How does the news get reported in your country?

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

This is a post that is obviously by an older person.

In the USA where I live there is 24 hour a day news reports. The news media reports on things that are based on speculation, rumors, and so fourth. For example, they report that something has been confirmed; then, they say it was not confirmed as reported earlier. There are reports of new iPhones, etc., that are found to be nothing but rumor.

I miss the days when there were only 2 or 3 one-hour news reports each day. We heard more facts in those news reports than the 24 hours a day of speculation and rumors.

I can see sites like theguardian.com and euronews.com. However, that doesn't give me the full picture. So, how does the news get reported in your country?

Remember that politics and religion are not permitted on this forum. Edit: And the mods know I won't care if they close or jail this thread if it gets off topic.

[buzzingrobot]

In the days of those short evening TV newscasts in the U.S., the networks did not expect their news divisions to make a proft. That gave their news staffs the freedom to report objectively. (Objective does not mean accurate. It means submerging your own opinions and biases before you write the story.)

That changed some years ago when the U.S. networks required that news division make money, just as if the news was a situation comedy or pro wrestling. Networks care little about journalistic integrity. As a result, we've seen the proliferation of talking heads and pundits yapping at each other. It's cheap to produce, it sells lots of advertising, and they can slap a "news" label on it. But, don't believe it. It is not news. It's talk radio with pictures.

Part of getting the "full picture" is knowing, through research or experience, what interests a news source is likely to side with, either openly or implicitly. E.g., The Guardian is on the left side of the UK's political spectrum. The Daily Telegraph is on the right. Putin controls almost all TV and radio in Russia. Watching Moscow TV, then, for impartial and objective news is probably futile. But, it's a very good way to see which way the wind is blowing in the Kremlin.

I consistently find BBC News to be the best single source of international news. I've been going to their site for years over morning coffee. i believe they have more reporters and stringers in more locations than any other news organization.

Only a very few U.S. news organizations maintain any permanent international presence at all. Most of their reports are based on services like Reuters, AP, Agence France Press, etc., that they subscribe to and are fed into their computers. When there is a flap someplace, it's not unheard of for the reporter who's hurriedly flown overseas to stand up and read a report prepared in New York.

[QIII]

In the US, "news" has become hollow, non-nutritive pabulum served up at the corporate pap for a buck.

[ibjsb4]

In the US, "news" has become hollow, non-nutritive pabulum served up at the corporate pap for a buck.

Ouch

Some of us yanks got to other countries to get a less bias view or maybe just to see how its done on the other side of the pond

[ian-weisser]

If you look for quality news, you can find good, fact-based reporting. Good, fact-based reporting is not very profitable. And though most people claim to want it, their actions differ from their claims.

If you just turn on the TV, you will get noise. Noise is highly profitable. And very popular, despite people's claims to the contrary.

One lovely feature of the internet is that good, fact-based reporting usually links back to source documents.

[pqwoerituytrueiwoq]

In the US, "news" has become hollow, non-nutritive pabulum served up at the corporate pap for a buck.

each with there own political spin and bias on the scale of ~20/10, details of which we will not discuss here as it is against the rules

[PJs Ronin]

(Australia)
All news outlets have had a hell of a time remaining relevant since the internet exploded into our lives. Those bastions of news, the daily newspapers, lost their classified advertisement cash cows and are now battling to survive. Presses are closing left, right and center, mastheads are merging or passing into history as they all try and find their niche. TV news has been distilled down to "if we have vision of an event, it's news" so the third item on the nightly news is a youtube clip of a kitteh being rescued. Note: I like kitties so this is important to me, but.

With the condensing of news sources into fewer corporate hands we are all subject to the opinions of the likes of Murdoch et al who are desperately trying to outrun the onslaught of the internet in general, and Google in particular. Has anyone else noticed that the internet has changed the concept of a headline from:
"Hindenberg: Giant Airship Fire: Terrible Loss of Life", to
"Blimp Goes Bloop: 10 Things You Need to Know About Getting Airborne".
The reason being of course is that the core of a news item is its headline. Give the reader this info in a headline and they won't click through to the bulk of the story and all that lovely advertising. So headlines are no longer headlines.

I have 6 news outlets tabbed in Firefox (one for each major newspaper from three states here in Oz, one 'national' paper, the ABC (govt funded independent broadcaster) and the Guardian from the UK). The three state based papers not only run the same stories, but have the same bylines. I was unaware of this until the internet allowed me to make this comparison. Note: I have removed those sources.

Just like OP, my final comment is indicative of my age. The reporters we see now on the nightly TV news appear to have not graduated high school... or at least with passes in subjects that actually matter; finger painting does not matter, not does interpretive dance. Most of these young folk cannot string sufficient words together into a coherent sentence to present 'facts'; and isn't that what news is about, facts not opinion or supposition.

Quality news coverage is still available, you just have to dig.

[pretty_whistle]

I live in the U.S. and I know what you mean by quality news. I wished this were the old days too. Nowadays they speculate, give their opinions, etc. and call it "news". That's a joke.

[coldraven]

In my opinion TV news is condescending claptrap. For example if there is a bus crash on the highway they will show you a stock image of a bus. Well I know what a bus looks like!!! (I nearly wrote the last sentence all in caps.)
Another example, this one is true. A school made trip to a ski resort in Europe and unfortunately some of the pupils died in an accident. The trip was cut short and returned by bus to the UK only to be met by hoards of reporters. They wanted to get shots of distressed pupils meeting their parents. Maybe I'm unusual because I have an imagination, I don't need to see pictures I can imagine how upset these kids were.
It was also an invasion of their privacy at an upsetting time.

As for radio, we just get (cannot mention the P word) talking rubbish and spin and never answering a direct question.

YMMV

Edit: I got so annoyed at my TV that I gave it away years ago. It was the adverts that irritated me the most.

[Elfy]

This is a post that is obviously by an older person.

In the USA where I live there is 24 hour a day news reports. The news media reports on things that are based on speculation, rumors, and so fourth. For example, they report that something has been confirmed; then, they say it was not confirmed as reported earlier. There are reports of new iPhones, etc., that are found to be nothing but rumor.

It's much the same here unfortunately. The good thing is you can watch the news at any particular time during an hour, say minute 10 - 20 then when you come back later to catch up - miss out minutes 10-20

I miss the days when there were only 2 or 3 one-hour news reports each day. We heard more facts in those news reports than the 24 hours a day of speculation and rumors.

I miss the days when we had 3 or 4 channels and nothing on them between midnight and 3pm ...

I can see sites like theguardian.com and euronews.com. However, that doesn't give me the full picture. So, how does the news get reported in your country?

I try to see the same story in sites with different political viewpoints - somewhere in the middle lies something a bit closer to the truth.

In general I think that the best that anyone can do is not read news in one place.

I use the guardian often, the bbc, try to look at some of the right wing sites.

Remember that politics and religion are not permitted on this forum. Edit: And the mods know I won't care if they close or jail this thread if it gets off topic.

I'll do my best