I'm Quitting CNN today-Tired of hearing anchors express unfounded opinion

[liveoaktx]

Read a post like it yesterday and considered what it was that is annoying to me about CNN (I already don't watch Fox-it's blocked on the tv- or most of MSNBC). It's mainly this:

An anchor says "Bush is so likeable" or "People will be SHOCKED to hear you say that".

Who? What people? When I hear an anchor offer a purely subjective opinion, especially when I don't share it, it automatically puts me on the opposing side of the program.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Welcome to sanity. I gave up CNN last year and have yet to regret it

;)

[baby_mouse]

65. Oh, television is just STUPID. Throw the ugly box away.

There's NOTHING THERE. It's exactly the same as watching somebody standing behind a tree waving glove puppets around going: "Arrrgh! Eee! Oooo! Look at me! Wibble bibble smibble BOO!" It's a cat-distracting device and NOTHING ELSE.

[LeftHander]

66. wean yourself from the glass teat....

Set your brain free!

Everything is better without TV vomit on it.

[jackstraw45]

2. Come on in...the water's fine...

Welcome to a non-CNN, non-Faux life.

[catmother]

3. that's like throwing the baby out with the bath water. not watching

a particular channel because of the view of an anchor doesn't make sense. you're going to miss out on hearing good people -- maybe like dem members of congress, etc. i watch all the stations -- although i try to avoid fox news. you know what they say about AA meetings -- "take what you need and leave the rest behind".

[liveoaktx]

11. I've had that philosophy as well, like digging in pig shit for gold

but it isn't worth the overall irritation.

Sometimes I have made clips of anchors being outrageous. But I think it just feeds the sensationalism of "infotainment" and I won't be a party to it anymore.

I'm tired of subtly hearing, all day long, Democrats being trashed and it isn't enough to occasionally hear someone come on to rebut when the rebuttal is sprinkled with anchors who clearly are not attempting to be impartial, and whose very voices indicate the way they want people to lean.

And it isn't as if they are the only game in town for "news".

[catmother]

13. well maybe it's good for me to let out my frustrations when i

scream at the tv.

on edit: most times i'm not actually watching it. i have 2 tv's on while i'm doing chores or posting on the DU. so it's more like i'm listening to it. that's my choice.

[liveoaktx]

18. That's exactly what I think I have gotten out of it,... but I'd rather

divert my frustration into something more concrete and constructive.

Something else. I do like the watch the real crack, the real news events. That's the real thing and all the blah blah blah that the anchors do on either side is just filler... and that filler is tainted. I can't even get that with CNN et al, only on Cspan.

[400Years]

36. You will feel much better for it. I gave up TV altogether years ago

[liveoaktx]

39. I think tv has a place.... as entertainment... with one exception I

can immediately think of, and that's Cspan or other entities that show events as they occur, without comment.

[barbtries]

50. 'And it isn't as if they are the only game in town for "news".'

hell no, DU is!

[Lorien]

27. I gave up cable several years ago

all I miss is Jon Stewart and A&E. I find that I end up spending my free time reading articles online or listening to NPR (which isn't as objective as it once was-but it's not a complete farce, like CNN). My friends who are hooked into cable news all day know a lot about the missing girl in Aruba and Brad and Angelina, but they know very little about the Patriot act or what's in the most recently proposed budget bill. When I hear CNN at the airport, I'm just blown away by the superficial quality of the "reporting" and the sensationalism-it's embarrassing that such drivel is even marketed to adults. I just see it as throwing out putrid bath water, period.

[BobRossi]

4. I gave it up long ago..

MSM is dead.

[Initech]

5. I havent watched cable news for, going on four years now!

I'm tired of all of it - Faux, CNN, MSNBC, it's all sensationalist bullshit and / or opinions shoved down your throat 24 / 7. I cant watch that crap.

[Maat]

6. I gave up MSRNC, Faux and CNN a couple of years ago.

Now, I tune into the Daily Show, the Colbert Report, Bill Maher sometimes, a few movies, and lots of Free Speech TV (on DISH)! Oh, and a bit of HGTV and children's shows (when watching with my kid - Hubby likes the SciFi channel).

I've been a much happier person!

[Corgigal]

7. I have come to the same conclusion

CNN was my default channel too. Even if I left the house I would turn on CNN for my pups.

So now I leave animal planet on all day. I just read more print/internet news.

[EFerrari]

8. I haven't watched CNN for months. Or, MSNBC except

for Keith's show. Don't miss it in the least. :)

[Cleita]

9. That's because anchors aren't supposed to offer opinions,

no matter how subtle, unless they are doing and "opinion" piece and it is described as such.

Now you know one of the problems of commercial news, they don't use real journalists and news people to present the news.

Turn the teevee off and use the internet as your main news source. At least it's in print and you can get all points of view to get at the truth.

[liveoaktx]

15. Yes. I remember back when the "news" was not a profit center

and it was read as objectively as possible. Because broadcast channels have to do some bits in the public interest, they'd have someone come on to profer an opinion, but it was clearly labeled as such, with a disclaimer at the end "This person's opinion doesn't necessarily reflect that of the station or its advertisers".

That's how I want the news.

I'm also disturbed at VNRs (Video News Releases). Although this was on MSNBC, not CNN, I saw a blatant example the other day of a commercial disguised as an ad for Bayer aspirin, but introduced by the MSNBC anchor and including a "Science" anchor. But it was obviously created by a PR company for Bayer. Demmit, that's just as bad as the political VNRs paid for by Bush, except it's more insidious because it's not against the law... but it misrepresents the news.

[Cleita]

22. It's bad journalism. I remember when I was a reporter on my

high school newspaper, I once wrote a piece that the faculty advisor told me to either rewrite without my personal opinion in it, or resubmit it as a letter to the editor. She was adamant about unbiased journalism, even for our little fishwrapper.

[quiet.american]

10. Haven't watched cable news in five years.

Welcome to the club!

[mtnsnake]

12. They're not perfect for us, but they're not perfect for repukes either

If you do a google search, I think you'll find that CNN gets bashed by neocons more than it does by liberals.

[liveoaktx]

24. That's not my argument, though... If an *anchor* also expresses an

opinion unsubstantiated by facts or a source, or otherwise lets it be known by the tone of voice or grimace on face... towards Republicans... it's still not news attempting to be neutral.

[Dunvegan]

56. Rightists bash ALL media...from FOX to CNN...

...and keep pounding on them with faxes and calls and letters calling them "lib-rul media" because they are determined to continue moving the goal posts as far right on the spectrum as is possible.

[Blue_In_AK]

14. Do you ever watch CNN International?

You'd think it was a whole different planet they're talking about. I never watch CNN USA.

[Cleita]

20. I used to until my satellite provider cut it off.

I used to have CNN Intl, and NWI that carried Canadian news. Now I have neither. :cry: I still have BBC that airs news once a day for half and hour and LinkTV.

[jsamuel]

16. Me too, see this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x221667

[catmother]

17. if you don't watch any of those channels then you didn't see the

alito hearings or gore's speech along with many other things.

[liveoaktx]

21. Not true- I watched Cspan and I saw the whole thing- Cspan is NOT CNN

Cspan is the actual event, unadulterated by commercials or anchor "gas".

Also, CBSNEWS on the web quite often streams speeches live.

[catmother]

26. that's true. sometimes a like a little mix of things. if i didn't

have the news on sunday, i would have completely missed McCain's remark about Chavez being a whacko, which i started a thread on.

but let's not argue. bottom line, we're both on the same side.

[liveoaktx]

38. Well, that's another thing- when I watched John Cornyn this morning

hold up the picture of Alito's crying wife, I thought about making a video clip about it. He's my Senator. But then, I thought, why would I want to give even one more minute of time to that creep and his stunt?

It also isn't as if others don't.

I want to spend my time and energy hearing points of view that reinforce my values. My original point was that it isn't that I don't want to hear other points of view, but I believe very strongly that the so-called anchors who present the news should be as objective and neutral as possible.

they're not. It would be okay if they LABELED themselves as such so that you knew, demmit, it was just their own opinion instead of being presented as a fact.

[catmother]

52. you're absolutely right. i've been watching MSNBC for years and

i remember tweety when he first started out on his show. i had no idea what his political views were. of course, he still keeps me guessing -- one day he's on our side -- the next the other. lol

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

19. Better Late Than Never

I'm cnn FREE for quite awhile.

[Armstead]

23. I agree with the sentiment -- But we should challenge them, not quit them

I watch a lot less of that crap than I used to because it just either depresses me or makes me angry.

However, I don't believe we should just walk away and let them continue to get away with this crap. Moderate-to-left are AT Least half the country, and we can't cede the major infrastructure of information to these conservative corporatist elitist bastids.

Whether we like it or not, they do set the minstream agenda, and shape the perceptions that ultimately affect politics, policies and values of the country. As long as they are allowed to continue to spew and distort without being contested, they will continue to make it harder -- if not impossible -- to make changes that matter.

[liveoaktx]

28. I agree with you that this needs to be changed.. but I don't think

you change it by enabling it. Corporate media is not going to (and hasn't - see "Orwell Rolls Over in his Grave") publicize their corporate connections, nor any bills that would stop them. The only way this can be changed is by a grassroots movement that takes it to a Democratically controlled Congress to alter it.

Meantime, I believe we have to think in terms of alternative media. Period. And in this age of the internet, video cameras, digital phone cameras, we have the power to do it.

[Armstead]

31. We should emulate the right wing

One reason the corporate media are such toadying bastids these days is that the right wing initiated a concerted and relentles campaign to challenge "liberal bias." They did it on many levels, and it worked. Now the media bends over backward to placate the 1/3 (appx) of the population who are so right wing that they thought the media was "ultra liberal."

They pointed out example of "liberal bias" relentlessly, and they got their politicans to threaten their licenses or tougher laws to crack down on "liberal bias."

The media is corporate, but if they are made to realize that they can;t ignore and piss off at least half the country -- and if we get the Democratic party to support us in this -- we can hold their feet to the fire and force them to serve us too.

They may be corporate but they are not so stupid to think that they can diregard a large segment of the population (market) and one of the two major political parties. What is needed is for our side to emulate thje right wing and make it clear that we are keeping track of their performance, and we are too big to ignore.

[liveoaktx]

34. Nope. Media Matters and Robert Greenwald do that and I applaud

them. In fact, I can go right now if I want to see Corporate Media called out to Media Matters and not only read about them but see examples of what they're doing.

It doesn't appear that corporate media in the form of CNN et al give a shit whether they are pissing people off or not, or they wouldn't allow that type of format.

I'll give you another example, but about Countdown. Last night, Keith very pointedly said that he got the memo about "Fair and Balanced". I believe that was a message to his audience that, due to the producer change, he's going to be altering the show to accomodate more right-wingers. Does it matter that his ratings are higher than Hardball and that apparently jacking with the show's format may alienate the loyal listeners who have watched it from the beginning? No, because the greedy managers want more.

I'm saying that it's a behemoth that I don't believe can be changed by whether we watch or not.

[Armstead]

37. Well we just disagree on tactics

I believe feedback to them is important. They may be a behomoth, but they are also still accountablke both to the "market" and to regulation.

We are not a minority in the country. We are either equal or a majority, depending on how you want to define that. There is power in that fact, and we have to start using it more aggressively, including being like a hive of stirred up hornets to these cable networks.

[liveoaktx]

41. The distinction between cable and broadcast

Broadcast companies are regulated because they use the airwaves for free-in return, they are supposed to provide a certain amount of public interest programming and their files are open to the public for inspection. Cable, because it's a paid for medium, is, at the level, not subject to the same level of scrutiny.

I believe that contacting the advertisers of cable "news" on a regular basis to tell them or remind them why you don't watch is far more vital than telling the cable "news" show.... because they know, by virtue of you telling them, that you're watching.

The answer, to me, is voting in Democrats and then changing the telecommunications laws.

[Armstead]

45. There are several answers

I believe direct and relentles feedback with them is one.

Cable regulation is possible. For example the right-wing bluenoses are threatening it to force "decency" on cable channels.

The Democrats also need to have their feet held to the fire. Democrats are just as responsble for this mess as Republicans. In the 1990's they should not have allowed the gutting ofregulation and anti-monopoly laws that concentrated so much media power into too few hands.

[liveoaktx]

53. Yes, and you remember that corporate news didn't even REPORT

what was happening with the Telecommunications act. And why should they, since it wasn't to their monetary interest?

Yes, they all need to have their feet held to the fire but, right, it's tactics I differ with you on. I don't want to watch the crap, but I'm not suggesting that media shouldn't be held to account. It doens't, in my opinion, hold them to account by continuing to watch them specifically.

[jus_the_facts]

25. Still PAYING for it monthly...then there's no reason to abstain...

....your monthly donation/subscription to their cause is all that really matters in the end. :think:

[Lorien]

29. Except that you'll never get those minutes of your life back

why give them to RW enablers? there's got to be better stuff on television. I hear that BBC world is good.

[liveoaktx]

30. That argument doesn't wash and here's why

I'm not talking about a material/monetary contribution, but a psychic one. I pay for Dish because I want to watch movies, Democracy Now and LinkTV, Comedy Central, Cspan and DIY. I'm willing to pay to watch what I want, it's mainly entertainment, but I equally don't watch some other channels. And yet, for basic channels, I'm also paying for some that I will never watch (A la carte is a separate discussion).

Just because I have the subscription that includes basic services that I didn't explicity ask for, doesn't require me to watch crap.

[jus_the_facts]

33. Yeah fuck logic....but enable mass idiocy....

....and one has the audacity to continue to wonder WHY everything is so ass backwards?! :nopity:

[liveoaktx]

35. Baloney- I pay, in taxes, for war, but I abstain from supporting it

do I have a choice in how my money is being used? No, but I would pay taxes anyway because of other benefits that I believe I derive, or do support. For example, at a local level, my taxes go to support public schools, even though I have no kids in school.

[jus_the_facts]

40. that's off topic...just keep paddin' the bank accounts of the MSM....

....and siffoning off your own...and bitch and whine some more to let them know loud and clear you are 100% behind 'em with your $$$$$$$$ donations to their cause and effect. :eyes:

[liveoaktx]

42. Specious and off-topic argument from you....

[jus_the_facts]

44. LOL...

....guess you just can't handle the truth. :nopity:

[liveoaktx]

46. I don't agree and it isn't a matter of not handling the truth, it's a

matter of respecting the fact that one can't always determine how money is going to be spent, but one can decide how one will spend hours of the day.

[jus_the_facts]

49. Oh puhleeze...so you admit your monthly subscription is extortion?

....and they hold a gun to your head every month and there's NOTHING AT ALL YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT but hand it over to them and then come here to bitch and moan how horrible they are? :puke:

[liveoaktx]

51. You're missing the point. I CHOOSE to have Dish which has

plenty of channels available-it's also the only way I can watch local channels because of the rural location where I live. I CHOOSE to pay this because of other programs that I want to have, and I don't see it as extortion, especially when I can block channels or CHOOSE not to watch.

I also don't think stating that I don't care for anchors that express opinion rather than an objective fact is "bitching and moaning".

Don't agree with you.

[jus_the_facts]

55. You're gettin' what you PAY for....regardless....

....couldn't care less if you agree or not...it's the truth...you CHOOSE to keep on payin' for it and then complain on and on about how they don't placate you or your opinions....if you were to stand behind your convictions then you'd not want to be bribed by the rest of the so-called entertainment that's offered along with the pure shit that is the media...it's your CHOICE to insist on giving them your money and that just keeps the shit slingin'...get used to it...because your money supports it....it's just that simple. :think:

[liveoaktx]

57. Again, I don't agree-it may be YOUR truth, but it isn't mine

Television, to me, is just one of many media types that are out there, and I don't see a reason to get rid of it entirely when, as entertainment or real events (in the case of Cspan), I'm not only willing but want to watch it.

It isn't a support issue, it's a Not-Watching issue.

[jus_the_facts]

58. yeah as the sayin' says....to each their own reality....

....one person's truth is another person's lies...blah blah blah. :nopity:

[Lorien]

61. Um, are you saying that if someone pays for a cable service, they are

REQUIRED to watch AND endorse EVERY program offered on that service, or they should cancel that service and boycott all programming offered from that service?

Either you are TV free (nothing wrong with that-I was for many years) or you've got one hell of a lot of sets on your wall.

[jus_the_facts]

64. Haven't PAID for TV in almost 20yrs...get 9 free channels with an antenna.

....and watch mostly PBS if anything at all...my point is it gets really annoying to see rant after rant about how sorry the media is..the ONLY solution is to quit giving them your money...their bottom line is all they'll ever pay any attention to...if enough people quit paying for the lies and manipulation...then maybe change could result..just complaining non-stop encourages them...not watching but still paying their monthly fees lets them know their spew is still extremely effective....

[McCamy Taylor]

32. CNN is FOX. I use MSNBC when necessary. GE hates high oil price

so it will allow some criticism of King George II.

[rman]

67. But GE loves war,

because they are in that business.

[Roland99]

43. I dropped cable in Nov. 2003. Couldn't be happier.

[SeattleRob]

47. what took you so long? n/t

[barbtries]

48. i haven't been

able to watch any of these channels for so long - i'm thankful for those who can bear it because i stay informed that way, of certain media related issues.

i just wonder how anybody could like someone who is president and lies every time he opens his mouth, is a murderous warmonger with aspirations of dictatorhood, which are becoming reality. my country tis of thee is going down the tubes behind this administration and i cannot watch tv when the talking heads act as if its business as usual and everything's hunky dory.

when did it get okay to lie, lie, and lie some more?

[corkhead]

54. CNN has been "dead to me" since the Dem Convention 2004

that was when they had ralph reed comment on John Edwards speech. I think that was the moment I finally woke up to the fact that this country is really being screwed by the SCLM corporate media.

[ronnie624]

59. Of all the challanges to democracy

and social justice one of the biggest is the near complete corporate ownership of all of the media IMHO. Their propaganda is so insidious. How does one even begin to fight it when so many millions accept it as "reality"?

[liveoaktx]

62. I read last year that the percentage of people who actually watch cable

news is small, compared to, say, 21 or Desperate Housewives. If so, that's one small consolation, less people to be contaminated by the crap

[babsbunny]

60. Well Duh!

I don't watch anything but Keith Olbermann, and he's the only one that comes close to telling the facts.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

63. They've gotta get rid of that Kyra Phiilips & Wolfie.

They are both as dumb as a bunch of rocks.