Its a problem with the 24/hr newscycle. Back in the day you would hear the news at 6 on your television, or on your radio. Now, due to the constant need for content, news has gotten more extreme. Fox and CNN need something constantly on their channels, news sites need constant content on their websites, etc. The news at 6 is no longer a thing, and that fact feels like it has hurt just about everything
This is still true today, though. I am generally sick of the news too but sometimes it is nice to watch local news (WDIV channel 4 here in Detroit) from 6 to 6:30 to hear about stuff going on around town, and then NBC nightly news from 6:30 to 7 to get some more national info.
I often wish we could abolish 24/7 cable news altother. When breaking news happens, we hear the same breaking news headline for the next 24 hours like it is a new event.
I find it really troubling that in a time when people want to be connected and informed like never before (and have the technology to be so) so many in smaller news organizations try to be every thing to all people, and end up failing spectacularly trying to out perform larger operations at games the larger operations are finely tuned for. Smaller outfits, especially those limited in geographic area, should play to their strong suits. In this case, they should do as much as possible about having LOCAL news.
Watch your local evening news, and if your station does the 5-6:30 model, it's almost certain that the 5:30-6 section will focus on national news, occasionally different anchors, and will have the lowest ratings. The three 30 minute sections' ratings usually follow this model: ¬_/
And news stations will tell themselves "Oh, we put national news in the middle because it has low ratings." I get that if you're forced to play the short view and juts have to fill time. But I do honestly think that if you put more effort into that, over time, you could cultivate a worthwhile news show there. Possibly even just make the 5-6 one hour, and use the expanded time to help flesh out the rest of your stories and make them all run an extra minute longer.
It's just as someone who's worked nearly all of my post-high school life (being 31) in local news, it's always frustrated me how only a few hours a day of local content are produced locally in most places. I think it's a vast misuse (unuse?) of available resources.
When I was growing up, every weekday there was 30 minutes of local news and 30 minutes of national news. Most of the time they were able to fill all of that time with actual newsworthy stories, sometimes, there was filler.
Once the 24 hour news stations came out, there is still 30 minutes of national news, but much, much more filler. This is mostly fear peddling. 40 years of that and it's no wonder the entire population is a little off.
I think it's the same news, but more hours. So the rest is opinion.
The news used to be something that came on at 11 PM and was over by 11:30. Then there was another half-hour of local news. That was it. And of those 30 minutes apiece, at most 12 would actually be news (aside from fluff, commercials, sports [which aren't really news], etc).
Now news is a 24 hour thing, but there isn't 23 more hours of stuff going on. At least, not stuff that people would tune in to hear about. And since it's all the most engaging stuff, you basically get the same 12 minutes of news per day and the rest is yammering.
There’s 24hr news most places around the world now and there’s been 24hr “global” news channels for decades too…
But it’s not the same as American news. For one thing American news is weirdly musical… like why the hell does all American news come with a subtle soundtrack trying to obviously steer my emotional reaction to what I’m seeing? Other places add music too in plenty of places often for the same reasons but it’s not the same level… American news basically has a soundtrack going almost all the time, it’s excessive and blatantly an attempt to manipulate the viewers emotions.
I agree with them, but local "news at 6" shows tend to feel more balanced when I watch them, because they only have about 30 to 60 minutes to report what they need. Only the most important stuff can be reported, due to the inherent restrictions of the medium. Its not perfect. Like you said choosing not to report something is a bias in itself, and local news shows aren't exempt of this. But also, they have an incentive to report stories that their area will find significant, so I prefer it
it's more than that. We used to have a morning edition newspaper and then the late edition. That's it. Two times a day to get fresh news. Even 9-5 too much.
24 hour news channels are almost useless. I still like the daily news magazine that's put together by networks, like NBC Nightly news. Weeklies like 60 minutes are usually fine too.
The problem is that it has to be filler. How much local news that actually matter are there in any given day? Maybe news would work better if it only got sent out when there was anything worthwhile.
If you look at the traditional ‘news’ shows you see at 10am or noon you’d see much less sports and much more ‘lifestyle’ news. This is largely a historical oddity based on work norms and who had free time to watch when.
In the modern world with 24 hour dedicated channels for effectively everything this is just tradition now.
There just isn't enough important news to fill up 24 hours. I prefer PBS Newshour because they carefully pick and research the stories they do to maximize what they can cover in 1 hour per day.
Just in my hometown, the local newspaper has gone from employing 400 people with a Sunday circulation around 100,000 in the early 2000s, to a Sunday circulation under 20,000 with fewer than 20 employees today.
All business functions, as well as printing, design, editing etc. have been eliminated or outsourced. Mid-size local newspapers are a scant shadow of their former selves, full of filler and national wire articles from USA Today, NYT and other major metros.
Television news has always primarily been fed by newspaper reporting. Without the depth and breadth of reporting that once was available for television to narrate and play some b-roll over (and with the advent of news as 24 hour entertainment source,) most television news is built on tiny nuggets of new information surrounded with pundits speculating about what things might mean, or what might happen.
Without robust local journalism, no one is covering your local county board meeting, that controversial school board meeting. No one is calling these people and asking them hard questions about their stance.
Social media seems to be filling the gaps, but in my opinion it's filling the gaps with vitriol, opinion, misinformation and a general sense of helplessness, instead of a sense of authority that speaks truth to power and shines light in dark corners.
reply