61–70 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much relevance would ANYTHING on local tv (or even national) have in 100 years? That’s a weird bar to hit.
1918 flu pandemic would be kinda relevant, don't you think
Yes, I agree. Why is 30% to 40% of the time slot allocated to matters that are as ephemeral as the weather and of no long term consequence whatsoever? (For that matter, the weather segment has become much longer than it needs to be, but I digress). Afaict it's only bc it's cheap filler. Certainly most sports fans can either watch things as they happen, or can find out the results any time they want on the internet. I…
I assume you are joking about the weather, but either way... Before weather was freely available on computers or phones, it was useful to know what the weather was likely to be so you could plan local and/or national travel accordingly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume you are joking about the weather, but either way... Before weather was freely available on computers or phones, it was useful to know what the weather was likely to be so you could plan local and/or national travel accordingly.
Idk about other areas but I suspect my local stations are fairly representative of at least the north eastern quarter of the US. All of them burn the better part of a minute with a 'teaser' piece that reveals essentially nothing, early in the half hour. Then about mid way through they burn what must be a solid 4 minutes at least with all manner of fluff. This is when there are no extreme events. If they just stuck to…
People are interested in various things. News is whatever people find interesting that shows up when you diff today vs yesterday.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That wasn't a sports story. It was a political story. A political story should not be relegated to People or the lifestyle section just because it happens to involve famous athletes.
If that’s a political story, almost anything involving both a politician and a celebrity is a “political story.” Think of all of the times that Trump tweeted something about a celebrity, or that celebrities tweeted about Trump. I don’t think it can be right to say that these were all newsworthy events. But suppose that we restrict consideration to only those cases in which Trump tweets something about a celebrity (ra…
(And probably the most accurate)
I think you're pretty much right about the bread and games comment. I think sports can be a big distraction from politics. I believe the White House invites championship teams to visit. So I think political manipulation is still a big part. You can find more evidence in the post-9/11 deals between the NFL and the government.
Just like politics can be a big distraction from the policies and governance that those pesky proles would demand otherwise?