41–50 of 77 posts
I've consciously not watched news for at least the last 20 years. I never watched it much before that. My life is better because of it. It's nothing but fear mongering.
As the video description says "Found the clip, sharing it here." We probably shouldn't link to someone who just stole this clip. On the other hand, the original clip was posted on Deadspin, which was mismanaged so badly that the entire staff ended up resigning roughly a year after they first posted this clip so I don't want to link to them either. So instead I will point to the author of the original article that con…
A stealth tech company in Calif-US created a system to record as many news casts as possible, 24-7, and invoke the closed-caption system to annotate it, and make it searchable. The company was sold in the early 2000's for $1B+ ; I have never seen the name in any tech news. source: colleague was a core engineer there
I don’t think they have any plans to do anything other than what they do now (selectively offer playback to subscribers who opted in before the broadcast), but makes you think it’s a solved technical problem that governments and other players are also probably doing.
I worked with someone who worked in a local news studio. They told me that A LOT of the stories came pre-scripted. Imagine you are a local news studio. You went from being responsible for 30 minutes of content a day to (often) upwards of two hours. And you only have a skeleton crew of on staff writers. To stretch the time, corporate offers a library of "stock" news stories and scripts to choose from. I am told that l…
That's absolutely true. I understand that this particular piece is a step beyond that: a 'must run' segment that was mandated by corporate (something for which Sinclair has form).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is Sinclair, and I find it extremely funny that the right has taken this video to smear the rest of the MSM.
Woah, it's almost as if the right isn't monolithic
is this related to the sinclair broadcast group[1,2] or something else? 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group#2018_... 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtNyOzGogc
This is Sinclair, and I find it extremely funny that the right has taken this video to smear the rest of the MSM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new strategy is to saturate social media with the same talking points ad-nauseam. It’s especially apparent on Reddit and Twitter.
You can even do this with things that are true, to discredit them. Then, when someone independently comes to the same true conclusion, their friends can robotically shut them down with "you are just repeating side X's talking points!"
Televised news is harmful manipulative crap. Just like most Google products you should avoid exposing yourself to it. Of course I feel a little bad telling people this because it's pretty easy to avoid. Once TV news becomes unpopular they'll probably start shoving the same stuff into something that was previously mostly free of that kind of thing.
Not all news stations are the same, not all countries have the same TV news.
It is easy to just give up and think that you cannot trust anyone. But, the reality is that there is many journalists that care and try to create high quality news. To put them all in one bag is not fair, nor helpful.
I worked with someone who worked in a local news studio. They told me that A LOT of the stories came pre-scripted. Imagine you are a local news studio. You went from being responsible for 30 minutes of content a day to (often) upwards of two hours. And you only have a skeleton crew of on staff writers. To stretch the time, corporate offers a library of "stock" news stories and scripts to choose from. I am told that l…
A couple of years later I wrote a script to consolidate stories from news sites across my state and display them with a nice UI, since I have family all over the place and want to keep up with what's going on. The majority of stories were duplicated across all of them, and local news had become the filler content. Even for stories of national importance, they can be interpreted in so many ways that you'd expect different people in different areas to have different analyses of the facts (which is what used to happen), but that doesn't exist anymore. With the pushback against "fake news", official news sources are the only acceptable source of information, and those are monopolized by an increasingly tiny minority of people. BTW I don't put "fake news" in quotes to say that it doesn't exist, but that it's a catch-all term for propaganda that goes against the official propaganda.
Televised news is harmful manipulative crap. Just like most Google products you should avoid exposing yourself to it. Of course I feel a little bad telling people this because it's pretty easy to avoid. Once TV news becomes unpopular they'll probably start shoving the same stuff into something that was previously mostly free of that kind of thing.
> Televised news is harmful manipulative crap. Not all news stations are the same, not all countries have the same TV news. It is easy to just give up and think that you cannot trust anyone. But, the reality is that there is many journalists that care and try to create high quality news. To put them all in one bag is not fair, nor helpful.
The problem lies in finding the high-quality journalists. A default assumption of “TV news is crap” is warranted by the signal-to-noise ratio. Nobody’s putting them in the same bag; they are already there and must be sorted out. And that takes time and attention that is already scarce for most people.
I don’t know if there is a viable solution to this that doesn’t start with journalists themselves. As you say, some have a great record. IMO part of that is, and will increasingly involve, more extensive provenance and supplementary documentation for the stories they report, whenever possible.