Article

2005-02-06 Iraq-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2005-02-06 9:01:32 AM|| || Front Page|| [11140 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Back when I went to college, there was only one difference between the drama students and the broadcast journalism students.....at least the drama students could remember their lines. The broadcast journalism ones needed their scripts for even "impromptu" remarks.

Posted by Desert Blondie 2005-02-06 10:27:54 AM|| [http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com/] 2005-02-06 10:27:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 The thing I find the most enjoyable, in watching the media self-destruct, is the fact that AP, Reuters, Eason Jordan, etc, just don't grasp that they are yesterday's news.

There is still a market for good reporters - the type that can accurately portray an event that transpired. But as for "framing" the news, the blogosphere can interact with interested experts in a matter of moments. Reporters can't compete with this body of expertise. The day of talking heads "framing" the news, is long over.

Posted by 2b 2005-02-06 1:10:09 PM|| 2005-02-06 1:10:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 The day of talking heads "framing" the news, is long over.

That may be true here. It's probably less true in, say, the middle East.

Posted by too true 2005-02-06 1:28:38 PM|| 2005-02-06 1:28:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Whether it is framing the news or even the emergence of a particular event, the MSM are no longer in power. The Jordan slander is an excellent example of how the MSM still do not understand that someone with a computer can go and transcribe what was said and in no time it will be seen by millions. They are being taken down a peg at a time.

Posted by Remoteman 2005-02-06 1:49:02 PM|| 2005-02-06 1:49:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 As an engineer I've always found it teeth-grindingly frustrating to read MSM articles having anything to do with science: the illiteracy (like referring to "kilowatts per day" as a measure of energy) and the innumeracy (like talking about an aircraft that weighs "80,000 tons" instead of 80,000 pounds) are just stunning. Even as a kid, during the early days of the space program, I would grit my teeth while listening to Jules Bergman or Walter Cronkite try to talk about science.

But for some reason, it never occurred to me until just a couple of years ago to wonder if these people might be just as ignorant about everything else, too.

I have hopes for the blogosphere: it brings publishing technology, and bandwidth, to people who have something to say and know what the hell they're talking about. It sure is a damn sight better than being lectured to by a bunch of idiots who couldn't get into Drama School (good point, DB).

Posted by Dave D. 2005-02-06 1:59:01 PM|| 2005-02-06 1:59:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Dave, I even have to grit my teeth at a lot of technical articles in engineering trade magazines. Having now written a few in recent years, I have worked with the editors and found out that they are as much a part of the problem as the solution. I've concluded that many engineers who drift into technical magazine editing do so because they are justifiably insecure with their engineering capabilities.

Posted by Tom 2005-02-06 2:09:17 PM|| 2005-02-06 2:09:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 "Dave, I even have to grit my teeth at a lot of technical articles in engineering trade magazines."

I'm in electronics, mostly the design of sensors for pressure, force and acceleration, and I no longer subscribe to ANY of the trade journals. In my opinion, they're almost worthless. The articles are poorly written, they're riddled with errors, and they focus almost exclusively on the latest whiz-bang video game technology instead of dealing with basic engineering issues. I get far better info over the Internet from manufacturers' websites.

Posted by Dave D. 2005-02-06 2:50:36 PM|| 2005-02-06 2:50:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 General Rule: If a publication carrys advertising, the purpose of the publication is to deliver readers to the advertiser. If there is no advertising in the publication, its sole purpose is to deliver information to the subscriber.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-02-06 2:55:32 PM|| 2005-02-06 2:55:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 There are in-betweens such as some professional society monthly magazines.

Posted by Tom 2005-02-06 2:59:17 PM|| 2005-02-06 2:59:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 in my engineering freebies they are paid for by ads, but that's a good thing since the newest and cutting edge stuff is usually in the ads....

Posted by Frank G 2005-02-06 3:09:58 PM|| 2005-02-06 3:09:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Let's not minimize the power of broadcast and print media. The vast majority in the US, and even higher percentage in the rest of the world, get the vast majority their info by these sources. Their viewpoint is broadcast day-in day-out without refutation, and form the foundation of most people's knowledge of the wider world.

For instance, what percentage of the US population has heard the story behind Jordan's slur? 5%? What has the rest of the world heard besides "CNN Editor says Amercian soldiers shoot journalists."?

While we actively search out primary sources of news stories in this war, those who do are still a small minority. The greatest impact I can have is to gather enough knowledge to be able to point out family and friends the errors, ommissions, and biases fed to them each and every day by the media.

Posted by ed 2005-02-06 4:11:23 PM|| 2005-02-06 4:11:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Dave D you can add 'scientific experts' to the list. I regularly find myself shouting 'That's not true' at the TV. While the problem is worst with politicized issues like climate change, a recent example was a siesmologist explaining how the Sumatra earthquake caused the tsunami that was directly contradicted by the video (of the tsunami) shown 30 seconds earlier.

Posted by phil_b 2005-02-06 4:25:12 PM|| 2005-02-06 4:25:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 We have a full generation whose education was ... wait, let me think of the correct technical term for it ... shitty. These people are now in jobs, including in the media. And the next generation isn't getting anything better.

We have got to insist on some rigor in our school curricula. The idea of a "fact" should not be foreign to our students, even as we also distinguish fact from opinion. It would be nice if they had even a passing familiarity with statistics and how to use them correctly. Some history -- you know, those facts again -- would be nice. So would some science.

Posted by too true 2005-02-06 4:29:41 PM|| 2005-02-06 4:29:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Eight suicide bombers killed 36 Iraqis besides themselves. Of these, seven were foreigners (six Saudis and a Sudanese).

We need to work on securing a border. For training and to gain lessons learned, the Military should be praticing by securing our borders.

Posted by Penguin 2005-02-06 9:52:39 PM|| 2005-02-06 9:52:39 PM|| Front Page Top

12:21 Me
12:17 Me
23:57 True German Ally
23:57 Chris W.
23:56 anymouse
23:37 phil_b
23:14 trailing wife
23:01 gromky
23:00 gromky
22:57 Alaska Paul
22:53 JP
22:33 SR71
22:26 Ptah
22:26 mhw
22:24 Rafael
22:22 Alaska Paul
22:08 Alaska Paul
22:04 Classical_Liberal
21:52 Penguin
21:43 Bomb-a-rama
21:31 Jame Retief
21:31 JosephMendiola
21:28 Frank G
21:24 .com