CBS News Radio Closed

[TheBigA]

I've already posted too many times my experiences in Ecuador

I don’t care. This is not Ecuador.

We found that each one told the facts, but in a context that reflected both the agency's and the journalist's own perspective.

In this country, if a journalist writes from their own perspective, it's labeled "opinion." In this country, real journalists have their work overseen by editors who ask them the same question I asked you about the survey. Once you gave the context, we saw the story was different from what you originally wrote. That is how things should work. If a journalist makes a mistake, or fails to give appropriate context, the editor will correct it and apologize.

The other thing I'll say about your survey is it doesn't surprise me that 38% say they're democrats. Most of them likely work in big cities, where the populations are more like 70% democrat. They represent the places where they work. That's what we want our media to do. That context is important.

Once again, there are many ways to get news. Not all of them use the same methods. Consumers would be advised to check how their media works and who the reporters are before accepting what they say.

 

[ted chittenden]

David speaking as a non-moderator here: Ted, can you please give us a break from the direct ad hominems against Trump and his administration? Your points would come across better if reasoned in some other way. Over half of us voted for the President, and this kind of incessant comment from you is tiring and offensive.

No.

 

[cc333]

No.

Very concise and succinct!

c

 

[davideduardo]

I don’t care. This is not Ecuador.

The experience is valid. As is the comparison. Different journalists of different beliefs or philosophy have different ways of writing about the same subject.

In this country, if a journalist writes from their own perspective, it's labeled "opinion." In this country, real journalists have their work overseen by editors who ask them the same question I asked you about the survey.

And, as I said, this is not about opinion. It is about perspective. A writer who is concerned with finance and cost of living will see the economic impact of an event. One that is more into sociology will see the cultural aspects such as gender and race. A journalist who is focused on laws and constitutions will see the legal aspects. And so on. Each will have a different, sometimes very different, focus in writing about the same general event. They will even ask different questions if they do on the scene reporting.

Once you gave the context, we saw the story was different from what you originally wrote. That is how things should work. If a journalist makes a mistake, or fails to give appropriate context, the editor will correct it and apologize.

But that does not guarantee that every aspect of the event being covered is written about or put in the proper perspective.

The other thing I'll say about your survey is it doesn't surprise me that 38% say they're democrats. Most of them likely work in big cities, where the populations are more like 70% democrat. They represent the places where they work. That's what we want our media to do. That context is important.

Then they are not impartial if they reflect only t one segment of the population. We get up in arms about ignoring Blacks, Hispanics, LGBTQ+ persons and so on... but if a city is 70% Democratic, it's, then, OK to ignore Republicans? Uh, no.

Once again, there are many ways to get news. Not all of them use the same methods. Consumers would be advised to check how their media works and who the reporters are before accepting what they say.

Most today don't even use traditional news delivery services. And many of those alternative sources have no editors and no verification.

 

[davideduardo]

No.

So you will continue to insult about half the population... and likely (based on the emails I get) many of us here.

There is no need to use offensive and derogatory term, anywhere.

 

[TheBigA]

The experience is valid.

Maybe to you. Not to me.

And, as I said, this is not about opinion. It is about perspective.

Perspective is why you hire COLUMNISTS. Do you understand the difference??? A columnist provides perspective, but also some opinion. It's not straight journalism, in the way someone covers a news story in real time. There's a big difference. The minute a reporter goes into perspective, a good editor should stop him. The way NPR handles it is in two separate parts, with the straight news piece that tells what happened, followed by analysis with perspective.

But that does not guarantee that every aspect of the event being covered is written about or put in the proper perspective.

There's that "perspective" word again, and once again, it's why you have that aspect done by someone else whose biases are known. One example I can give is David Gergen. He was a writer and journalist who worked for presidents of both parties. He was a Rockefeller conservative, which is hard to explain. But the reason CNN and US News hired David was to provide perspective. He is not a straight news reporter, who writes real time news with attribution.

Then they are not impartial if they reflect only t one segment of the population. We get up in arms about ignoring Blacks, Hispanics, LGBTQ+ persons and so on... but if a city is 70% Democratic, it's, then, OK to ignore Republicans? Uh, no.

How someone votes is not how someone does their job. They're two different things. But as far as your last sentence, I remind you that there's no such thing as a fairness doctrine. Is that really what you want?

Most today don't even use traditional news delivery services. And many of those alternative sources have no editors and no verification.

As I said, it's up to consumers to choose wisely. That goes for buying a car and reading the news.

 

[davideduardo]

Perspective is why you hire COLUMNISTS. Do you understand the difference??? A columnist provides perspective, but also some opinion. It's not straight journalism, in the way someone covers a news story in real time. There's a big difference.

I am very familiar. My stepbrother edited and published a major U.S. paper; I programmed the most listened to news and commentary station in the Hemisphere.

In radio, we tend to call editorialists or columnists as "commentators". They give opinion pieces on news, trends, customs and such.

My point is that every reporter reflects their experiences and beliefs, and, to a great extent, the "mood" at any station or newsroom is more uniform than not.

There's that "perspective" word again, and once again, it's why you have that aspect done by someone else whose biases are known.

But everyone has a "perspective" based on what I just said: their experiences, friends, education, political affiliation.

The reason a significant number of cases get overturned on appeal is that even the interpretation of laws is subject to opinion and perspective.

One example I can give is David Gergen. He was a writer and journalist who worked for presidents of both parties. He was a Rockefeller conservative, which is hard to explain. But the reason CNN and US News hired David was to provide perspective. He is not a straight news reporter, who writes real time news with attribution.

You use "perspective" as a positive term. It is not; a Houthi journalist is going to have a perspective but it won't be the same as that of any of us posting to this thread.

 

[TheBigA]

My point is that every reporter reflects their experiences and beliefs, and, to a great extent, the "mood" at any station or newsroom is more uniform than not.

My point is if they do that, they're not a reporter but a commentator.

But everyone has a "perspective" based on what I just said: their experiences, friends, education, political affiliation.

A good editor will remove all that, so all that's left is the straight story. A reporter's story must have attribution, not perspective.

You use "perspective" as a positive term. It is not; a Houthi journalist is going to have a perspective but it won't be the same as that of any of us posting to this thread.

It can be positive or negative depending on how its used. Gergen had a unique perspective that is really missed today.

 

[L Chanon Gade]

So you will continue to insult about half the population... and likely (based on the emails I get) many of us here.

There is no need to use offensive and derogatory term, anywhere.

Mentioned thousands of times In Epstein Report.
97 Times Pleaded The Fifth.
34 Felony Convictions.
91 Criminal Charges.
26 Sexual Assault Allegations.
6 Bankruptcies.
5 Draft Deferments.
4 Indictments.
2 Impeachments.
2 Convicted Companies.
A long history of adjudicated fraud:
1 Fake University Shut Down. Paid 25mn in restitution to defrauded students.
1 Fake Charity Shut Down.
$5 Million Sexual Abuse Verdict.
$2 Million Fake Charity Abuse Judgment. Forbidden to engage in charity work here in NY
$93 Million Sexual Abuse Judgements.
$400+ Million Fraud Judgment.
First President in history to maintain a debt to GDP ratio over 100% for his entire term.
Highest annual budget deficit.
Most added to the national debt in a single term.
Most new unemployment claims. To be fair, COVID played a major role here.
Largest single day point drop in the history of the Dow..
Longest government shutdown in history (and he did that while his own party controlled both chambers of Congress).
First President in the history of approval ratings to maintain a net negative approval rating for his entire term. Repeat performance as of 3-26.
First President to be impeached twice.
First President to have bipartisan support for his conviction after impeachment (which happened both times).
Most indictments, guilty pleas, and criminal convictions of members of an administration --
Trump (Republican): 215
Nixon (Republican): 76,
Reagan (Republican): 26.
Vs. Democrats:
Obama (Democrat): 0,
Carter (Democrat): 1,
Clinton (Democrat): 2.
First president to have a mug shot.

With all of the above verifiable facts, how can you expect any respect when you put something like that back in our nation's highest office.

LCG

 

[davideduardo]

My point is if they do that, they're not a reporter but a commentator.

In a perfect world, that may be true. But you can not totally remove the background, experience and beliefs of a person and, thus, they will be influenced by them.

As an example, a reporter who is an adamant environmentalist will look at the war in Iran and see the effects of bombs, explosions, oil spills and the like and have some sort of compulsion to mention this in their report. Or the person who took economics in school will look, also, at the costs of warfare.

A good editor will remove all that, so all that's left is the straight story. A reporter's story must have attribution, not perspective.

Again, there is a mood in every newsroom. When The New Yorker selects an article and, perhaps edits it, both the writer and the editor are likely to have similar outlooks. Otherwise one would work at the Post.

It can be positive or negative depending on how its used. Gergen had a unique perspective that is really missed today.

And the rarity of his balanced "perspectives" is why we remember him.

 

[cc333]

Then they are not impartial if they reflect only t one segment of the population. We get up in arms about ignoring Blacks, Hispanics, LGBTQ+ persons and so on... but if a city is 70% Democratic, it's, then, OK to ignore Republicans? Uh, no.

That happens a lot in the SF Bay Area. The "R" word might as well be equivalent to the "N" word around here, and anyone who doesn't 100% hate the current POTUS is ridiculed and hated.

People are entitled to their opinions, and if I don't like what you like, I'm not going to insult and ridicule you based on that alone.

Most today don't even use traditional news delivery services. And many of those alternative sources have no editors and no verification.

Mentioned thousands of times In Epstein Report.
97 Times Pleaded The Fifth.
34 Felony Convictions.
91 Criminal Charges.
26 Sexual Assault Allegations.
6 Bankruptcies.
5 Draft Deferments.
4 Indictments.
2 Impeachments.
2 Convicted Companies.
A long history of adjudicated fraud:
1 Fake University Shut Down. Paid 25mn in restitution to defrauded students.
1 Fake Charity Shut Down.
$5 Million Sexual Abuse Verdict.
$2 Million Fake Charity Abuse Judgment. Forbidden to engage in charity work here in NY
$93 Million Sexual Abuse Judgements.
$400+ Million Fraud Judgment.
First President in history to maintain a debt to GDP ratio over 100% for his entire term.
Highest annual budget deficit.
Most added to the national debt in a single term.
Most new unemployment claims. To be fair, COVID played a major role here.
Largest single day point drop in the history of the Dow..
Longest government shutdown in history (and he did that while his own party controlled both chambers of Congress).
First President in the history of approval ratings to maintain a net negative approval rating for his entire term. Repeat performance as of 3-26.
First President to be impeached twice.
First President to have bipartisan support for his conviction after impeachment (which happened both times).
Most indictments, guilty pleas, and criminal convictions of members of an administration --
Trump (Republican): 215
Nixon (Republican): 76,
Reagan (Republican): 26.
Vs. Democrats:
Obama (Democrat): 0,
Carter (Democrat): 1,
Clinton (Democrat): 2.
First president to have a mug shot.

With all of the above verifiable facts, how can you expect any respect when you put something like that back in our nation's highest office.

LCG

The sheer quantity of problems this president has is absolutely laughable.

I am absolutely incredulous.

c

 

[TheBigA]

In a perfect world, that may be true. But you can not totally remove the background, experience and beliefs of a person and, thus, they will be influenced by them.

Sure you can. That's why you have editors and producers, other people who remove individual prejudices from reporting. It happens every day.

Again, there is a mood in every newsroom. When The New Yorker selects an article and, perhaps edits it, both the writer and the editor are likely to have similar outlooks. Otherwise one would work at the Post.

I assume you mean the NY Post, which has its own set of editors all the way up to the owner, who also owns Fox News. The biases are well known and educated consumers know those biases going in. Some will buy the Post specifically to get that point of view because that's what they want. In a free country, where you have freedom of the press, they are free to cover the news the way they want. The government can't punish them for their point of view. The problem now is we have a president who is using the government to punish parts of the press he doesn't like, and he can't do that.

But sure, we have people who are quitting CBS News because they feel Bari Weiss is biased in a way that will be incompatible with their approach to reporting. We have viewers who have chosen not to watch the Evening News because they don't like what's going on. Both sides have the freedom to do that.

And the rarity of his balanced "perspectives" is why we remember him.

But once again, we don't have a fairness doctrine. The government can't require "balance" because the government has its own set of biases and prejudices. This particular government itself isn't balanced, and ignores the 49% who didn't vote for it. Some in the media are reporting that, and as a result are being targeted by the president, the secretary of defense, and the FCC. The courts have ruled for the press every time.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Wrong.
View attachment 11738

But that is how the Electoral College works.

 

[TheBigA]

When The New Yorker selects an article and, perhaps edits it, both the writer and the editor are likely to have similar outlooks.

I should add that The New Yorker is a FEATURE magazine, not a strict NEWS magazine, and the writers there are columnists who write from a perspective for their specific audience. That's a different thing from a strict news reporter who writes news in real time with quotes and attribution. That is not what the New Yorker does. It's audience knows its a feature magazine., and they buy it for that reason.

There are similar feature magazines from other perspectives, and audiences that want that perspective know where to get it. National Review might be one in that area. Nobody buys the National Review for balanced reporting, and it's not how they promote themselves. They say up front that they're targeting conservatives, and make no effort to present the other side.

 

[vw86]

So you will continue to insult about half the population... and likely (based on the emails I get) many of us here.

There is no need to use offensive and derogatory term, anywhere.

"I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them."

President Trump at Charlie Kirk Memorial Service: "He did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry. I am sorry Erika."

www.c-span.org

Trump’s use of the ‘R’ word showcases the meanness in America | Column

The president recently used the word to describe Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

www.tampabay.com

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

CBS News Radio shutdown ends a decades‑long bond with WTOP - WTOP News

CBS News Radio, once known as CBS Radio News, will air its final report Friday, May 22, after 99 years of broadcasting news and information in the U.S. and globally.

wtop.com

WTOP is the largest non-Audacy station to lose affiliation with CBS News Radio. Also it will be interesting to see where Hubbard owned WTOP-FM is going in May.

 

[1stplayertokens]

Some History of CBS Radio<center><hr width="640"></center> is a great HISTORICAL writup of how CBS came to be... we sure have come a logn long way since then. the site might take a bit to load, but it will eventually, and it's not mine, but thought it'd be of interest

 

[JayR]

CBS News Radio shutdown ends a decades‑long bond with WTOP

WTOP is the largest non-Audacy station to lose affiliation with CBS News Radio. Also it will be interesting to see where Hubbard owned WTOP-FM is going in May.

WTOP picked up ABC News Radio for a short bit before returning to CBS News Radio at the TOH but keeping ABC News Radio at the bottom. Won’t WTOP just stick with ABC News Radio?

 

[lanceventa]

Let's stop with the personal politics in this thread...

 

[TheBigA]

I just saw this article written by one of the owners of WDWS-AM in Champaign Illinois. He talks about the business side of changing network affiliations.

Records & Radio | With plug pulled on CBS News Radio, affiliate switch pending for WDWS

Please read today’s column without a political lens. What I am writing about has zero to do with politics and is 100 percent about the business of broadcasting.

www.news-gazette.com