5 Things The Media Loves Pretending Are News
Reporting the news is really hard. We've seen those poor guys standing in the hurricanes, trying to hold on to their microphone while debris flies by. And it's a good thing we have them; blogs and Twitter are nice, but to find out what's really going on in the world, at some point you need good old-fashioned journalism.
So can you blame a news outlet for using shortcuts and falling into the same old mistakes and cliches over and over again, just to fill space?
Yes, yes we can.
#5.
Let's Ask the Idiots About Science
When it comes to matters of opinion or personal beliefs, it is absolutely the duty of the news media to report both sides (and any extra sides there may be, on those rare odd occasions when there are somehow more than two). It doesn't matter which one they agree with, they need to acknowledge the fact that some people think gay marriage is a right and others think the gays are forming a unicorn army that will kill us all.
Image courtesy of Faithmouse.com
When it comes to matters of fact, however, they absolutely do not have that duty. Particularly when it comes to technical or scientific matters where it takes somebody with training to speak knowledgably on the subject.
If we're talking about if, say, vaccines cause autism, we need to hear from scientists. That's a scientific issue. We do not need to hear from Jenny McCarthy or Jim fucking Carrey, in the name of giving "both sides." Jim and Jenny don't get a side. They have no background in the subject, and it's one that requires fucking background.
Once this happens, your opinion on medicine doesn't matter.
Sure, they can talk about poisonous vaccines to Oprah or whoever is sitting next to them at the Lakers game all they want. They have freedom of speech. That freedom does not guarantee them a seat on a panel of experts.
Yet, this kind of stupidity happens constantly. You get articles like this one from the Toronto Star, explaining how an investigation revealed how World Trade Center building 7 collapsed:
Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology say their three-year investigation of the collapse determined the demise of WTC 7 was the first time in the world a fire caused the total failure of a modern skyscraper.
The organization they mentioned, the NIST, studies how buildings collapse so that they can make sure future buildings don't collapse. But instead of going into further detail on their extensive investigation, we get this:
Mike Berger of the group 9/11 Truth said he wasn't buying the government's explanation. "Their explanation simply isn't sufficient. We're being lied to," he said. Ah, yes, the conspiracy nut. Again, we would never deny a crazy person the right to be crazy.
They just shouldn't get a voice equal to that of hundreds of highly-trained experts. It can't be done that way. After all, there is a contingent of conspiracy kooks drifting around every subject. You don't stop every story about AIDS in Africa to hear from the John Bircher who thinks AIDS is a secret government population control project spread by fluoridated water.
But we can't just disregard their opinions, can we? Yes. Yes we can. If you're going to weigh in on a scientific matter, you need to bring data, gathered by people who know what the fuck they're talking about. If the subject is medicinal marijuana, we're not going to quote a stoner who has suddenly realized his hands can talk.
#4.
"_______gate"
The first rule of modern journalism is that everything has to have a cute nickname. When celebrities are dating you mash their names together (Bradgelina!) and when there's a scandal, or anything that sort of looks like a scandal, you tack "-gate" onto the end.
Grategate.
Obviously we can thank the Watergate Scandal for this, which was only named that because it involved a break-in at the Watergate hotel, which itself was named after a planned reception area on the shore of the Potomac river that oh by the way, does not exist.
We get another "-gate" about once a year these days. The Clinton administration had like five different -gate scandals (Troopergate, Travelgate, etc). But now? Janet Jackson's nip slip at the Superbowl--Nipplegate. Tom Cruise mad at an episode of South Park that makes fun of Scientology? Closetgate. Someone crashes Obama's party at the White House? Gatecrashergate. Soon we expect to learn Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is using public funds to buy himself a new gate in Gatesgategate.
Pictured: Gate's gait.
You can also thank New York Times columnist William Safire, who started 'gating every scandal starting all the way back in 1974, when Watergate was still going on. Thanks to him, journalists get a Bonergate every time they think there's a gate-worthy scandal, and political pundits are always eager to hang a -gate on the other side (see the "climategate" emails).
Gotham City already experienced Bonergate.
The only thing that makes us feel better is the knowledge that, in some alternate universe, the Watergate hotel was instead named after John Hancock.
#3.
Now for the Weather
You have to feel sorry for weather men and women. These days you can get a weather forecast within five seconds on your PC or cell phone. So there is a certain desperation that comes with a guy who is doing a job he knows is not only obsolete, but a little bit silly. As a result, there are two types of weathermen/weatherwomen: the "Michael Bay" and "Captain Obvious."
And occasionally, the Ron Jeremy.
The "Michael Bays" love to play up any kind of severe storm like it's straight from the Book of Revelation. They've been waiting all year for this, and immediately become the weather version of the sensationalist reporter, knowing that all eyes are on them. First step? Come up with a rad name for the storm. Then stand in front of a graphic that says, "The Blizzard of Oz" or "Snowmageddon" or "The You Gonna Get Stabbed in the Eyeball With an Icicle Like That Guy In Die Hard 2 Coldocalypse of '08."
Now is the winter of your discontent.
One example: A Portland, Oregon news site went on a frenzy calling an upcoming winter storm "Winter Blast." The result? According to this site, Portland got two inches of snow. For the entire month of December. Holy Shit, two inches! Why that's enough snow to build a four inch tall snowman, then look at pathetic said snowman, think of your childhood and wonder if you'll ever be able to feel anything ever again.
Then we have Captain Obvious. "Breaking news, everybody. It's snowing! In Chicago! In January!"
Enjoy this CNN report, with their team tracking the kind of storm they get in Chicago every year at this time. That's a national news channel there, breaking in to let you know that the weather in Chicago is doing exactly what you would expect.
They could take that report, stash it in a drawer and pull it out every year at this time and it would still apply. Speaking of which...
Here's the problem with #5.Let's Ask the Idiots About Science
ReplyBack in late August of 2011, The Guardian reported “It may not rank as the most compelling reason to curb greenhouse gases, but reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim,”(no kidding, just Google "Aliens may destroy humanity to protect other civilisations, say scientists" and you can read it yourself)
The Guardian report of this "scientific" study includes a warning that "Rising greenhouse emissions could tip off aliens that we are a rapidly expanding threat", and siting a new study conducted by researchers at Nasa’s Planetary Science Division (WOW, that sounds really importantly smart, doesn't it) posits that “green” ETs might get angry at Bubba driving his gas-guzzling SUV and respond by wiping humankind off the face of the earth to “protect other civilizations”.
Ok, well what about televised news. Just Google "mercury is good for your brain" and you can watch K-Eye News reporting that 2 new studies conducted by the Journal of Pediatrics, "that Mercury in Vaccines improves brain function." YUP, that's right... A deadly toxic metal is now GOOD for you according to 2 scientific studies.
But according to the author of this article, I need another scientific expert to tell me that Mercury is very bad for my brain, before I can doubt the scientific studies conducted by the Journal of Pediatrics.
So, in short, why should anyone blindly take the words of "Scientists" over the words of so-called idiots, when scientists sound more-and-more like idiots everyday.
Do I really need another "EXPERT SCIENTIST" to tell me that's a load of crap.
For the simple reason that the so-called scientists they talk about are the idiots in question. Morons who think that citing a study by someone impressive and then drawing a completely unmentioned conclusion from it makes them a scientist. These news outlets often completely ignore the fact that the rest of the entire science community is either laughing at them, or trying to pretend they don't exist.
TL;DR
One that puzzles me involves George Clooney. He's an adult, famous, handsome, rich but when ever he starts dating a new woman they squeal like he's in junior high and just got his first girlfriend. "Georgie has a new girlfriend! Isn't that exciting?" No, not really.
ReplyIt's everywhere. When I lived in NJ there was a local paper (Washington Township I think) where they would cover the reopening of an adult book store every time it was closed by the police and moved to a new location. But they made it sound as if they were outraged and yet say something like "We're sickened by the reopening of the Whoopee Adult Book store at its new location at 123 Oak Street where they are selling their vile wares from 8 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday and until 9 pm on Saturday and Sunday." Hard hitting news or ad, you decide.
ReplyUncreativenamegate.
ReplyI've got one: Anything to do with internet memes.
ReplyApparently, a farmer in britain has become mildly popular on Youtube after posting a video of himself screaming at his dog while it chased his goats into a motorway.
And that event got a headline.
FENTON!
I am f*****g sick of yahoo and msn's shit. If you're Australian, you know how yahoo's tied in with Channel 7 and msn is tied in with channel nine. It's f*****g annoying seeing news updates about "best road trip albums" or "biggest tv scandals" or them plugging some s****y reality show nobody likes. TV channels back the f**k off. Stick to promoting your s**t in the newspapers, gossip rags and on your spin-off channels. I don't want to know about that slapper Kim Kardashian. You either start putting up real news or don't f*****g have the news at all, assholes
ReplyIt is more complex. Any nutjob can be asked for opinion, but the host or a reporter should always present the setting and tell who is he talking with, using the same criteria. So, if there is scientific matter discussed, he can say something like "In the blue corner there is an expert with 23 years of experience and author of 42 patents from this field, in the red corner there is a person with no background and no achievements in the discussed matter". And, of course, it someone tries to undermine the reliability of the opposing party the burden of proof is on him.
ReplyYou dont have the time to painstakingly present such debates? Then DO NOT DO IT AT ALL. It is that simple. If you want to cover the topic and present to the public, write a paper, report or a monograph so anyone interested can read it. Television and radio are not universal media, so some things are not suited for them.
Alright, so . . . are we just gonna ignore what's going on with that Doritos bag? Cause that's pretty messed up.
ReplyMy personal favorite is the local or national news broadcaster airing the same bit about a 'dog skateboarding' or other useless nugget for three or four days straight.
ReplyI think quoting the 9/11 truthers was more of a device to make the article more interesting. Just stating facts without any conflict of opinion or stating them without outlining the implications of the facts being sated makes for a pretty boring story.
ReplyBut that's what journalism is supposed to be. It's supposed to be boring! The editorial or huaman pieces are supposed to be the ones that are fun or creative. If you're doing a story on bills passed by the governement, guess what, they're going to be boring! And if you're into that sort of thing, you read it. Instead, now every time I try to read something about government, I get an opinion thrown in (either side, I don't give a damn which) and suddenly it's no longer a factual story that I can really base my own opinion on. I just wanted to know facts so I could form some sort of knowledge of the situation and then form MY OWN opinion. I don't NEED their opinion.
And the anger comes from the fact I almost went into journalism before I realized Lawyers were no longer scum of the earth, Journalists were. Edward R. Murrow must be spinning in his f*****g grave!
I wish people would stop saying things like "all the evidence out there is a lie, because the government."
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesHere's something: you can't prove that wrong. You literally can't prove that wrong. If I say "here is contrary evidence to what you're saying" the response will be something along the lines of "that's a lie, the government something, something, experts suck, it's a lie."
HOW ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO DISPROVE THAT? All contrary evidence is a conspiracy, all conspiracy theories, no matter how flawed and ridiculous, are the truth because the government doesn't support it. That's circular reasoning and it does not work.
P.S. Most people get vaccines. Some people get autism. Vaccines=/=autism and correleation is not causation.
Exactly. It's ridiculous to say the government is just lying. However, the issue people are trying to convey (and failing miserably at doing so) is that we don't know what is the truth. It's not uncommon for the media, news, government to either cover up some truth or tell an outright lie, but that also doesn't mean that they're ALWAYS doing it. Thing is people actually think things are a definitive answer, when they aren't. Most likely it's some of the truth, but played up in some way to support a certain side (everything is bias, that's not conspiracy, it's just fact since views get colored by experiences, humans rarely deal in "facts") It's retarded to wholly believe them and it's retarded to flat out say they're lying to us. Sure, they probably don't all have our best intentions in mind and money in whatever cause the person with the most power wants is what will be conveyed, but that should be obvious that money talks. Propoganda in any form, including propoganda is just stupid. Take everything with a grain of salt and research as much as one can on subjects, cross referencing info, finding out who's supporting financially for the info out there and research what motives they may have.
*Meant to say "propaganda, including propaganda against propaganda (oh, the irony)" but I don't see an edit button after hitting reply.
How do you disprove such accusations? You simply use the burden of proof principle. Anyone who challenges one's viewpoint must explain why they are false (ore prove the evidence has been fabricated). He or she can get any expert they want. Sometimes for free. There are many qualified truth-hunters out there. The problem is, many self-proclaimed whistleblowers usually do not know second thing about the things they say, so they don't know where to look for experts in the first place.
And this is not only a theory. Many private-funded organizations and think-tanks exist specifically for this purpose. There were many cases when people were able to prove machinations and lies of the government. It usually doesn't make news because in high-profile cases answers become incredibly complex, so they are not interesting (not to mention next to incomprehensible) to Joe Average.
Dear Cracked,
ReplyThank you for keeping my post up after taking it down three times and the fourth time putting it in the profanity section. It now appears as normal and I appreciate us coming to terms ;-)
It's funnier that a comedy writer (Nick Coffin) is the science expert of news media, exclaiming his devotion to scientists and the official word. Unfortunately Nick isn't Coffin-up too many of his own facts in critiquing media's portrayal of conspiracy theorists vs scientists. His devotion to something he doesn't understand is a tad obvious and silly. Let's face it, scientists speaking on particular issues are usually divided. And when a 'conspiracy theory' point of view is expressed, it's hardly one to be threatened by since all the major news media outlets (FOX, NBC, CBS, ABC) regularly dismiss 'conspiracy theorists' as lunatics (besides BBC, but I'm sure they don't count), so Nick is Coffin his germs (damn straight I used that pun twice, you've got nothing to say) all over a minority group and joining the elites he's attacking. And not to reign on Nick's parade too badly here, but as for those 'conspiracy theorist' groups, they're typically comprised of scientists from all walks of life and universities with PhD's and even MD's conducting INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATIONS, free of corporate interests. Like the corporate news media - which you can't seem to decide whether you're attacking or defending - they have PR from other non-scientific interests, including celebrities. JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW, THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN DELETED 3x BY CRACKED ;-)
ReplyUpdate: upon my fourth posting, Cracked has decided that this comment belongs in the Profanity section. Please note Nick's consistent use of the F-word, none of which appears in my post.
Do you ever shut up? f**k off
"These days you can get a weather forecast within five seconds on your PC or cell phone. So there is a certain desperation that comes with a guy who is doing a job he knows is not only obsolete, but a little bit silly."
ReplyHmmmm, where do those
And where do those cell phone weather forecasts come from? Oh yeah, WEATHERMEN. It may not be necessary for weathermen to broadcast on television, but we still need them to make those predictions to begin with. Not obsolete!
There's this one local channel (can't remember the name) that feels the need to update the weather every 10 minutes. It rarely changes in that time but god help them if they don't report that.
ReplyThe Weather Channel, maybe?
The entry about things affixed with the "-gate" suffix killed me. They do this a lot on sportscenter too and it's annoying and cliche. Although I have to admit I am guilty of using the device in jokes, but each time a perceivable film of shame settled over me.
ReplyNow I coincidentally have a taste for Arby's. It's almost as if you were trying to promote it...
Great article Nick!
It's like adding "aholic" to every addiction.
I just love how everyone focuses on the fire, completely forgetting the massive multi-ton airliners that slammed into the buildings at over 500 miles per hour and started those fires.
ReplyThis is building 7, honey. Not building 1 & 2
did u seriously write that? oh, it's a comedy website, nevermind
#5 just never ceases to tick me off. It's like if half of the weather page was dedicated to actual meteorologists, and the other half was written by that old guy on his porch basing his predictions on how his bad knee feels.
Replyi say thank the god of your choice that in the UK we have BBC news, that WILL deliver unbiased ADVERT AND PRODUCT PLACEMENT FREE! news ona daily basis, it dose what is listed here in the minimun, and what i dont consider news is the constant "celeb news" and sports news and results
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesSpeak English or I will dose you in petrol and light you on fire!
Wasn't the BBC known as the 'Bagdad Broadcasting Station' a few years ago.
nothing is perfect, but BBC is the only news channel on in my home, that's for sure ;-)
I pretty much get my news exclusively from BBC. They could honestly care less about our political parties, so there isn't any bias--just the occasional condescension.
bah. another anti conspiracy article on cracked. guess what there are plenty who disagree with u who r experts and u arent an expert either. look up geraldo riveras interview with architects and engineers for 911 truth. very telling.
Reply Hide All See All 10 Repliesthen watch on utube "secret evil of 911".
and "jfk - the president who told the truth"
dingoid.
and btw, given that jim carrey and jenny mccarthy have an autistic son who was vaccinated and were able to possibly see a direct link between when he got the shot and when his disability showed up means they have first hand experience and does give them credibility.
i suppose back in germany during world war 2 you would've trusted all the "experts" and "officials" who told u things too. you are totally in love with authority. all this is is an attack piece against the public who can think rationally, logically, and independently even when the experts are bullshit.
kinda like the experts who told us iraq would be sending mushroom clouds over here if we didnt go over there.
"experts" do and say what they have to to keep their jobs when their superiors tell them what the evidence is supposed to say. in this bizarro world run by the elite. true science is dead.
nick coffin is just too dumb to realize it. being on the inside crowd, makes him feel smart, which too him is almost as good as being smart.
good luck with that.
Well well, let's mark off the check list, shall we?
- Poor spelling and grammar (is it that hard to type out "you" and "are?").
- Citing sensationalist talk show hosts, Playboy models and actors as "experts."
- Invoking Godwin's Law at the drop of a hat.
- Dismissing strong, factual evidence to the contrary as conjured by "The Man."
Oh yes, this fine poster seems like a well-informed individual indeed. Clearly he/she/it has all the answers and should be regarded as an intellectual giant of our time.
/sarcasm
kmfdm!, Neverhoodian said pretty much all I wanted to say except this: "given that jim carrey and jenny mccarthy have an autistic son who was vaccinated and were able to possibly see a direct link between when he got the shot and when his disability showed up means they have first hand experience and does give them credibility." No it f*****g does not! That is, at f*****g best, anecdotal evidence. Just because they've seen a case doesn't mean they know the cause; if they said it was because of demons posessing their boy you'd think them daft and yet that's what people did before science told them it was stupid.
Seriously, don't make me take the gloves off about the autism thing.
ps. Neverhoodian, if I could upvote you more, I would.
@Neverhoodian. You forgot comparing the author to the Nazis.
Not to mention that their kid was not even autistic. She self-diagnosed him without seeing a doctor.
" given that jim carrey and jenny mccarthy have an autistic son who was vaccinated and were able to possibly see a direct link between when he got the shot and when his disability showed up means they have first hand experience and does give them credibility."
No no no no no no and NO! Nearly every child in America is vaccinated. This means that pretty much every Autistic child did receive vaccinations but it also means that pretty much every non-Autistic child received vaccinations as well. Given your insane troll logic, this would actually say that vaccinations prevent Autism. After all, the vast majority of vaccinated children don't turn out autistic.
Also, "my kid is sick and I have opinions as to why" does NOT make you an expert on the matter. At all. The only way their input would be valid is if there were a report on the challenges inherent in raising Autistic children.
My baby brother was bitten by a wallaby. Four years later he was diagnosed with autism.
Clearly, wallaby bites cause autism.
kmfdm!, If the kid got the vaccine, then immediately stabbed by a crazy hobo, would you blame the vaccine, too?
You forgot to mention the confusion of correlation and causation. Autism does in fact manifest itself at around the same age as vaccinations. That does not imply any causal link.
I used to have a poster of Jenny McCarthy naked on my wall. I masturbated to it frequently. I never once masturbated to her opinions. Opinions are about as sexually gratifying as a lack of scientific knowledge.