Good grief. When have they stopped firing people?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Biased terminology on KTRH
- Thread starter Mark Roberts
- Start date
- Status
My points still stand. Remember when Rush called himself "America's Anchorman"? Because I certainly do when I used to listen to his show.
Again, there's been a claim that I have a certain opinion because I objected to the terminology KTRH used in its newscasts. Well, if you try to put words in my mouth, I reserve the right to bite your fingers!
And I really don't care what the terminology is in Spanish. Unless KTRH suddenly starts broadcasting in Spanish, or echoes of KEYH's all-news past come to life, it's not relevant. Look up "faux ami" sometime.
So let me repeat: the question is why KTRH used a charged, loaded term when more neutral terms were available...and whether that damages the credibility of (what's left of) its news operation. To pivot to a different example: will KTRH call it the "fairy parade" when the annual Pride March happens in June in Houston?
The purpose of a newscast is to inform, not to agitate. What KTRH is doing is agitprop, and more suited to a Marxist or fascist environment.
I remember hearing from some KGO listeners back when it was primarily a talk station (a much more balanced talk station than KTRH has become) that they felt that the station's newscasts just got in the way of the programming they were interested in. I found that to be a strange response, but it is true that news/talk or talk/news is a very different animal from all-news - with "all news some of the time" not usually having worked all that well.
I knew there was a 19 in 20 chance that this thread would turn political, though the speed with which it happened astonished me. A useful first step in rectifying that sharp drift would be to focus the discussion on the issue at hand and to stop trying to intimate or detect whatever viewpoint I might have.
And I really don't care what the terminology is in Spanish. Unless KTRH suddenly starts broadcasting in Spanish, or echoes of KEYH's all-news past come to life, it's not relevant. Look up "faux ami" sometime.
So let me repeat: the question is why KTRH used a charged, loaded term when more neutral terms were available...and whether that damages the credibility of (what's left of) its news operation. To pivot to a different example: will KTRH call it the "fairy parade" when the annual Pride March happens in June in Houston?
The purpose of a newscast is to inform, not to agitate. What KTRH is doing is agitprop, and more suited to a Marxist or fascist environment.
To be honest, that image was what triggered my annoyance. Here was a once-credible news operation, one that I had been a part of (admittedly a long time ago) that was using emotionally charged, editorializing language in the disguise of a newscast. It wouldn't have surprised me from a typical talk-show host, but this was a new frontier in bias.
That is an interesting point. It would certainly amount to dropping the pretense. Unfortunately, talk show hosts are held to lesser standards than newscasters, if they are held to any standards at all beyond not uttering seven certain words, but I don't see that changing any time soon.
I remember hearing from some KGO listeners back when it was primarily a talk station (a much more balanced talk station than KTRH has become) that they felt that the station's newscasts just got in the way of the programming they were interested in. I found that to be a strange response, but it is true that news/talk or talk/news is a very different animal from all-news - with "all news some of the time" not usually having worked all that well.
I knew there was a 19 in 20 chance that this thread would turn political, though the speed with which it happened astonished me. A useful first step in rectifying that sharp drift would be to focus the discussion on the issue at hand and to stop trying to intimate or detect whatever viewpoint I might have.
It's not policing. It's attempting to maintain objectivity while describing an event or issue. That's why we have things such as the Associated Press Stylebook. It's also a journalist's responsibility to avoid sloppiness and inaccuracies in descriptions. "Illegal immigration" is an accurate term. "Illegal immigrant" implies that someone's existence is illegal, which is a dangerous path to go down. You can work out the implications for yourself.
What KTRH did wasn't journalism and shouldn't masquerade as such. That's my point.
Thank you.
Because the intent is to agitate. We have to recognize it for what it is, and why it was done. It was not an accident.
Language is a sword and people wield it for a reason.
Exactly. Rush was an entertainer, not a journalist. People are surprised when someone like Maria Bartiromo or Lou Dobbs, who were once respected journalists, fall into the pit of ideologues. Same could be said of a lot of politicians. But we have to recognize they've been bitten by the vampire. They are no longer who they were.
I totally agree that it was intentional. Disgusting, but intentional.
Trouble is, they do a lot of damage along the way, and there's no disclaimer saying "This host is here to stir you up (and get you to buy a special pillow)".
To that end, I do apologize. I was trying to frame the discussion on the need for talk stations to have news if the "news" isn't going to adhere to a stylebook or guidelines anyway.
So my question to you is who do we call to fix that? The phrase ''Congress shall make no law'' comes to mind.
A newscast doesn't have to be journalism. It can be performance art. Saturday Night Live and the Daily Show prove that.
And so did Rush! And pretty much every run-of-the-mill talk show host today. They were and are performance art in every sense of the word.
The modern day policing of words has become a real issue because the practice has become politically weaponized. Many people have used political correctness as a way to suppress political oppositions' messages in media.
Not letting people say that a migrant's resident status is in fact "illegal" seems like a tactic to reduce the stigma of illegal immigrants.
Not maintaining objectivity would have been using an adjective, such as "dangerous illegals" or "gangs of illegals" in their reporting of immigration. Simply calling immigrants "illegal" if they are indeed illegal isn't losing objectivity..
This is not about the status. It's about labeling anyone they don't like as illegal, and inventing an invasion by "hordes of illegals."
The only people who actually know their status are those who are authorized to ask. That doesn't include a newscaster.
It is quite bonkers to see Trump leading Biden amongst ALL Hispanics in some polls. CNN even had an interview with an illegal immigrant who preferred Trump over Biden here in Houston.
It will be interesting to see if any networks will take advantage of this political shift. For the longest of time, Univision and Telemundo have been propaganda outlets of the DNC and covered issues faced by Hispanics with a leftist viewpoint (within reason since many Hispanics are still Catholic). The explosion of social media and algorithms controlling the online narrative this past decade seems to be having a larger influence than network "news" programs. Whatever happens, it seems like there is a lucrative opportunity for someone to provide content for center-right leaning Hispanics.
Let's see how polls actually vote.
Voz Media didn't have the money to buy the SBS TV stations and are reduced to buying airtime on Daystar. Americano Media wanted to set up a radio network and ran out of money.
Are there several examples of Hispanics being incorrectly called illegal on KTRH?
Seems like "invasion" is a relative term. The unwelcomed entry of migrants has surpassed 6 million people. Maybe you wouldn't call that an invasion, but I can understand someone who will use the term to illustrate what is happening at the border.
This country was able to absorb 15 million immigrants in the early 1900s. That was when the US population was a fifth of what is now. Back then we built Ellis Island to handle it. We need that now. It's not the number of people that is the problem. It's the government's ability to handle it, process the paperwork, and get people settled. That problem has existed for 25 years.
No need, you're fine. It was an expectation regarding the broader context of any such discussion and of people who aren't or haven't been journalists misunderstanding the issue that I was bringing up.
And so is conservative talk radio.
That's no excuse for something that purports to be a newscast.
- Status