epiphany Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Most facts are pretty easy to verify, so if you have your doubts over a source, check other sources. Most people are lazy with their news intake and just put their trust in a single publication. A broader reading will give you a bigger picture. Don't be afraid to read international sources either. Bear in mind, however, that the PR industry gives us a significant portion of our mainstream news, and we should all be aware of the history of this industry and its intentions. Edward Bernays (considered by many scholars as the "father of public relations") openly talked about what he saw as a key tool for manipulating mass thought (or what he called the irrational "herd instinct") in democratic societies. Everyone should read his book Propaganda - incidentally a word which only took on negative connotations following its use by the Nazi Party during WWII... "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. [...] In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons [...] who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind." Wow, what a nutty conspiracy theorist. Actually he was just very perceptive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiphany Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 No news channel is inherently bad. It's all about how much air time is bought by certain interests. For all the sewage US network Fox churns out, you get the odd gem such as below which reminds you, for example, that there are legitimate issues outside the two/three party system... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwIZ4syCFLc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 You can tell them yourself:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/feedback/ If TV programs can't be news, can sport? No that's why invariably they say with the news and sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Because ignorance is bliss as many sheffield forum members would admit, they would rather hear about famous people falling on ice than reports of freedoms taken away. Odd. I always thought the BBC news was national. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 when we watch the news we expect the inevitable reporting of doom ,gloom, and tragic stories.much of the news is speculation anyway.about what could happen rather then what has happened....we watch because we want to keep up with the latest reports yes....but for me hearing it once a day is enough sometimes...and if they do decide to throw in a bit of diversion to cheer us up.(such as paul macartneys wedding) i wecome it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickiethecat Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 There isn't enough news happening to fill the vast about of airtime the BBC's news programmes take up. There's only so much footage of left wing rent a mobs protesting about something irrelevant in Bongo Bongo Land before you need a bit of light relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I remember watching Nationwide when i was younger. It ran from the late 60's through to the early 80's. For a youngster the news was something to avoid but they somehow managed to keep the interest by including lighter subjects and humour and it became a must watch programme and i have no idea why other than the presenters were more human I suppose, and they gave us Sue Lawley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 There isn't enough news happening to fill the vast about of airtime the BBC's news programmes take up. There's only so much footage of left wing rent a mobs protesting about something irrelevant in Bongo Bongo Land before you need a bit of light relief. yes i get the light relief bit. ..but now i'm thinking i may not be as up to date with news affairs as i thought i was,as i havnt heard of bongo bonbo land.i should really keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I remember watching Nationwide when i was younger. It ran from the late 60's through to the early 80's. For a youngster the news was something to avoid but they somehow managed to keep the interest by including lighter subjects and humour and it became a must watch programme and i have no idea why other than the presenters were more human I suppose, and they gave us Sue Lawley. yes i remember that period too.but i dont think anything bad was happening in the world at that time was there?!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Why do the BBC think that what happens in TV programs is News? I do not understand why we need to announce what happens in an episode of Big Brother, Strictly Come Dancing or the Apprentice on the main news. When I watch the news I want news not a load of fluff about non events. Pretty soon the plane that crashes onto a football stadium will be consigned to other news whilst the headlines are all about TV programs. It is probably only a matter of time before they head hunt the editor of Hello magazine to lead the news team. A few nights ago BBC News 24 sidelined important UK and World events so they could devote half the programme to an in depth analysis of the 'breaking news' that Sarah Palin would not run for president. This may have been something which most people pretty much could have guessed anyway (if they actualy cared), but did they know what colour socks she was wearing when she made the announcement? Or, what various Americans who we have never heard of think about her not running for president? Thank you BBC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.