Community >> View Post
·
Post By
Reverend Meteor

In Reply To
Deborah

Subj: Re: Replying anyway . . . National News
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:25:36 am CST
Reply Subj: Re: Replying anyway . . . National News
Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:27:44 pm CST

Previous Post

>
> What about missing people? If god forbid one of your relatives went missing tommorow should that story make the national news or just your local news?
>
That's a very good example. Somehow, missing people stories are usually on young white women (as I alluded to in other post). The ones focusing on men, or on people of any other color, somehow just don't generate the same interest. Or at least reporters act like they don't. Whether that is cause or effect, who knows?

But to reply to the question, I'd say it depends. If someone is missing and possibly lost, say, in Yosemite National Park, it really doesn't make a whit of difference if that news is splashed all over Maine or not. If a person is missing and presumed kidnapped and could be anywhere, then most certainly *that* latter example warrants nationwide attention.
>
> >
> > Religious news is worth being a national story, as millions of people can be effected.
>
> I see your point but the atheist in me cringes at the thought that religious news is more relevant than a person's demise.

I know what you mean, but regardless of how a single person feels about religion, it is indeed relevant to millions of people, and what religious leader do affect those people. And how they relate to others (religious or otherwise). That is why it is a valid story.

A person being murdered somewhere in Oregon likely won't even have any impact on Washington State, let alone the east coast. Note, I'm not claiming that the situation isn't awful, or that the person is by any means less important as a person. Nor am I saying their is any justification for what the murderer did. But neither of those make it *news*. Tragic and terrible, yes, but not news.

> > A cannibal in Texas is titilation "value" and nothing else.
>
> Ok I'm not going to argue that point because it is a valid one (I hate our media here in America). But what right does the media have to NOT air such a story?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. A right to report a story? You mean, as in the right to inform the public, and the public's right to know? A person was brutally murdered. Horrible, yes. By all means put it in the local paper. I'm simply pointing out that, that very same day across the U.S., hundreds if not thousands of people were murdered. Where are all *those* stories? A murder doesn't qualify as national news.

> If the real journalists don't report on this stuff then the yellow journalists like Fox News or Inside Edition or Hard Copy will report it anyways and their report won't be balanced or well researched.

So? Some people will always scrape the bottom of the barrel. Instead of stooping to that level, "legitimate" news sources should concentrate on stories that are actually news that belongs on the national or global stage.

> So you think crime should only be reported on the national news if it somehow has a national impact right? (9/11, Virginia Tech Massacre, capital punishment etc)
>
Basically, yes. *National* news should have a *national* impact.

> >
> > What about missing people? If god forbid one of your relatives went missing tommorow should that story make the national news or just your local news?
> >
> That's a very good example. Somehow, missing people stories are usually on young white women (as I alluded to in other post).

Here I was ready to disagree with you but you steered the conversation to something I agree with you on. I remember when Daniel Compton a college student at Georgia Tech went missing. I read about it online but I never heard about it on the national news (the kid was from Houston, Texas).

It's a real shame when minority children go missing. I almost never hear anything about them on the news. My next door neighbors 13 year old biracial daughter ran away from home and we couldn't even get the local news to report it.

> The ones focusing on men, or on people of any other color, somehow just don't generate the same interest. Or at least reporters act like they don't. Whether that is cause or effect, who knows?
>
> But to reply to the question, I'd say it depends. If someone is missing and possibly lost, say, in Yosemite National Park, it really doesn't make a whit of difference if that news is splashed all over Maine or not. If a person is missing and presumed kidnapped and could be anywhere, then most certainly *that* latter example warrants nationwide attention.
> >
> > >
> > > Religious news is worth being a national story, as millions of people can be effected.
> >
> > I see your point but the atheist in me cringes at the thought that religious news is more relevant than a person's demise.
>
> I know what you mean, but regardless of how a single person feels about religion, it is indeed relevant to millions of people, and what religious leader do affect those people. And how they relate to others (religious or otherwise). That is why it is a valid story.
>
> A person being murdered somewhere in Oregon likely won't even have any impact on Washington State, let alone the east coast. Note, I'm not claiming that the situation isn't awful, or that the person is by any means less important as a person. Nor am I saying their is any justification for what the murderer did. But neither of those make it *news*. Tragic and terrible, yes, but not news.
>
> > > A cannibal in Texas is titilation "value" and nothing else.
> >
> > Ok I'm not going to argue that point because it is a valid one (I hate our media here in America). But what right does the media have to NOT air such a story?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that. A right to report a story? You mean, as in the right to inform the public, and the public's right to know?

Yes that's where I was going with it.

> A person was brutally murdered. Horrible, yes. By all means put it in the local paper. I'm simply pointing out that, that very same day across the U.S., hundreds if not thousands of people were murdered. Where are all *those* stories? A murder doesn't qualify as national news.

I see your point. My problem is what happens if the news media stops reporting this and we only hear about this stuff from your less respectable news sources (like say Inside Edition...I hate that show).

> > If the real journalists don't report on this stuff then the yellow journalists like Fox News or Inside Edition or Hard Copy will report it anyways and their report won't be balanced or well researched.
>
> So? Some people will always scrape the bottom of the barrel. Instead of stooping to that level, "legitimate" news sources should concentrate on stories that are actually news that belongs on the national or global stage.
>
> > So you think crime should only be reported on the national news if it somehow has a national impact right? (9/11, Virginia Tech Massacre, capital punishment etc)
> >
> Basically, yes. *National* news should have a *national* impact.




Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software