6 Comments
User's avatar
Tom Clavin's avatar

I think I envy you!

Expand full comment
Tom Clavin's avatar

I am hoping for a bit of a consumer revolt, with audiences demanding more objectivity and facts in place of opinions supporting already decided positions. But I'm rather naive.

Expand full comment
Prairie Rose's avatar

Because you know I'm so notoriously rebellious, I don't have cable at all! Yeah! So there!

Expand full comment
Tom Clavin's avatar

Agree with all. Especially, the 24/7 cycle made news outlets less discriminating about how they filled up all that time -- and talk is cheap.

Expand full comment
James Clavin's avatar

There is no more unbiased reporting on the major channels these days. Those news people, like soldiers as McArthur had said, are fading away. The news shows should be called “Your Nightly Opinion News”. I watch Newsmax which portrays both sides of the story truefully as I can get it. OAN got silenced by all cable providers. But you have to give credit to the person who brought to light what the media was doing and their brainwashing their programming to the mass public. Kudos to his enlightenment.

Expand full comment
Prairie Rose's avatar

I grew up in the Dan Rather/Peter Jennings era, but I agree. I think a lot of it has to do with the 24/7 news cycle, and maybe a need/desire for networks to have "filler." The PBS News Hour is a valuable news resource--and it's an hour. My parents have the TV on all day, a lot of it news, and I say to them: Remember when the news was on twice at night? Just pretend, or limit yourself to that. But sticking to the facts of who, what, when, and where, what was said, etc. with an objective analysis would be a good goal for journalists to set.

In newspapers, there are op-ed columns, and they are noted as such. But I feel that op-ed portions of broadcast news often dominate and deflect from the actual news.

Expand full comment