Now that Cumulus and Merlin are planning to expand all-news radio to other cities besides San Francisco & Dallas (where Cumulus competes against CBS for all news in these cities). Or NYC and Chicago where Merlin Competes against CBS and in the case of DC where CBS competes against Hubbard for all-News. Incidentally in the DC case Hubbard has the CBS affiliation for all News and WNEW (CBS owned all-news station has Cumulus news). How do we ensure that these commercial All-News stations remain objective and neutral in their content. Well My Point here is that I don't want these stations to end up the same way like all-news cable did. Remember CNN, MSNBC and Fox were supposed to be all-news but they ended up as propaganda stations that did infomercials for the Politicians like Fox News (For NeoCons and Tea Party), MSNBC for (Progressives and Liberals), and CNN for Moderates. HLN from the all-news operation to all-tabloids station.
-
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
How do we make sure that commercial all-news radio stations remain objective?
- Thread starter recto101
- Start date
I guess the marketplace will decide that, whether we like the outcome or not.
Who as been ordained with the power to decide what is objective? The fans of Fox news and other conservative message outlets are sure what they are getting is objective. The fans of MSNBC are sure what they are getting is objective.
Who has the ability to rain on our parade and wash the color filters from the lenses we all seem to wear?
Who as been ordained with the power to decide what is objective? The fans of Fox news and other conservative message outlets are sure what they are getting is objective. The fans of MSNBC are sure what they are getting is objective.
Who has the ability to rain on our parade and wash the color filters from the lenses we all seem to wear?
All News radio has generally been objective. But it's local for one thing. Cable TV is different. It all started when Rupert Murdoch saw an opening, and decided to turn his fledgling Fox News operation into the right-wing alternative for all those middle Americans who thought the "lame-stream" media is liberally biased. Obviously, it worked, and Fox News has been #1 for years now.
If you'll notice, KTVU never followed that path, though they use Fox News reporters. Why? Because this is a liberal region.
If you'll notice, KTVU never followed that path, though they use Fox News reporters. Why? Because this is a liberal region.
Lkeller said:
The "media" IS biased, but it is much worse than that. Fox News was created as an opposite to CNN. Unfortunately, even Fox News is not so conservative anymore. The problem with today's media? No longer are "journalists" held to any sort of journalistic responsibility. Today, those trying to make headlines often make up news, with no verifiable sources. They have a template for any news story they wish to write. It's the same political rhetoric over and over again. It is so bad I find myself watching less and less TV. Radio still has good reporting. Without radio, and the Internet, we would all be watching the garbage on TV. And yes, most of what's on is crap.
Steven Roy said:
??? ??? ???
Mike said:
It's true Mike. This coming from someone who is mostly conservative.
Many say Fox caved to gubmnt demands, with threats directed at Rupert Murdoch. I was shocked by what I heard on Fox News Radio. The attacks started with the destruction of Herman Cain. Obama saw him as a very big threat to re-election. With two African-Americans running for the White House, there would be no race card available.
I find most cable and network news to be unwatchable.
Not going to happen as long as humans are involved.
Let's address this from the old school of journalism. Facts are facts when you have multiple confirmations from reliable sources. Those sources should not be columnists from the NYTimes OR the National Review. Politicians & business peoPle are asked tough questions that are re-phrased over and over to get past the PR spin. Reporters are hired to go into the field and look for stories which they follow up on and have vetted by editors who restrain themselves from using stories that don't have solid confirmations. This is costly because most leads don't develop into usable stories.
This is costly time consuming work but it is how we stay an informed public.
This is costly time consuming work but it is how we stay an informed public.
Steven Roy said:
First of all, when were journalists held to any sort of journalistic responsibility? Did you ever hear of William Randolph Hearst?
Second of all, most major news organizations still have the editorial process, where reporters and their stories are questioned and fact checked.
Steven Roy said:Mike said:
It's true Mike. This coming from someone who is mostly conservative.
Many say Fox caved to gubmint demands, with threats directed at Rupert Murdoch. I was shocked by what I heard on Fox News Radio. The attacks started with the destruction of Herman Cain. Obama saw him as a very big threat to re-election. With two African-Americans running for the White House, there would be no race card available.
I find most cable and network news to be unwatchable.
Well...as a mostly liberal person, I find Fox News pretty far to the right. But they're not monolithic - they have a few liberal commentators - Juan Williams, Geraldo Rivera, Alan Colmes, etc.
And even conservatives aren't always consistent. I stumbled into The O'Reilly Factor a couple of weeks ago - sometimes I like to watch him for laughs. Bill was doing a story about the fact that much of the oil taken out of the ground in the USA is sent overseas. His comment was that the government should step in and stop the exporting of American oil WHAT! I always thought Big Bill was against government intervention and regulations. Made me laugh.
Lkeller said:
Also KTVU and KICU are owned by Cox Broadcasting inc. Thats another factor that keeps KTVU from bowing down to propaganda. I know in 2009 Fox News hire Stossel away from ABC to push his libertarian ideas on his weekly talk show.
Also I know recently ABC has started to mirror its newscasts to be more like HLN. Ever Since ABC aired the Casey Anthony case and Former KNEW 910AM host current HLN host Nancy Grace came in as a pundit for GMA then that network fell apart. I remember back in the 1980's-1990's Media experts use to ask "Is the lines between News and Entertainment blurring?" That really means is the media bowing down to the National Enquirer the largest national tabloid in the 1990's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1W9ykaMdGc
Check out this WEMP-FM News in NYC clip its too much like E online and its more TMZ leaning.
Check out this WEMP-FM News in NYC clip its too much like E online and its more TMZ leaning.
Lkeller said:
Keep in mind that there's a difference between the top of the hour news on these channels and the talk that goes on afterwards. The news is basically the news, and then the talk is commentary. They are two different thing, as Paul Harvey used to distinguish between news and comment. Paul played offense and defense. Juan is strictly a commentator. And guys like O'Reilly are talk show hosts. Different animals in the same zoo.
TheBigA said:
Well...there's a lot of slop-over on Fox News. I've noticed that Bret Baier and Sheppard Smith deliver the news straight without a lot of right-wing pundits making comments. Other "news" shows not so much. The conservative bias is pretty noticeable with Megan Kelly, for example.
"How do we make sure that commercial all-news radio stations remain objective?"
I'm not totally clear as to why "we" would even want or need to do this.
If there's something I don't like, I usually change stations. There are countless options via old and new media, and more choices are coming online every day...radio, TV, newspapers, and independent internet sites. That's just for local news. I can see where some control freaks might want to try and bully a particular station into spinning in their protracted way, but I'll just move on, thanks. For me life's too short to whine.
I'm not totally clear as to why "we" would even want or need to do this.
If there's something I don't like, I usually change stations. There are countless options via old and new media, and more choices are coming online every day...radio, TV, newspapers, and independent internet sites. That's just for local news. I can see where some control freaks might want to try and bully a particular station into spinning in their protracted way, but I'll just move on, thanks. For me life's too short to whine.
barman said:
It's called Civics 101, Hoss.
Our Founding Fathers knew that self government needed to operate on a well lit field. That is why what we call Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press are enshrined in the Constitution.
Changing stations to avoid whining may be a recipe for the Failure of Freedom in our Country.
The rest us will stand guard, whining all the way, while you go "Eat, Drink and be Merry."
Sometimes I comment: "May your tribe increase." I shall not encourage your tribe to engage in procreation.
If what you say is true and enough people agree with you, the market share loss stemming from a reduction of audience will most likely create a self-imposed change. In nearly every situation this is a business, you know.
If Sears. Target or Walmart carry the wrong products, they'll change to conform to current market demand.
Maybe we differ in our interpretation of "we", which I interpret to meaning just the people on this board, because the forementioned is Econ 101.
If Sears. Target or Walmart carry the wrong products, they'll change to conform to current market demand.
Maybe we differ in our interpretation of "we", which I interpret to meaning just the people on this board, because the forementioned is Econ 101.
- Status