|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 1, 2007 19:13:34 GMT -8
Why does sensationism rule my world so?
Please, you tell me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 1, 2007 19:53:12 GMT -8
Well, I've just been googling "sentationism", and have come up with no clue for a response to your request.
Was someone asserting that air pockets were common?
|
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Aug 1, 2007 21:47:15 GMT -8
If someone wants do do a poll on 'the most puzzling thread topic and intro ever', I know what I'm voting for....  |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 1, 2007 22:04:59 GMT -8
The backwords spelling approach sometimes offers a clearer view:
Erar era stekcop ria, yrros
Does this help?
Please, you tell me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 1, 2007 22:32:18 GMT -8
You are on the wrong track. It has to do with media.
Media now a-days is in the get as many viewers as possible over putting up quality journalism. Sometimes, they will even distort headlines just to get people talking and misinform the public just for people's reaction. Sometimes, they even focus more on celebrities instead of anything going on within the political spectrum. Sensationalism adds sugar on stories to make them sound better yet risk them being misinforming and only one sided. I don't pay attention the T.V. media much anymore since it has nothing to impact my life and the political stories do not have the indepthness of for say BBC. All they care about are viewers and to get them hyped up without giving the whole story, that is how I understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Aug 2, 2007 2:53:47 GMT -8
An average of once a year, on or another of our local television stations will ask me to do an interview on one subject or another relating to my field of expertise (meaning they want to know how the latest income tax law changes will affect the people, or some such). And every time they do it, when I see the story on the air, I question whether we were in the same room talking about the same subject. It's been a rare time when I have watched the resulting report (as in me talking) and wonder how they had come to a particular conclusion from what I had said.
Usually it comes from them inappropriately sensationalizing the subject.
After those experiences, I end to take ALL TV news reports with a grain of salt. If they can't get the story right from the information I had given them, I will presume that they don't get ANY of the stories right from the information that other people give to them.
It kinda takes the fun out of it all....
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 2, 2007 5:19:53 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 2, 2007 7:00:21 GMT -8
Air pockets are quite another can of worms, Sensationalism is literally putting the media on steroids from quality journalism into untruthfulness with the viewers left to ask questions. They do this to keep the public misinformed since all they want to do is have the good stuff and not so much bad stuff since politics leaves most at a crossroads. Yet most are so dubbed to the right wing, it drives me nuts. click here for the definition |
|
|
|
Post by FlugelHorn offline on Aug 2, 2007 7:18:39 GMT -8
No, I was wondering about "Sentationism", not "sensationalism".
If we know 1 thing about Mr.A, it's that almost everything he says is very deliberate and thought out.
I'm sure there's some reason, known to him, re the mystery word "sentationism".
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Aug 2, 2007 9:41:25 GMT -8
Air pockets is quite another can of worms, I think it's safe to say that is the first time that sentence has ever been uttered in the English language. Or any other language, for that matter. This forum continues to blaze new trails in creative linguistics.  |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Aug 2, 2007 13:00:07 GMT -8
Neil I am glad you said both statements - cause I thought it was me. Air pockets in what? Planes when flying which give you a thrill in your stomach? I am just a little confused.
I think I will either wait for a clarification or have a few glasses of wine then reread this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 2, 2007 15:46:33 GMT -8
Best of luck on the wine... I can tell you beer didn't help.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 2, 2007 15:49:40 GMT -8
I do love going against the norm for the sensation of it; I was simply trying to compare the immediate reaction to a bridge colapse - of people from North America specifically - to all the death and destruction and similar negative happenings around our world that occur on a daily basis and suggest that maybe we shouldn't be so selfish as to attach such emphasis on deaths in our part of the word through the title of my thread. The substance was in the post, I am plain and simply disturbed by the prevalence of sensationalism in the media I encounter on a daily basis, with such a self-centred blinders-on and not-so-subtle bias in the writing. P.S. Re: the spelling mistake, sometimes a mistype is just that |
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 2, 2007 16:21:45 GMT -8
Well I've changed the thread title, by popular demand apparently. I guess that sometimes those kinds of metaphors and ways of communicating have better place in the 'why the sky is blue' thread.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Aug 2, 2007 16:24:59 GMT -8
Ah, so that's what was going on there... okay, now we read you.
Sometimes, there's a fine line between cryptic and unfathomable.
This morning, the BBC lead with news on the Minneapolis bridge collapse, with the usual political suspects flappin' their gums, and followed with news on catastrophic flooding in south Asia, with millions homeless, and probably countless more casualties than in the American disaster.
But of course, our western media seems to have a certain mathematical formula for determining story priority; it might be something along the lines of, one white western dead person equals, oh, about 1000 Asians, with extra points given if the W.W.D.P. also happens to be female, blonde, and attractive. (Hello Laci Peterson and Nicole Simpson).
But can you blame the media? Look right here in our own backyard- this forum, for instance. Ferry sinks in BC with two deaths; people are consumed by it- endless discussion. Ferry sinks in Indonesia with 500 dead; most people have no interest whatsoever.
I've said it before- the corporate media know their markets. Not everyone is apathetic about suffering elsewhere, but for the most part, people get the news they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Aug 2, 2007 16:37:34 GMT -8
As Steve Martin would have said, "Well exccuuuuuusssssseee me!"
Perhaps I will now go on a tirade on the subject of how my grocery store doesn't choose to stock canned worms..... MMMMM mmmm good!
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Aug 2, 2007 22:10:37 GMT -8
I tend to agree with most of the sentiments expressed... but have some additional thoughts. First of all, I don't think it's a "North America" thing. It's more like a "human nature" thing. Perhaps it is more prevalent in Western society (including Europe) since a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth and power is centered in the "West".
But I think there is a certain amount of good reason why we're more interested in the bridge collapse in Minneapolis than the flooding in India and Bangladesh. I think it's way too simple to put it all down to racism and discrimination - although there is do doubt some of that. If a bridge had collapsed in Australia or Germany, involving "White Western Dead Persons", I don't think it would have gotten the same amount of coverage as it has, happening in the USA. It probably would have gotten a few paragraphs in the newspaper, like most overseas stories. Like it or not, the USA is our close neighbour, sharing border, common histories, common laws and beliefts (relatively), commonly built cities and bridges... of course we'll have more interest in American news than world news.
I too like the BBC (website) for its international news. I watch next to zero television... so I can't really comment on that, although I find CBC very Liberal .. possibly left-wing. I get most of my news from the radio... CKNW and News1130. I find CKNW has a pretty balanced set of hosts... most are pretty liberal on most issues. As for newspapers, it's usually the free Metro or 24 Hours .. again, more liberal than conservative. Maybe it's my lack of exposure to US television - but I don't find much of my media very right wing or conservative. The most conservative piece of media I regularly read is ironically? the Asian Post. And they can be just as sensationalist as the Province.
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 3, 2007 7:35:00 GMT -8
With this recent incident to add to the sensationalism, ABC's Good Morning America decided to make a story of "how to get out of your car in water" This could happen at any time don't they know? Instead, they decide to hit the panic button. Question for you John, do you think Global is "fair and balanced"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 3, 2007 14:51:08 GMT -8
Sometimes, there's a fine line between cryptic and unfathomable. Now the fog starts to clear, now you're seeing my point. This morning, the BBC lead with news on the Minneapolis bridge collapse, with the usual political suspects flappin' their gums, and followed with news on catastrophic flooding in south Asia, with millions homeless, and probably countless more casualties than in the American disaster. But of course, our western media seems to have a certain mathematical formula for determining story priority; it might be something along the lines of, one white western dead person equals, oh, about 1000 Asians, with extra points given if the W.W.D.P. also happens to be female, blonde, and attractive. (Hello Laci Peterson and Nicole Simpson). ...but for the most part, people get the news they want. Sure, the left needs the right in media too, like politics, but where's the line in the sand? Why is there no sight of that line, only the extremes, in media today? |
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 3, 2007 15:15:56 GMT -8
I tend to agree with most of the sentiments expressed... but have some additional thoughts. First of all, I don't think it's a "North America" thing. It's more like a "human nature" thing. Perhaps it is more prevalent in Western society (including Europe) since a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth and power is centered in the "West". But I think there is a certain amount of good reason why we're more interested in the bridge collapse in Minneapolis than the flooding in India and Bangladesh. I think it's way too simple to put it all down to racism and discrimination - although there is do doubt some of that. If a bridge had collapsed in Australia or Germany, involving "White Western Dead Persons", I don't think it would have gotten the same amount of coverage as it has, happening in the USA. It probably would have gotten a few paragraphs in the newspaper, like most overseas stories. Like it or not, the USA is our close neighbour, sharing border, common histories, common laws and beliefts (relatively), commonly built cities and bridges... of course we'll have more interest in American news than world news. ... Granted, but no one will argue that the US isn't the superpower of this world, and this fact has much bearing on their influence on media around the world. ... I too like the BBC (website) for its international news. I watch next to zero television... so I can't really comment on that, although I find CBC very Liberal .. possibly left-wing. I get most of my news from the radio... CKNW and News1130. I find CKNW has a pretty balanced set of hosts... most are pretty liberal on most issues. As for newspapers, it's usually the free Metro or 24 Hours .. again, more liberal than conservative. Maybe it's my lack of exposure to US television - but I don't find much of my media very right wing or conservative. The most conservative piece of media I regularly read is ironically? the Asian Post. And they can be just as sensationalist as the Province. I take everything I read in media with a grain of salt and try to take-in the most diversity of media in order to get the best picture of what represents my people. Sure certain 'news hours' have a slant to them - CBC has been known for this for years, it's become a running gag or sorts that people seek-out whether they believe the slant or not - but like with consumerism, the market is driven by the people and media represents our views; to this I am not off the fence about though, I don't know if corporations have political agendas or not, and personally try to only worry about what I have time for, and I don't have much time for tossing and turning at night worried about the current fate of my people when I could be using that engery to live better and possibly be able to donate financially to their causes down the road. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Aug 3, 2007 20:46:58 GMT -8
R3b311i0nXLR80R, sorry I don't watch Global enough to form an opinion. Most I've watched was the noon news at work (not anymore), which I liked for it's casualness. If a significant news event happens I'll watch Global over CBC, but I very rarely sit through a whole newscast so I can't really answer your question:)
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Aug 3, 2007 21:35:32 GMT -8
misterA- I can't feel guilty about being totally mystified by the original thread heading and seven word question- I know I wasn't the only one. Perhaps it was thrown out as some sort of obscure zen koan to get us all pondering on the unknowable...
As to 'extremes' in media- I think that should be 'extreme', singular. There is not a single left wing newspaper of note in Canada, nor is there any major electronic outlet of similar bent outside of some internet offerings.
John- I think CKNW could be described in the same fashion as Fox News- "fair and balanced". Their main financial commentator is the brother of Premier Campbell. They've just hired one of Campbell's former cabinet ministers to host one of their call in shows. Their afternoon guy has been the enviro-neanderthal, right wing Winnipeg ranter Charles Adler. Gary Bannerman, Socred cabinet minister Rafe Mair, Peter Warren, and Province columnist Michael Smyth are or have been regulars on 'NW's roster. Bill Good stands out as about the only guy who could be called a 'liberal', and his claim to that appellation is somewhat tenuous.
What is a major source of small 'l' liberal news and comment in this city? There isn't one. The Globe and Mail is the only outlet I know of which employs more than one token lefty. The corporate parents of our news outlets donate money to the conservatives and/or provincial Liberals, and their bias shows up in many ways in their presentation of public affairs.
For anyone interested in a different perspective on American and international affairs, the 'progressive talk' format can be heard on the Seattle radio station, KPTK 1090 am. They're on the web as well. Maybe that format will one day show up in Canada- at least in the States, some media outlets have discovered that there actually is a market for programming not dominated by a conservative mindset.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 3, 2007 22:24:33 GMT -8
misterA- I can't feel guilty about being totally mystified by the original thread heading and seven word question- I guess I should reiterate that I didn't expect you or anyone else to, this is the point, I'm tired of mindless media, period. |
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,887 
|
Post by Mill Bay on Aug 3, 2007 22:48:38 GMT -8
Hey... just wanted to note, that, by coincidence... although I had absolutely no idea until reading just now who Dennis Miller was... I had a math teacher for several years who was named: Dennis Miller, And this post immediately made me think of him... guess it's funny the connections we make sometimes, but I just thought this was kind of intriguing for what I related it too. As far as I know, he wasn't too much of a sensationalist though... one of the best and friendliest teachers I ever had though. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 4, 2007 8:19:07 GMT -8
Here's a clip from a certain intelligent TV show, that comments on "media". I think that some of you might enjoy this.... |
|
