4 ms·

Whether it's the "actual factual definition" or not, it's definitely not the way the term is commonly used by the news media of today.

krapp 7y ago
How do you know? Are you a member of the news media?
- Turing_Machine 7y ago
  I watch the news, and see which stories are given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!" treatment. They are, without exception, sensationalistic stories, not mundane stories that just happen to be new. Can you give me a counter-example of even one boring, run-of-the-mill story that has been shown on any major news site that has been given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!!" treatment simply because it is a new story? I don't think you can, and even if you could, it would be an extreme outlier.
  - krapp 7y ago
    >They are, without exception, sensationalistic stories, not mundane stories that just happen to be new. Really? Literally every story reported on every news outlet anywhere in the world, without exception labelled as breaking news is sensationalized? Nothing reported on as breaking news actually deserves to be covered as such on its own merits? >Can you give me a counter-example of even one boring, run-of-the-mill story that has been shown on any major news site that has been given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!!" treatment simply because it is a new story? You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not news, right? And that the entire point of "breaking news," legitimately, used as intended, is to report exceptional events? What's your definition of "mundane breaking news," exactly? Man walks dog? But fine. Since your thesis is that such a thing doesn't exist, I only had to find one, but I found three. Shooting at a Fresno party: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPkPWLcBlUM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPkPWLcBlUM And CNN: Trump saying a thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z53kXE5dRHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z53kXE5dRHk And Kobe Bryant's death: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbVn_ziuTJ4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbVn_ziuTJ4 No hyperbole, no crazy sound effects, no multiple exclamation points, no "spin(ning) the truth any way they can to make it more outrageous, fear-inducing." Literally just the media reporting current events.
    - Turing_Machine 7y ago
      "Really?" Yes. Really. "You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not news, right?" Ah, yes. That's why my local newspaper prints the details of the city council meeting. Because it's "not news". You know what they don't do? Print it under a big banner "breaking news" headline. Nor do the local TV stations interrupt regular programming with a "BREAKING NEWS BULLETIN" about the new trash collection rates. Every single example you gave was of a sensationalistic story. We're done here.
      - krapp 7y ago
        >Ah, yes. That's why my local newspaper prints the details of the city council meeting. Because it's "not news". Fair enough, I didn't realize you were being purposely obtuse and pedantic. Yes. You are correct. Items printed in a newspaper such as city council meetings are, technically, news. Merriam Webster's dictionary defines "news" thusly: 1a : a report of recent events b : previously unknown information c : something having a specified influence or effect. 2a : material reported in a newspaper or news periodical b : matter that is newsworthy 3 : newscast I assumed you were aware the context of the thread was the definition of the term "breaking news" and its nature, and that you would realize that by "news" I was referring to noteworthy matters, specifically on tv and cable news, not in the newspapers (because newspapers don't have breaking news.) My mistake. Therefore, let me be more accurate and restate my comment: You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not particularly newsworthy, and therefore, not of being covered as news, right? >Every single example you gave was of a sensationalistic story. Every single example was of a noteworthy event being covered as it occurred, and thus, of being breaking news under the definition I and the entire rest of the world understand it. None of those examples were of sensationalist coverage, however, which is the definition you seem, for reasons I can't fathom, to want to die on the hill of defending. Also, you have yet to provide an example of what you consider a mundane, run-of-the-mill event which should be covered as breaking news. I can tell you really wanted the endorphine hit that scoring imaginary points on the internet provides but you still don't know what you're talking about. >We're done here. Yeah, I don't know why I wasted my time. Closing this thread and forgetting now.

krapp 7y ago

How do you know? Are you a member of the news media?

Turing_Machine 7y ago
I watch the news, and see which stories are given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!" treatment. They are, without exception, sensationalistic stories, not mundane stories that just happen to be new. Can you give me a counter-example of even one boring, run-of-the-mill story that has been shown on any major news site that has been given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!!" treatment simply because it is a new story? I don't think you can, and even if you could, it would be an extreme outlier.
- krapp 7y ago
  >They are, without exception, sensationalistic stories, not mundane stories that just happen to be new. Really? Literally every story reported on every news outlet anywhere in the world, without exception labelled as breaking news is sensationalized? Nothing reported on as breaking news actually deserves to be covered as such on its own merits? >Can you give me a counter-example of even one boring, run-of-the-mill story that has been shown on any major news site that has been given the "BREAKING NEWS!!!!!" treatment simply because it is a new story? You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not news, right? And that the entire point of "breaking news," legitimately, used as intended, is to report exceptional events? What's your definition of "mundane breaking news," exactly? Man walks dog? But fine. Since your thesis is that such a thing doesn't exist, I only had to find one, but I found three. Shooting at a Fresno party: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPkPWLcBlUM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPkPWLcBlUM And CNN: Trump saying a thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z53kXE5dRHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z53kXE5dRHk And Kobe Bryant's death: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbVn_ziuTJ4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbVn_ziuTJ4 No hyperbole, no crazy sound effects, no multiple exclamation points, no "spin(ning) the truth any way they can to make it more outrageous, fear-inducing." Literally just the media reporting current events.
  - Turing_Machine 7y ago
    "Really?" Yes. Really. "You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not news, right?" Ah, yes. That's why my local newspaper prints the details of the city council meeting. Because it's "not news". You know what they don't do? Print it under a big banner "breaking news" headline. Nor do the local TV stations interrupt regular programming with a "BREAKING NEWS BULLETIN" about the new trash collection rates. Every single example you gave was of a sensationalistic story. We're done here.
    - krapp 7y ago
      >Ah, yes. That's why my local newspaper prints the details of the city council meeting. Because it's "not news". Fair enough, I didn't realize you were being purposely obtuse and pedantic. Yes. You are correct. Items printed in a newspaper such as city council meetings are, technically, news. Merriam Webster's dictionary defines "news" thusly: 1a : a report of recent events b : previously unknown information c : something having a specified influence or effect. 2a : material reported in a newspaper or news periodical b : matter that is newsworthy 3 : newscast I assumed you were aware the context of the thread was the definition of the term "breaking news" and its nature, and that you would realize that by "news" I was referring to noteworthy matters, specifically on tv and cable news, not in the newspapers (because newspapers don't have breaking news.) My mistake. Therefore, let me be more accurate and restate my comment: You... you do realize that boring, run of the mill events are by definition not particularly newsworthy, and therefore, not of being covered as news, right? >Every single example you gave was of a sensationalistic story. Every single example was of a noteworthy event being covered as it occurred, and thus, of being breaking news under the definition I and the entire rest of the world understand it. None of those examples were of sensationalist coverage, however, which is the definition you seem, for reasons I can't fathom, to want to die on the hill of defending. Also, you have yet to provide an example of what you consider a mundane, run-of-the-mill event which should be covered as breaking news. I can tell you really wanted the endorphine hit that scoring imaginary points on the internet provides but you still don't know what you're talking about. >We're done here. Yeah, I don't know why I wasted my time. Closing this thread and forgetting now.