what news stories/political issues should be in the 'and finally sectiion'?

@jb78000 (15163)
January 21, 2010 11:49am CST
the 'and finally stories' are those stuck in at the end of the news and are complete fluff. often concerning animal antics, very slightly funny coincidences and the like. now the media seems to have a very strange idea of what is genuinely important and what is not. paying way too much attention to a few audience grabbing stories that are either essentially trivial or not all that important. here are some examples: real news - massive natural disasters wars in africa any wars famine plagues coups not as important as the media thinks news politician says something embarrassing local elections squabble in political party celebrity wears odd dress footballer gets drunk over rated health scares but in pratically any country you will find that 90% of the news consists of what should be 'and finally stories' with the real stuff barely getting a mention. so what heavily hyped recent stories do you think should have been at the very least edited heavily? and are you aware of any real stories that virtually no attention was paid to.
2 people like this
4 responses
@catdla1 (6005)
• United States
22 Jan 10
The 'big' news here, that to me is a complete waste of airtime, are stories of athletes that took steroids 10 or 15 years ago. I understand how dangerous they are, that they are and should be banned for all sports...which they are. But worrying about something that took place so long ago? And wasting taxpayer dollars with hearings about them? I just don't see the point. I think there are better and more currently relevent places to spend the money. What would really be a breath of fresh air is some unbiased reporting for a change. The spins that various networks and newcasters give make watching the news almost a waste of time.
1 person likes this
@jb78000 (15163)
22 Jan 10
i agree. now unbiased (or as unbiased as is possible) reporting would be proper journalism and we can't have that now can we?
1 person likes this
@andy77e (5161)
• United States
21 Jan 10
News is a business. That is what they do, sell news. People have this funny idea that 'news' is a special spot in the economy, that doesn't operate by supply and demand. That somehow it is immune to the natural operation of a market economy. Not so. The job of the newspaper is not to 'serve the general public with important information about world events'. No, the job of the newspaper is to sell newspapers. So in reality, the news stories that should be in the newspaper, are whatever stories will best sell the news paper. Why? Because what sells, is what people want to read about. What people want to read about, is what matters. When you try it the other way, you end up with junk. It's sort of like communist propaganda in the old Soviet Union, or Cuba, or China. Papers filled with propaganda crap no one reads. Of course that doesn't matter because the government pays for it. So 300K copies of something no one reads is all over the place.
@jb78000 (15163)
21 Jan 10
i know - i think rollo said this above. but it is depressing the drivel that makes headlines
@andy77e (5161)
• United States
21 Jan 10
It all depends on perspective. What you think is drivel, others are really interested in. We have an entire cable channel dedicated to "Entertainment News" where they continuously talk about those morons in Hollywood 24/7. I personally couldn't possibly care less about anyone in Hollywood. If the entire celebrity state were to fall into the Ocean tomorrow I wouldn't even notice, or care that it was gone. Yet others would be holding week long mourning. Similarly I hate ports. Three Channels of ESPN and all the major legal sports would vanish without a trace, and I wouldn't even notice they were gone. Perspective. What I hate, isn't what others hate. That's simply how it goes.
@Rollo1 (16650)
• Boston, Massachusetts
21 Jan 10
It depends on the scope of the organizations - national media or international media? Massive natural disasters, like the earthquake in Haiti, get a lot of airtime and attention. What gets reported about it may vary on where it is being reported. Here in the US, I see many stories about the destruction, the medical and aid needs, the efforts to convince the State Department to let Haitian orphans into the US without the red tape, etc. Yet I have heard from friends in the UK that the US is taking over Haiti militarily and US investors are snapping up prime investment real estate there. I had no idea we wanted to conquer Haiti, nor that there were any prime investment areas just waiting for someone to capitalize on. As far as I knew, it was an impoverished nation with a very corrupt infrastructure. Wars in Africa - I agree we don't see much information on the news. I would include all African politics because many are ignorant of the histories and politics of many African nations. Famines are important but I think they spent too much time on the plague-that-never-was, H1N1. House Speaker Tip O'Neill once said that all politics is local. Local elections can be of national importance, so I wouldn't put them in the unimportant category. A celebrity wearing an odd dress or a footballer getting drunk could be more interesting if it was the drunk footballer wearing the odd dress. Ultimately, the media will show what brings in the audiences. Some people just like to watch bears falling on trampolines or hear the list of women who have slept with Tiger Woods. I think the blame is misplaced. They are just selling what the public is buying.
@jb78000 (15163)
21 Jan 10
swine flu belongs under over-rated health scares. yes i know the media runs with what brings in the viewers/readers but it is depressing. another example is the way it hypes up scare stories - it does this because people prefer to be scared rather than told the truth (probably nothing really interesting will ever happen to you). it is a mutual relationship.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16650)
• Boston, Massachusetts
21 Jan 10
It can be depressing. HL Mencken said "You can never go broke underestimating the taste of the American public". I think it holds true for all humans. We have short attention spans and can't help but look at the train wrecks in life. Why do people hate me when I debunk the hoax scare emails they send me? Because I took away the excitement of oohs, ahhhs and oh-my's. People love the juicy stuff, the scary stuff and heck, even the wacko stuff. That's why people still see the Loch Ness monster, Bigfoot and recount their alien abductions. Life is more interesting that way. Personally, I could feel very content to know that nothing interesting would ever happen to me. But I am a curmedgeonly old recluse.
@thea09 (18316)
• Greece
21 Jan 10
I enjoyed that fluff one about John Major and Edwina Currie. I know, E rate celebrities but it was a good one.
@jb78000 (15163)
22 Jan 10
i'll give you that one - it was funny