3 ms·

Why cable news has become unwatchable

5 points by woldemariam 3y ago

galaxyLogic 3y ago
I don't buy this thesis that all networks are equally bad. They all want ratings yes, but some of them try to get ratings by appealing to people who are smart, who value information over grief-mongering. Who value data-driven news. Who are not numerically illiterate. When there is misinformation we need news about that, to counteract the misinformation. I do wish MSNBC had a program that analyzed the coverage, non-coverage, and misleading information by some other networks. That would give them ratings from people who value truth and true information, truly important information.
- chiefalchemist 3y ago
  > They all want ratings yes, but some of them try to get ratings by appealing to people who are smart, who value information over grief-mongering. Who value... Not being divisive or confrontational but...serious question...which networks or are the "some" who have a higher bar?
  - galaxyLogic 3y ago
    See below. Clearly Fox News was spreading misinformation at the cost of $787,500,000 to them. MSNBC nor CNN have not faced any similar misinformation lawsuits as far as I know. Also as far as I know but I may be wrong Fox News has not made much news about this lawsuit nor apologized to its viewers for misleading them. In other words it continues to mislead them. https://www.npr.org/2023/04/18/1170339114/fox-news-settles-blockbuster-defamation-lawsuit-with-dominion-voting-systems#:~:text=Fox%20News%20settles%20Dominion%20Voting%20Systems%20defamation%20lawsuit%20Fox%20News,in%20the%202020%20presidential%20race https://www.npr.org/2023/04/18/1170339114/fox-news-settles-b.... Another lawsuit accusing similar deliberate spreading of misinformation seem to be ongoing, against Fox News not CNN, not MSNBC. https://www.smartmatic.com/us/lawsuit-updates-fact-checks/ https://www.smartmatic.com/us/lawsuit-updates-fact-checks/
    - chiefalchemist 3y ago
      Ok. But where does intentional misinformation end and intentional "mis-reporting" begin? I've watched all the various boardcasters and have read many of the "pillars of (print) journalism" and have two conclusions: 1) Too much of what's presented as journalism doesn't actually qualify. Start here: https://kottke.org/20/01/jim-lehrers-rules-of-journalism-1 https://kottke.org/20/01/jim-lehrers-rules-of-journalism-1 2) Just because something happenen doesn't make it news. Being actual and factual doesn't make it news. Yet when you watch, listen and read with a non-passive mind, too high of a percentage of "the news" *again* doesn't actually qualify. Sorry, I don't have a cheat sheet. I have my own smell test. For me, far too much filler. Far too much intellectual junkfood. Normalizing dumbed down doesn't mean it's ok. The point is there are different ways to distract and downplay. That if X (e.g., Fox) is doing something nefarious and Y (CNN) and Z (MSNBC) are not, well that doesn't mean Y and Z are acceptable.
      - galaxyLogic 3y ago
        True nobody's perfect. But some are clearly orders of magnitude worse than others. Like $787,500,000 worse. That's 787.5 million dollars. So saying only that they are all bad is misleading. Hey, Russians shoot Ukrainians. But Ukrainians also shoot Russians. Saying that they are both bad is misleading if not downright propaganda.
        chiefalchemist 3y ago
        Not really. There are not degrees of journalism. You can't be failing and then set the narrative as "Well look, they're failing worse than we are..." That's not the way it works. That's not okay. That's not a system worthy of trust. Democracy depends on a healthy and proper Fourth Estate. We don't have that. Full stop. Even if you believe CNN and MSNBC are better than Fox, the former are still failing to fulfill the responsibilities of The Fourth Estate. Worse is the fact that they're ignorant of their obvious shortcomings. And yet they shamelessly spin a narrative that pretends otherwise. Flip it anyway you want but it's an industry fueled by Dunning Kruger.
  - pauldenton 3y ago
    C-Span is a higher bar C-Span is news in a raw form, from the floor of Congress. Their BookTV and other segments are great too https://youtu.be/q2UzKRUgzJ0 https://youtu.be/q2UzKRUgzJ0
cebert 3y ago
I wish for a news channel that dedicates more time to each topic, allowing for a deeper dive. The brief 5-minute segments often lack the depth and nuance needed to really understand an issue. However, likely wouldn’t be as profitable. There appears to be a need to produce a constant stream of short segments that outrage viewers and keep them captive. I see both sides of the spectrum, from Fox News to MSNBC. News outlets apply these tactics ostensibly for viewership numbers.

5 points by woldemariam 3y ago

I don't buy this thesis that all networks are equally bad. They all want ratings yes, but some of them try to get ratings by appealing to people who are smart, who value information over grief-mongering. Who value data-driven news. Who are not numerically illiterate. When there is misinformation we need news about that, to counteract the misinformation. I do wish MSNBC had a program that analyzed the coverage, non-coverage, and misleading information by some other networks. That would give them ratings from people who value truth and true information, truly important information.

chiefalchemist 3y ago
> They all want ratings yes, but some of them try to get ratings by appealing to people who are smart, who value information over grief-mongering. Who value... Not being divisive or confrontational but...serious question...which networks or are the "some" who have a higher bar?
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  See below. Clearly Fox News was spreading misinformation at the cost of $787,500,000 to them. MSNBC nor CNN have not faced any similar misinformation lawsuits as far as I know. Also as far as I know but I may be wrong Fox News has not made much news about this lawsuit nor apologized to its viewers for misleading them. In other words it continues to mislead them. https://www.npr.org/2023/04/18/1170339114/fox-news-settles-blockbuster-defamation-lawsuit-with-dominion-voting-systems#:~:text=Fox%20News%20settles%20Dominion%20Voting%20Systems%20defamation%20lawsuit%20Fox%20News,in%20the%202020%20presidential%20race https://www.npr.org/2023/04/18/1170339114/fox-news-settles-b.... Another lawsuit accusing similar deliberate spreading of misinformation seem to be ongoing, against Fox News not CNN, not MSNBC. https://www.smartmatic.com/us/lawsuit-updates-fact-checks/ https://www.smartmatic.com/us/lawsuit-updates-fact-checks/
  - chiefalchemist 3y ago
    Ok. But where does intentional misinformation end and intentional "mis-reporting" begin? I've watched all the various boardcasters and have read many of the "pillars of (print) journalism" and have two conclusions: 1) Too much of what's presented as journalism doesn't actually qualify. Start here: https://kottke.org/20/01/jim-lehrers-rules-of-journalism-1 https://kottke.org/20/01/jim-lehrers-rules-of-journalism-1 2) Just because something happenen doesn't make it news. Being actual and factual doesn't make it news. Yet when you watch, listen and read with a non-passive mind, too high of a percentage of "the news" *again* doesn't actually qualify. Sorry, I don't have a cheat sheet. I have my own smell test. For me, far too much filler. Far too much intellectual junkfood. Normalizing dumbed down doesn't mean it's ok. The point is there are different ways to distract and downplay. That if X (e.g., Fox) is doing something nefarious and Y (CNN) and Z (MSNBC) are not, well that doesn't mean Y and Z are acceptable.
    - galaxyLogic 3y ago
      True nobody's perfect. But some are clearly orders of magnitude worse than others. Like $787,500,000 worse. That's 787.5 million dollars. So saying only that they are all bad is misleading. Hey, Russians shoot Ukrainians. But Ukrainians also shoot Russians. Saying that they are both bad is misleading if not downright propaganda.
      - chiefalchemist 3y ago
        Not really. There are not degrees of journalism. You can't be failing and then set the narrative as "Well look, they're failing worse than we are..." That's not the way it works. That's not okay. That's not a system worthy of trust. Democracy depends on a healthy and proper Fourth Estate. We don't have that. Full stop. Even if you believe CNN and MSNBC are better than Fox, the former are still failing to fulfill the responsibilities of The Fourth Estate. Worse is the fact that they're ignorant of their obvious shortcomings. And yet they shamelessly spin a narrative that pretends otherwise. Flip it anyway you want but it's an industry fueled by Dunning Kruger.
- pauldenton 3y ago
  C-Span is a higher bar C-Span is news in a raw form, from the floor of Congress. Their BookTV and other segments are great too https://youtu.be/q2UzKRUgzJ0 https://youtu.be/q2UzKRUgzJ0

cebert 3y ago

I wish for a news channel that dedicates more time to each topic, allowing for a deeper dive. The brief 5-minute segments often lack the depth and nuance needed to really understand an issue. However, likely wouldn’t be as profitable. There appears to be a need to produce a constant stream of short segments that outrage viewers and keep them captive. I see both sides of the spectrum, from Fox News to MSNBC. News outlets apply these tactics ostensibly for viewership numbers.