View Full Version : Do you like your news dumbed down and "hip"?
WildWop
05-04-2004, 04:14 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/04/business/media/04CND-GORE.html?hp
Gore said the network will be "an independent voice in this industry" with a primary target audience of people between 18 and 34 "who want to learn about the world in a voice they recognize and a view they recognize as their own."
I cringe at the thought of a news network geared towards 18-34 using wording "relevant" to the age group. Anyone that has watched the CNN Headline News section for "Students" knows exactly what I fear in this new network. If I see one multiple choice question on that channel titled "Shout Out" or "Holla Back" I think I will simultaneously vomit and write a hateful letter to Al Gore & Co.
The process of dumbing down news to get people "informed" is wrong. We need to beef up our educational system so that people can successfully keep themselves informed via normal channels. We need to breed critical thinkers that can see bias in reporting and formulate their own opinions, not give them a "view they recognize as their own."
Thoughts?
******
It's also interesting that a news channel for Americans aged 18-34 will be run by Canadiens. Hmm...
******
EggViper
05-04-2004, 04:17 PM
sounds pretty stupid, if people in those ages can't understand the news then god help us.
xzafixz
05-04-2004, 04:19 PM
I agree, America isn't getting any smarter by dumbing down everything.
Wshakspear
05-04-2004, 04:21 PM
here's our "Senior" correspondent, Kurt Loader.
defender
05-04-2004, 04:23 PM
What does the phrase "independent voice in the industry" actually mean. I been watching CNN and reading the NY Times for years..they dont need a 18-34 yr old channel. They need a 12-20 yr old one though.
greendj27
05-04-2004, 04:25 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/04/business/media/04CND-GORE.html?hp
Gore said the network will be "an independent voice in this industry" with a primary target audience of people between 18 and 34 "who want to learn about the world in a voice they recognize and a view they recognize as their own."
I cringe at the thought of a news network geared towards 18-34 using wording "relevant" to the age group. Anyone that has watched the CNN Headline News section for "Students" knows exactly what I fear in this new network. If I see one multiple choice question on that channel titled "Shout Out" or "Holla Back" I think I will simultaneously vomit and write a hateful letter to Al Gore & Co.
The process of dumbing down news to get people "informed" is wrong. We need to beef up our educational system so that people can successfully keep themselves informed via normal channels. We need to breed critical thinkers that can see bias in reporting and formulate their own opinions, not give them a "view they recognize as their own."
Thoughts?
******
It's also interesting that a news channel for Americans aged 18-34 will be run by Canadiens. Hmm...
******
I used to work a t aWB affiliate about a year ago. This past fall they launched a news cast aimed at 18-34 year olds. So far it has failed miserably. The problem is that 18-34 just don't watch a lot of news. If you look at any news ratings, they are mostly watched by people over 50. I'm not exagerating at all. Actually Wheel of Fortune has the same age skew. I just think that young people are looking for escapism on tv. There is just too many other places for them to get their news.
CTLesq
05-04-2004, 04:26 PM
I TiVo the News Hour with Jim Lehrer every night.
I could care less what the rest of the networks do.
CTL
As a comedian (Jeff Foxworthy, I believe it was) once said,"Booin' it doesn't make it less true!" You may snort in disgust that Gore would resort to such measures, but how much would you like to bet that the statistics will show that a sizable proportion of that age group polled DOES have difficulties absorbing the news past what the headlines say? ...and that more of them would actually have a better idea of world/national affairs from tuning into such low-grade mock-news drivel? Just keep in mind that such material wouldn't be geared towards *you* ....unless it is, of course. (cackle)
WildWop
05-04-2004, 04:29 PM
As a comedian (Jeff Foxworthy, I believe it was) once said,"Booin' it doesn't make it less true!" You may snort in disgust that Gore would resort to such measures, but how much would you like to bet that the statistics will show that a sizable proportion of that age group polled DOES have difficulties absorbing the news past what the headlines say? ...and that more of them would actually have a better idea of world/national affairs from tuning into such low-grade mock-news drivel? Just keep in mind that such material wouldn't be geared towards *you* ....unless it is, of course. (cackle)
I don't doubt that people in that age group have problems absorbing the news. Most of them probably don't even read a newspaper once a month. My point is that they shouldn't be dumbing the news down, they should be raising the academic quality UP.
Gothic Walrus
05-04-2004, 04:32 PM
As a comedian (Jeff Foxworthy, I believe it was) once said,"Booin' it doesn't make it less true!" You may snort in disgust that Gore would resort to such measures, but how much would you like to bet that the statistics will show that a sizable proportion of that age group polled DOES have difficulties absorbing the news past what the headlines say? ...and that more of them would actually have a better idea of world/national affairs from tuning into such low-grade mock-news drivel? Just keep in mind that such material wouldn't be geared towards *you* ....unless it is, of course. (cackle)
It may not be geared towards us, but we can still mock them mercilessly for even thinking about it, much less doing it. :)
That said...it seems like a horrible idea, but I guess we'll see how things pan out. Maybe it won't be as bad as it sounds...
WildWop: the trouble is, there are a ton of reasons to beef up the intellect of the average American (certainly not just so they have a better idea of what's happening in the news)...but since repeated attempts (and campaign platforms) have tackled that issue...with little to show for it, wouldn't you say that it's not surprising that somebody's willing to try spoon-feeding the news, in the hopes that meager gains are better than none?
..and Gothic Walrus, I am always supportive of merciless mocking, man. *salutes* :)
[edit : I am......Run-on Sentence Man! Ha ha ha!*heroic theme song*]
defender
05-04-2004, 04:43 PM
I am still in the 18-34 group and I resent being told that I am like an 18 yr old... maybe 18-25 is a better cut for a demographic on a subject like this. I am nothing like an 18 yr old..not even remotely.
I am still in the 18-34 group and I resent being told that I am like an 18 yr old... maybe 18-25 is a better cut for a demographic on a subject like this. I am nothing like an 18 yr old..not even remotely.
I'll say...grandpa.
XboxMaster
05-04-2004, 04:49 PM
WildWop: the trouble is, there are a ton of reasons to beef up the intellect of the average American (certainly not just so they have a better idea of what's happening in the news)...but since repeated attempts (and campaign platforms) have tackled that issue...with little to show for it, wouldn't you say that it's not surprising that somebody's willing to try spoon-feeding the news, in the hopes that meager gains are better than none?
..and Gothic Walrus, I am always supportive of merciless mocking, man. *salutes* :)
Whoa, technically, that whole post was one sentence. Oops, I mean two sentences.
Anyway, I doubt this will go very far. But if it does, more power to them, I don't care either way. All I know is that I won't watch it and there is no hope of making the mass of today's youth listen to news. If I had the choice, I'd probably like to watch the normal news.
CheapyD
05-04-2004, 04:51 PM
I am nothing like an 18 yr old..not even remotely.
:ziplip: ;)
The solution to get the 18-34 demographic to watch the news is clear: full frontal nudity and lots of it. This is America, however, and we're big wussies when it comes skin being shown, so there's really no helping the problem.
WildWop
05-04-2004, 05:00 PM
Another thought to chew on:
People in the 18-34 age bracket that give a shit about the news already watch it/read it.
Making it catered to the lowest common denominator won't make them care if they already could give a shit about the news.
basketkase543
05-04-2004, 05:09 PM
this kina thing already exists: MTV news
The solution to get the 18-34 demographic to watch the news is clear: full frontal nudity and lots of it. This is America, however, and we're big wussies when it comes skin being shown, so there's really no helping the problem.
Hey...yeah.....
Full frontal nudity + bubble-headed bleach-blonde that comes on at five (thank you, Don Henley)......you are a visionary, JMCC!! I'm gonna vote for you for President. :)
...then again...
Full frontal nudity + Dan Rather.....ewwww. Damn. You're a loonie, JMCC. I'm gonna backhand you.
XboxMaster
05-04-2004, 05:29 PM
this kina thing already exists: MTV news
:rofl:
JSweeney
05-04-2004, 05:34 PM
The people that scare me are the ones getting all of thier news from "The Daily Show with John Stewart" because they think they are so smart and above CNN, Fox News, ABC News, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, etc.
XboxMaster
05-04-2004, 05:37 PM
The people that scare me are the ones getting all of thier news from "The Daily Show with John Stewart" because they think they are so smart and above CNN, Fox News, ABC News, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, etc.
If anyone watches The Daily Show for that reason, then I don't think they could comprehend any other news channels. I watch The Daily Show because it's hilarious.
SS4Brolly
05-04-2004, 06:06 PM
this kina thing already exists: MTV news
Thats what I thought of when I saw this topic title.
JSweeney
05-04-2004, 06:14 PM
Of course, I don't think that most of the people on any of the news channels or programs actually deserve to call themselves reporters. Mouthpieces would probably be a more fitting term. When is the last time you've seen a reporter that was obese, or had bad hair, or blemishes, etc?
On top of that, have you ever looked at what the journalism curriculum at most major universities is? It's not exactly mentally taxing or the pathway of choice for the "best and the brightest".