Hey team,
So, after looking back through your notes (and perhaps watching the movies again, if you weren't paying desperately close attention), please comment on what you saw as the main positions taken by the speakers in the film, and why you agree or disagree.
All for now,
Jesse
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
First Video (16)
-In the Daily Show John Stewart uses humor to attract attention to news, therefore the Daily Show has become one of the best sources of news. I believe that the news can sometimes be boring to listen to, and I have never seen the Daily Show until English class. I found the show very funny, and through the humor I was able to learn about things in the news. I think that if reporters were as exciting as John Stewart, more people would be interested in watching the news including teens.
-The producer of the Daily Show states that the news and media is depressing. He also says that it is horrible news broadcasting horribly. I agree with the producer because the news, and the news reporters are boring, and depressing. They speak in a monotone voice even when the news topic is something important. Most of the time the things you see on the news are uninteresting anyway so the reporters are basically the icing on the cake.
-In the first video the reporter of the video states that hidden cameras work better when trying to tell a story. I think that when you actually see what a reporter is trying to tell you about, the topic becomes more fascinating, and it grabs your attention. For example the restaurant scene in the video. I could care less about what people think about having a couple making out, or kids running around in a restaurant, but when I actually saw the video tape I wanted to see, and learn more.
-My favorite line in the video was "networks are being pushed to create entertainment programs dressed up like news" I think this is pathetic. I think that a certain type of news on some level is suppose to be serious. When I think of newspapers or news networks I think of ground-breaking stories. I don't think about cheerleaders having to have to change the style of their uniforms. On the other hand I think news on the internet could, and can be about whatever you like.
Second Video (17)
-Ted Kqppel states that "you have to give the public what it wants, not what it should see or needs". The news network is a business itself, and like any other business it has to make money, and profits. By giving the public what it wants, the public will be more likely to watch the news, or read about it, which increases profits for the news networks. The news needs to appeal to everyone, but it also still needs to deliver the important issues going on in our country, like the war.
-CBS had a rule that said you have to have a session that tells you what is important on the news, and I agree with that. I think you can show whatever you want on the news as long as you still have the "more important" news aired. If we didn't have that session we wouldn't know whats going on.
-60 Minutes, and other shows like it were profit setters for news networks. I would honestly like to watch a 60 min., Dateline, or 20/20 episode over the regular news channels. These forms of news are more appealing to me because the reporters not only tell you a story, but they interview people, and show videos of the story they are telling you about. Its more interesting to watch this than it is to watch a reporter just reading to you.
Critics have voted that The Daily Show with John Stewart is the best news program on tv. David Javerbaum, a producer of The Daily Show, says that this isn't because of the shows success, but rather it's because of news programs failures. The news is "depressing" and it's "horrible news, broad casted horribly" I believe that the success of the show isn't because of the failures of others but rather, people want to laugh people want to be entertained by the news. Ted Koppel said, news is giving people what they want, and that this is one of the biggest tragedies in the history of American journalism. In someways I agree with Ted Koppel's statement and in others I don't. I agree because some of the reports are ridiculous and not important, their just attention grabbers. I disagree with it because whats wrong with interesting, entertaining, laughable news. Brian Ross, a producer at ABC, says that the standards haven't lowered but they have widened. There's more ways of getting the news more outlets like tv, radio, and the internet. They need stories to fill the time, and they'll use stories about strippers, or child molesters to do it. But what is disturbing to me is when they take entertainment and dress it up as news like the news report in the restaurant and the old man in the park. The question is, is technology threating the news? I think it's not, just because there are outrageous news stories doesn't mean that the "real" news should be hindered in anyway.
News Wars
Once upon a time they were thought of as heroes. Journalist would bring fresh and the best news to the public and expanding the knowledge of journalism. Today, the news industry is in crisis. People have found other ways of getting their news. Mostly online plays a big role in this world. The news industries are facing economic difficulties and journalism is not the same any more.
According to the videos the greatest tragedy in journalism occurred when news became entertainment. The Daily Show by John Stewart is not a news program at all, but many people favor of getting news from this show; John Stewart claims that the news channels do not know how to present its news, therefore are loosing business. He says that the news shows are boring and they are presented in a fearful view. The news media fails miserably to report the news.
According to “David Westin news is what matters to people”. I agree with this quote because I want to read about what I am interested in. Therefore, a teenage gets oral sex or a guy and a teenager are dating, may matter to some people. “The standard of news has broadened because I will find you a news piece, what you would perceive a noble serious news piece” Westin said, which for most fact is true.
Ted Koppel in the video “Network News: Then and Now” main point is “the public wants is what they want” and he say that this is the tragedy for the news industries because they lost the public’s interest. Brian Ross says that the standards haven't lowered but they have widened. There's many ways of getting the news; outlets like TV, radio, and the internet; he says that if he needs to stuff stories such as strippers at the club or child molesters he will add them in the news for pass time. I am perfectly alright with that. I do not care what I watch but it should entertain me. In other words news shows are not entertaining.
Over the years, network television and the media has changed the way they define news. News is no longer considered just current events about our world and government, but also entertainment. News is what matters to the people, and what matters to the people, is no longer just the boring serious headlines. Television broadcasting stations recognized the change and so to keep up with their views, they started airing news programs such as The Daily Show, 20/20, and 60 minutes.
All network television broadcastings want and need ratings. And in order to get these ratings, they must air entertaining news and headlines that grabs the views attention. All views have access to hundreds of channels, so why pick a boring news programming when they could get the news in a more entertaining way. All broadcasting stations must keep up with their audience and do whatever it takes to keep their attention. And if they have to do it by mixing in more entertaining news with current events, then that should be done. Everyone has unlimited access to serious current events, by a few clicks of a button and so I don’t believe that by adding more entertaining news it is taking away from our knowledge of what is happening in the world.
One main point made in the beginning of the first film was that, the most influential news program was not even a news program and that is John Stewarts “The Daily Show”. I would have to agree with this statement because I do enjoy watching The Daily Show, more than any news broadcast. The Daily Show makes the news more appealing and interesting to watch for the younger generations, and puts a humorous twist in the news that you won’t find anywhere else. Another point that was made was how entertainment programs such as “To Catch a Predator” pretend to be news. They said that this type of news which they call “investigative news” is more of a public service because they give the public what it wants, not necessarily what’s important. I agree with this because they mentioned in the video that the standard for news has broadened because the news can now cover more and attract more people which are both true. What maybe news to some may now be news to others and that is why it is important to have every type of news programs out there, so that people can decide for themselves what is and isn’t news to them. In one of the last interview they spoke about the major reason why the news has changed and that’s because the news is now a business. When news shows like “20/20” began to turn in profits big businesses began to buy out news divisions. Now the news is all about which program can bring in the biggest profit, which isn’t what news is suppose to be it was never suppose to bring a profit it was there to keep the public informed. I would have to disagree with this because everything is about money and if the news industry would have never brought in a profit I believe it would have eventually died out because nobody would want to sponsor the news.
1)News programmers admit that the most influential news program on TV at this moment is on comedy central, The Daily Show. This is not a surprise to me because Jon Stewart brings an approach to current events that actual news reporters do not, a humorous one. Stewart puts a twist on the news, presenting the happenings of the world more as a source of entertainment than information. Although I must agree that adding this excitement to the spread of information does attract more viewers, I feel that this takes away from the seriousness of the news. The addition of humor to news does make the subjects discussed more interesting to listen to, and in some cases more memorable. However, speaking of the elections or the war in Iraq with such a comical tone cause people to underestimate the significance of the issues at hand.
2)Throughout this video clip (16), numerous examples were given on how news has “gone soft”. At one point, it was even stated that news media is depressing and that the collection of news and reporting it is “turmoil“. I find that the headlines these days do seem to be ridiculous at times, not impacting our daily lives or our views of the world. A serious news channel should be able to uphold their stature and stage issues that actually apply to us or broaden our knowledge of current events, not just address any happening because they got a hold of it. The presentation of the news is also said to be lacking these days, having those speak about daily happenings in uninterested voices, allowing the public to also take on that approach.
3)During the interview in this segment (16) of the video, there were two given ideas on what defined news. While one said that news is merely current events, the other said that news in essence is what matters to people. As one debated that the standards of the news are dropping as more nonsense is aired on TV, the other stated that they are just broadening their topics of discussion. I feel that its true that what may be news or interesting to one may not be to another, but that doesn’t mean that all sorts of information should be given over to the public through one outlet. With the technology we have these days, there are many sources which people get their news from. Although I do think it’s important that news networks, such as CBS and NBC, keep a more serious tone with current affairs, I feel that the internet should have more leniency with what they call “news” because they don’t have a serious reputation to uphold.
4)The fact that news and entertainment are intertwined is an idea that I agree with greatly. Entertainment constantly uses the news as the source for its comical material and often pokes fun at worldly happenings. I think this is fine because that is what the media’s job is, to do whatever it can in order to draw in viewers. However, the problem is found when news itself is treated as an entertainment. I believe that it is wrong for news producers to draw in viewers through gossip-like stories, treating the spread of information more like big business than helping the public.
5)Ted Koppel states that instead of giving the public what it needs or what it should see, the news should deliver what the people wants. This idea is considered a big tragedy in the news world. Not only may the news not be alerting the public about worldly events, but it may be sinking with the moral decadence of the public. If the public only wants to hear about scandal, is that what the news will restrict themselves to giving them? It’s not correct to withhold Americans from the information they need to hear because certain news networks feel the need to make a bigger profit. However, if the news does not give the public what they want at all, then viewers will stop tuning in to watch the news and its production will stop altogether. Therefore, in order to keep the news alive, its programmers must broadcast topics which may seem not “noble” to some.
Ted Koppel believes that “the greatest tragedy in the history of American news” is putting news on the same standards as entertainment, making it more of what the public wants than what they should see or hear. In the two videos we are being told that news has become a way of making profit instead of a way to report news to the people of America. In the first video it was said that the job of the reporter is to raise questions that others are scared to ask, but today it seems that reporters only focus on entertaining people. David Westin, who supports the profit out of news, argues that news is what matters to people and the reason news has changed so much over the course of the years is because there are a wider range of outlets covered causing the definition of news to broaden. But how much influence does the news media have when the highest rating program for news is the Daily Show on Comedy Central? The success of comedy central is not a success to them it’s the failures of news media. News media has been seen by many as more depressing than the news itself and it fails to report good journalism.
I agree that news is more of a way to make profit than report news to the people of America. People shouldn’t turn to the news media for entertainment, that what television shows and specific networks as Comedy Central is used for. News should educate people of what is going on in the world and help them form opinions on situations. Today I believe news has become more gossipy and irrelevant. Yes there are more time slots for news but it shouldn’t be on things that don’t really matter, it should be on current events that have an effect on society as a whole and not on a specific group of people. When I watch the news I feel as they are always advertising instead of stating facts. We have to take news out of the entertainment standard and make it more out of what we need to hear and see, than what we want. It’s time to make American journalism respectful again.
Both videos display to the viewer that news has changed dramatically over the years. what you see and what stories are told to the viewer has changed. News has become less serious and more humorous. It has turned into a comedy show. The stories that are told on the news are stories that interest people. If people aren't interested in hearing that story then they wont watch that channel. You no longer need to watch the t.v to hear the new, you can go on the internet. The world wide web has changed news as well. If you look at the top stories they aren't even news. They are stories that provide entertainment for people. That is also what the news has come to, entertainment. People would rather read about a cat with two heads than hear about the war. Also, the news casters are willing to say any story just so they can get paid. It has come to a point where money has become more important than telling important stories to the viewers. All these statements are sad but true, and i have no choice but to agree with them. The news and what we hear is only what matters to people, and its sad that stupidity is what people want to hear and see.
The Daily Show with John Stewart was voted the most influential and best news program on TV. This is no surprise for me because people want to laugh and be entertained. And now thanks to this show news is now more fun to watch. I think this is really good because people who normally find the news boring and would never watch it, watch the Daily Show because it’s both informative and entertaining. So thanks to the Daily Show more people now know what’s going on in the world.
Ted Koppel criticizes the media and says how the news channels give people what they want and not necessarily what they need. But I don’t think there’s anything wrong with adding a little entertainment to the news. Why shouldn’t you give people more of an incentive to watch the news? You’re still giving important information and news about the world, so it’s ok to add some entertaining information too. This way you’re attracting more people to watch your show and they’re becoming more educated. A full range of stories is good because then it’s appealing to all. Their goals are to have higher ratings, and through entertainment they are highly increasing their ratings. Shows like 60 Minutes, 20/20, and Dateline agree with this. They all try portraying the news in an interesting way. By showing videos of the story and interviewing people they make their news more appealing and entertaining for the viewers. These entertaining ways of portraying the news is very helpful for our society because now more people are watching it and are more aware of the things going on in the world.
The films tell us that the standard of the news is being changed. News in the past is to inform people of recent events, but in the world we're in today, news is more like entertainments to the people. To the media companies, news is a gift for public of what they want. They make news programs concentrating on attracting people's attention. They only show news that the general population is interested in. (e.g. Britney Spears).Sometimes, they also show the news that should not be qualified as news to people to get better ratings. Even if the program itself is inappropriate, they still air the show. Also, radio and TV are no longer the only source of news, websites like web CNN provides another choice to those who prefer to browse only on subjects they are interested in. But the standard of news on internet is also fairly low. News reporters tend to write articles in less formal ways. And the reason of the low quality news that we experience today is us, people always prefer to hear the gossip rather than those serious national or domestic news. This is how the society has changed; and this is how the news has changed. I agree with it since people only want to hear and read the thing they are interest on, and to use this fact media companies create such shows to make money.
The first video deals with news and the media today, and how poorly that news is broadcasted to the public. The Daily Show has become the most popular “news” show on television, which its producers attribute to the news industry and how it has failed. The video then goes on to explain how new technology and the media marketplace are threatening serious reporting and changing our definition of news. It also talks about how networks are forced to present entertainment stories dressed as news, and how these stories really aren’t news. I agree with the points this video makes on how the standards of news have changed over the last few years, due to the wider number of outlets and news sources.
The second video speaks about “investigative reporting” and how news shows are being replaced by programming such as Dateline NBC’s ‘To Catch a Predator’ in order to get good ratings. Ted Koppel says that we are now judging journalism by the same standards that we apply to entertainment, and that these networks are giving the people what they want to see, not what they need to see, which Koppel describes as “one of the greatest tragedies in the history of American journalism.” The origins of news were to serve the public interest, and provide quality news for the public. I agree with this video because I think the news has turned into more of a business, and that television stations are not providing people with the news they need.
Both videos tell us how the news has changed over the years. News isnt just about current events but is now about entertainment and what appeals to people. For example the article we clicked on in class about the guy who killed his girlfriends cat was not as important as the articles about the stock market and the economy, but it caught our attention and we clicked on it anyway. Do I really care about some guy killing his girlfriends cat? no, but some cat lover might find it to be the most important thing they have heard all week. Now people watch comedy news shows like "The Daily Show" with John Stewart to get their information. They find these shows more entertaining and to have more important topics. More and more news channels are making shows like to "To Catch a Predator" and 20/20, and Dateline to make more money. American journalism needs to go back to the way it was before and not just be about who wore what on the red carpet.
Journalists were once thought of as heroes but now as desperate storytellers. Journalism was once thought of as serious and provided news that were important. It seems that today, journalists have lost their actual goal and focus on entertainment. The most influential news show today is a comedic news program known as "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart." His show has attracted many people because of how entertaining it actually is. Today, the media is under attack because it is about being entertaining and how "soft" it has become. One news reporter said, " There was a time in my day, when that wouldn't be considered news." One reason why the standard of news is changing is because of new technology. Broader topics need to be covered because news can't be just found on your television anymore. Any sort of news is acceptable in today's society because it is out of the norm and is considered a public service by NBC. Although often criticized about their reports, broadcasters often defend what they report. I disagree with the statement that the media is in crisis mode. The news needs stories and in my opinion shows the best of both worlds. It's okay now and then that we see some sort of entertainment news, it's a form of relief. Who wants to keep hearing bad news all day?
• One of the points stated was that new technology imposes a threat to the news world. I completely disagree with this statement because if anything, it is rebuilding the way news is broadcasted in a better way. With the introduction of the Internet, news is easier to access and more widespread. These technological advances help distribute information easier and faster and ultimately successfully.
• Another point made was that news is what matters to people. I believe that this is true because you are not always going to have the same audience be attracted to the same issues. For example, right now younger teens are not interested in the wall street crash but older adults are waiting on their tippy toes for this news. Some may be attracted to the election, while others could care less. This is where choice comes into place and each audience should have a variety of news to choose from. Likewise, another point made was that the standard of news has been broadened and not lowered, as argued.
• In part two one man argues that giving people what they want is the biggest tragedy of the news system. I would have to disagree because news cannot be defined. Rather, it is what interests the audience and yes, at times it can be less serious than the Wall Street crash or the war in Iraq…but that doesn’t mean it’s not news and it doesn’t affect other people. To some people the banning of cheerleader skirts can be news, especially if you are affected.
• News and entertainment are intertwined in today’s society and I think it should be. Entertainment is a source that makes news more interesting and more likely for all age ranges to watch. Think about it, if you went home and saw a comedic parody of the election, wouldn’t you be attracted to the television? I know I would… On the other hand, when we have the evening news on at 10 PM and all of a sudden the big headline is “Jaime Lynne Spears: Underage and Pregnant”, then you start to question the boundaries of the news broadcasting world. Is it really a necessity to involve celebrities in part of our day-to-day lives? Who really cares that Spears got pregnant at 16? Maybe if it was said once, but the repetition of these ridiculous events really has no correlation to the real world.
Over the years, journalism has changed the meaning of news. David Westin defines news as what matters to the people and the standard of news have broadened and wider topics are covered. I agree because the news that interest me, may not interest other people. Since the standard has changed, news media have to run their programs accordingly where they will include the news like cats being killed by an angry boyfriend to basically catch people’s attention.
I think their should be a boundary between the news and entertainment. But at the same time more people are willing to watch entertainment news like The Daily show by John Steward. Because it does prvide you the information but at the same time it entertains you. For example, if you have free time and you turn on TV, you wouldn’t want to watch news because you will find it boring. But if the same news are in the entertainment format you would be willing to watch it. It would be more appealing to you.
Ted Koppel says “give the public what it wants, not what it ought to hear, ought to see but what is wants”. That’s true because the people are going to spend most of their time watching entertainment comedies not the serious topics like Iraq war. Some old people might want to watch news to find out about Iraq war or economy, but the numbers are fewer compare to people eager to watch the entertainment news.
Eunjin Choi (Christina)
The main points from the videos that we watched in class shows the failures in our news. There seems to be a new definition for what news is now today. Reporters were once respected and were people who raise question noone wants to raise and chases the truth. Today we need a institution that is willing to do the same. An institution that is willing to tell the hard facts. In the Daily Show with John Stewart we see how much the news have failed. The producer of the Daily Show stated that the reason to the success of his show was due to the failure of the news. The new technology also is a threat to the news. Another issue that was brought up was the issue that the news is dressing entertainment as news to get more ratings. they argue that news is what matters to people and with theyre wider range of topics that this is needed to grab attention. I believe that because the news are broacasted in a boring way the viewers go to other options to get their news, whether it may be true or not.
Post a Comment