsworth was great. Just tons of useful backstory, quick descriptions and analysis, and wonderful displays of stats. Watch games from the 1960s and the difference is vast. But watch news from back then and you realize how bad it has become: people talk very fast today and say about 1/10th as much that's actually useful.
http://thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2009/10/why_im_coming_close_to_not_wat.html

No comments: