Is it just me...the stations I work for or an overall trend to dumb down news content? I was told recently not to include percentage numbers or too many numbers within a story such as the price of gasoline...high and low within a certain area. EH? Is news being dumbed down to elementary school level because some people in management believe their audience is that stupid? Granted, phone numbers and website addresses are a no no but other numbers are need for many stories. Anyone have any thoughts or am I alone in experiencing this???
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Dumbing down of news content
- Thread starter WRLK
- Start date
F
FredLeonard
Guest
Even NPR is dumbing down. As H.L. Mencken said: Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
However: Radio deals in headlines - bulletins. Long-form and in-depth coverage are long gone. Years ago somebody made up a rule that stories can't run longer than 40 seconds. Given that, are numbers and percentages really necessary or useful? Once upon a time, radio news broadcasts were obliged to end with something like: For details, see your local newspaper. That principle still applies (with the modification to "newspaper or website").
About the only stations still doing any kind of news are conservative talk stations. So, maybe management is right. The audience is stupid.
The OP has cross-posted this on three different boards. Maybe he thinks we all are stupid, too?
However: Radio deals in headlines - bulletins. Long-form and in-depth coverage are long gone. Years ago somebody made up a rule that stories can't run longer than 40 seconds. Given that, are numbers and percentages really necessary or useful? Once upon a time, radio news broadcasts were obliged to end with something like: For details, see your local newspaper. That principle still applies (with the modification to "newspaper or website").
About the only stations still doing any kind of news are conservative talk stations. So, maybe management is right. The audience is stupid.
The OP has cross-posted this on three different boards. Maybe he thinks we all are stupid, too?
Last edited:
Even NPR is dumbing down. As H.L. Mencken said: Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
However: Radio deals in headlines - bulletins. Long-form and in-depth coverage are long gone. Years ago somebody made up a rule that stories can't run longer than 40 seconds. Given that, are numbers and percentages really necessary or useful? Once upon a time, radio news broadcasts were obliged to end with something like: For details, see your local newspaper. That principle still applies (with the modification to "newspaper or website").
About the only stations still doing any kind of news are conservative talk stations. So, maybe management is right. The audience is stupid.
The OP has cross-posted this on three different boards. Maybe he thinks we all are stupid, too?
I hear about the dumbing down of News content more often on the Cable Stations like MSNBC, Fox and CNN. This is where CNN is accused of playing the Ron Burgundy card, MSNBC pleases the DNC Lobbyists, Fox News pleases the RNC/Tea Party Lobbyists and SuperPacs.
"Years ago somebody made up a rule that stories can't run longer than 40 seconds." Isn't that Commercial all-news radio or Old Headline News such as 1010 WINS, the CBS all-News O&O and Cumulus O&O's they all have the goal "You Give us 22 Minutes We give you the world." this means that you have to cram stories in a 50-70 second interval to meet that criteria. The Problem here is that the commercial news stations get their news from AP, Reuters, TMZ and Local Stringers as far as I know these groups don't fund the Investigative stories. they fund headlines.
Well we do have a Job to do we need to put more pressure on "Centers for Investigative Reporting", Propublica, some NPR affiliates, some PBS affiliates that do in-depth Reporting, LinkTV, BBC and Al-Jazeera news to do a better job in Investigative stories and International news in depth.
The journalism school I went to many years ago taught us that broadcast news HAS to be simpler than print. The ear can't pick up lots of detail. So the writing HAS to be more direct. Keep in mind that H.L. Mencken was a newspaper guy who hated broadcasting.
I don't know if the listeners are stupid...just not as attentive. Lots of distractions.
I don't know if the listeners are stupid...just not as attentive. Lots of distractions.
O.K. Reluctantly, I can see the point that numbers in news may be a problem. But there are some stories that really are not a story without some numbers.
Maybe it isn't the audience that is dumb and cannot comprehend numbers. May some journalists are too dumb to recognize which stories NEED numbers, and which stories can be told without numbers, and which stories shouldn't be told if the numbers cannot be included.
Now does this example qualify as a number that should not be used... (and it illustrates a different pet peeve of mine!)
"A tornado has hit a small Missouri town and killed three people."
Is it really news to say: "A tornado has touched down in a midwestern state and killed SOME people." If that is the best policy will allow, skip the story!
The first thing I want to know: What state? Then, since I have lived in nine different states, it may be that it is a town in which I have lived so I want to know if I should drop what I am doing and go to the web for details from a place where I remember some street names. Is it maybe underestimating the intelligence of the public to admit that maybe it would be a courtesy to explain whether 3 people were killed... or 37 people or 219 people were killed.
Any station that does not have enough respect for it's audience-ability to comprehend the difference between 3 and 219, the difference between, an audience with the ability to comprehend the difference between Carthage, MO and Canton, MO and and does not believe it has an audience that would like to know whether Midwestern storms hit Missouri or Indiana... that station should cancel all newscasts. After all, their audience is profoundly dumb. Running a newscast on such a station indicates it is run by a manager or owner even dumber than it's audience.
Full Disclosure: I used to get out of bed at strange after midnight hours to to fire up the station in Moberly, MO where I was News Director and tell the audience what burg of 30 or 300 people was in the path of an oncoming tornado path. Our station was owned by a guy who was so dumb he thought people were smart enough to understand all that. His name was Jerrell Shepherd. Some of you may have heard of him. NOBODY ever called Jerrell "dumb".
Maybe it isn't the audience that is dumb and cannot comprehend numbers. May some journalists are too dumb to recognize which stories NEED numbers, and which stories can be told without numbers, and which stories shouldn't be told if the numbers cannot be included.
Now does this example qualify as a number that should not be used... (and it illustrates a different pet peeve of mine!)
"A tornado has hit a small Missouri town and killed three people."
Is it really news to say: "A tornado has touched down in a midwestern state and killed SOME people." If that is the best policy will allow, skip the story!
The first thing I want to know: What state? Then, since I have lived in nine different states, it may be that it is a town in which I have lived so I want to know if I should drop what I am doing and go to the web for details from a place where I remember some street names. Is it maybe underestimating the intelligence of the public to admit that maybe it would be a courtesy to explain whether 3 people were killed... or 37 people or 219 people were killed.
Any station that does not have enough respect for it's audience-ability to comprehend the difference between 3 and 219, the difference between, an audience with the ability to comprehend the difference between Carthage, MO and Canton, MO and and does not believe it has an audience that would like to know whether Midwestern storms hit Missouri or Indiana... that station should cancel all newscasts. After all, their audience is profoundly dumb. Running a newscast on such a station indicates it is run by a manager or owner even dumber than it's audience.
Full Disclosure: I used to get out of bed at strange after midnight hours to to fire up the station in Moberly, MO where I was News Director and tell the audience what burg of 30 or 300 people was in the path of an oncoming tornado path. Our station was owned by a guy who was so dumb he thought people were smart enough to understand all that. His name was Jerrell Shepherd. Some of you may have heard of him. NOBODY ever called Jerrell "dumb".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIevazPIPzU
See Conan's Commentary on Local TV News Talent Reading "Yeah Baby" from a TMZ Article of Mike Myers. Dumbing Down of News Content ain't new if you see Good Day LA Happy Talk of celebs everyday though.
See Conan's Commentary on Local TV News Talent Reading "Yeah Baby" from a TMZ Article of Mike Myers. Dumbing Down of News Content ain't new if you see Good Day LA Happy Talk of celebs everyday though.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
The journalism school I went to many years ago taught us that broadcast news HAS to be simpler than print. The ear can't pick up lots of detail. So the writing HAS to be more direct. Keep in mind that H.L. Mencken was a newspaper guy who hated broadcasting.
I don't know if the listeners are stupid...just not as attentive. Lots of distractions.
Too bad that so-called "journalism school" didn't teach you to get your facts right.
Do you have a source for Mencken hating broadcasting (more than everything else he hated)?
The quote was from 1926. It's amazing how he was able to hate broadcasting, more accurately radio, so early. And radio was not even doing regular news yet. The two newspapers at which he spent most of his career both owned stations and regular used newspaper writers to broadcast (with the intention of promoting the paper). Many radio stations were started by or owned by newspapers which considered radio a way whet the public's appetite for detailed news by offering bulletins (and commentary).
One of broadcasting's more idiotic moves was when radio stations decided they were in competition with newspapers - five minute newscasts competing with pages of text and news staff of one or a handful competing with a news staff of dozens or hundreds.
"Broadcast journalist" is an oxymoron. Anybody who never worked for a newspaper or wire service is a news jockey. For people in radio news to call themselves "journalists" is like DJs calling themselves musicians.
The quote was from 1926. It's amazing how he was able to hate broadcasting, more accurately radio, so early.
He's an amazing guy. He lived until 1956. So he had lots of time to form his opinion. He actually did some radio commentaries at one point, but preferred working in newspapers.
For people in radio news to call themselves "journalists" is like DJs calling themselves musicians.
Show me one DJ who calls himself a musician.
The term journalist has more to do with the function of collecting the story than the medium its reported on. The quantity of the reportage has nothing to do with the quality.
It is not only "dumbing down" it's the huge spot load.
Most of these commercial operators carry a huge debt. That, combines with a generally declining industry has led to a "get the cash while we can" attitude.
The only commercial station that I listened to was WCBS-am here in NYC. While they still have an excellent staff, the station has become too loaded with garbage to tolerate.
It is typical ti get less than two minutes of "news" followed by a longer period of commercials. Even the space between traffic and weather reports has a live read that is longer then the traffic -often twice as long.
They have also started to add junk such as "entertainment news". Who cares where Howard Stern gets his hair styled.
I suppose some consultant has convinced management that adding this junk will bring in younger listeners. I doubt it.
LCG
Most of these commercial operators carry a huge debt. That, combines with a generally declining industry has led to a "get the cash while we can" attitude.
The only commercial station that I listened to was WCBS-am here in NYC. While they still have an excellent staff, the station has become too loaded with garbage to tolerate.
It is typical ti get less than two minutes of "news" followed by a longer period of commercials. Even the space between traffic and weather reports has a live read that is longer then the traffic -often twice as long.
They have also started to add junk such as "entertainment news". Who cares where Howard Stern gets his hair styled.
I suppose some consultant has convinced management that adding this junk will bring in younger listeners. I doubt it.
LCG
The only commercial station that I listened to was WCBS-am here in NYC. While they still have an excellent staff, the station has become too loaded with garbage to tolerate.
And the interesting part is that CBS is one of the few companies that doesn't have a huge debt load. It's just very expensive to run an all-news station in NYC.
Even NPR is dumbing down. As H.L. Mencken said: Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
However: Radio deals in headlines - bulletins. Long-form and in-depth coverage are long gone. Years ago somebody made up a rule that stories can't run longer than 40 seconds. Given that, are numbers and percentages really necessary or useful? Once upon a time, radio news broadcasts were obliged to end with something like: For details, see your local newspaper. That principle still applies (with the modification to "newspaper or website").
About the only stations still doing any kind of news are conservative talk stations. So, maybe management is right. The audience is stupid.
The OP has cross-posted this on three different boards. Maybe he thinks we all are stupid, too?
No..the other boards in Tampa and Orlando is where I am locally. Just wanted to post is nationally to see what is said.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
He's an amazing guy. He lived until 1956. So he had lots of time to form his opinion. He actually did some radio commentaries at one point, but preferred working in newspapers.
Show me one DJ who calls himself a musician.
The term journalist has more to do with the function of collecting the story than the medium its reported on. The quantity of the reportage has nothing to do with the quality.
No, DJs don't call themselves musicians. They are more grounded in reality than news jockeys who call themselves journalists. Newspaper people do collect stories. Radio news jockeys get stories handed to them from the AP or press releases.
Nice try at twisting things: Mencken made his comment 30 years before he died. Also nice try at backing down: You admit he did work in radio and now you say he "preferred" newspapers - which is different than saying he "hated" radio (and claiming that this hatred drove his comment in 1926). In context, his comment was about the gullibility of people and about those who take advantage of it - not about radio or any particular medium. Later in life, Mencken started his own magazine to give voice to his views and then started a radio program to promote it. The magazine is gone but the show is still on, a little thing called "Meet the Press." Of course it also has been dumbed down and turned into a soft-ball interview with a TV host (not a member of the press) and the panel now including TV talking heads is relegated to he-said, she-said arguments.
No, DJs don't call themselves musicians.
So that kills your analogy.
You admit he did work in radio and now you say he "preferred" newspapers - which is different than saying he "hated" radio (and claiming that this hatred drove his comment in 1926).
I never claimed his hatred drove his comment in 1926. Try again.
http://richliebermanreport.blogspot....on-tv-and.html
1. "Team Coverage"
2. "Our Science Editor."
3. Weather anchors that repeatedly emphasize a "strong cold front! and/or a "band of high pressure."
4. "Breaking News"
5. "At the end of the day."
6. MOS Live Shots
7. Sports anchors that get cutesy with the highlights:
8. Anchor to reporter after package: "Thanks Bill."
9. "Developing Story"
10. The insincere horrified look from reporters on scene at terrible accident or a natural disaster, say. First off, give us news and the information--that's why you're THERE! On the Scene,
Well 415 Media has a point here on this one and I happen to agree with him on this. I say this is true on both National Cable News and Local TV News. But then again NWS, Accu-Weather Local Stringers, AP, Reuters and TMZ provide the headline writing and shots that Local TV News uses but they happen to use different readers to spread the content around. If a morning show like Good Day LA and HLN News decided that Miley Cyrus, and Rob Ford (Toronto Mayor) are Breaking News so be it. Let them please their audience and provider TMZ.
See this article I posted it for the California TV board.
1. "Team Coverage"
2. "Our Science Editor."
3. Weather anchors that repeatedly emphasize a "strong cold front! and/or a "band of high pressure."
4. "Breaking News"
5. "At the end of the day."
6. MOS Live Shots
7. Sports anchors that get cutesy with the highlights:
8. Anchor to reporter after package: "Thanks Bill."
9. "Developing Story"
10. The insincere horrified look from reporters on scene at terrible accident or a natural disaster, say. First off, give us news and the information--that's why you're THERE! On the Scene,
Well 415 Media has a point here on this one and I happen to agree with him on this. I say this is true on both National Cable News and Local TV News. But then again NWS, Accu-Weather Local Stringers, AP, Reuters and TMZ provide the headline writing and shots that Local TV News uses but they happen to use different readers to spread the content around. If a morning show like Good Day LA and HLN News decided that Miley Cyrus, and Rob Ford (Toronto Mayor) are Breaking News so be it. Let them please their audience and provider TMZ.
See this article I posted it for the California TV board.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.