What The Media Should Shut Up About

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aristotleded24
What The Media Should Shut Up About

A while back on EnMasse, we had a thread where we could vent our frustrations about certain things that the media was droning on and on about. I thought I would bring back that tradition here, and see how it goes. Here are my picks:

Donald Trump. Seriously, just shut the fuck up about him. We understand that he is a reprehensible human being, he demonstrates that all on his own, we don't need the media to tell us this. This is especially frustrating because any attention that Trump gets only hepls Trump. The media has also not only done a bad job of reporting on why so many of Trumps policies are bad, but in many cases supports the underlying premise. One example I can think of off the top of my head is not challenging the dominant narrative that North Korea is a threat to the continental US, and then they act all shocked when Trump threatens nuclear war on Twitter. Seriously media, either do your job properly or get out of the way.

Hillary Clinton. She lost the election, and by insisting on being back in the spotlight, she is confirming suspicions that it's all about her, and it's causing serious damage to the issues she claims to care about. It's true that the media doesn't have direct control over what she does. What they do have control over is the decision to give her a platform. Just because Clinton says or does something, doesn't automatically make it newsworthy. It is especially frustrating because beneath her public face, you can sense that she expects to be treated like royalty and she becomes visibly agitated when she is challenged on that point. Election 2016 is done, she lost, please let the country move on.

cco

Aristotleded24 wrote:

This is especially frustrating because any attention that Trump gets only hepls Trump.

A while back I made a personal decision not to watch almost any coverage of Trump (I made an exception for comedy shows, as I need something to maintain my sanity, but it gets more difficult every week). I no longer watch political shows live-but-for-a-commercial-delay; I'll wait until they're over and start watching then, so I can fast-forward through the entirety of any segment that irritates me, with anything Trump-related at the top of that list. The fact that most of the coverage is anti-Trump is beside the point. Trump coverage, both pro- and anti-, is an eyeball magnet and therefore a profit machine for the media, and I'm done participating in the same phenomenon that got him elected in the first place.

Of course, given my similar attitude toward news about the monarchy and other vapid celebrities, there will probably come a time in the near future where all I can watch is the weather.

Unionist

The weather is just as bad.

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
The weather is just as bad.

I know! It's one thing if the weather is that extreme that a weather statement needs to be issued to protect vulnerable people, for example opening warming centres for homeless people during a cold snap or cooling centres for them during a heat wave. But seriously, does the news need to report every instance of snow that happens in major Canadian cities between the months of November and March, when we come to expect snow to fall during this time of the year? Is it particularly newsworthy that it might snow in Montreal or Ottawa in January or February?

And the worst part of that is that when they do report on extreme weather, they don't even link it to climate change!

Aristotleded24

cco wrote:
Of course, given my similar attitude toward news about the monarchy and other vapid celebrities, there will probably come a time in the near future where all I can watch is the weather.

I know this is dated, but:

Kim Kardashian

Pogo Pogo's picture

My blood pressure goes up when the Media talks about the stock market hitting record numbers. Is there anything more stupid? In the same vein I hate to hear a reporter demonstrating with their story how little they understand about a subject.

Glorifying our military also gets under my skin. Particulary sports events which are not news media, but I have to add as it really gets under my skin.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Well, we still have almost three months to go before the end of the first (fiscal) quarter - should I wait until then to come back and rant about the media breathlessly reporting on, yet again, record profits from the banking industry... or possibly their reports on share values of one of them dropping, yet again, because of their failure to break their previous record profits?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

1.  Any entertainment industry couple that is referred to using a portmanteau of their names.

2.  Heartwarming stories about soldiers.

3.  The children of the famous.

4.  The polls for an election that's only 154 weeks away.

5.  Anyone's "baby bump".

6.  Canada's proud Olympians and their struggle to reach the podium (including, but not limited to, 5am practices, self-doubt and an inflamed rotator cuff).

7.  #AlmostAnythingFeaturingAHashtag

8.  Hockey.  Every single thing.  To make it fair, let's go with all sports except badminton.

9.  What Drake's up to these days.

10.  The MMIW inquiry (unless it's NOT a story about the most recent resignation)

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

@Magoo:

Can you stretch that to include "11. Stories regarding drivers in the Lower Mainland and/or the GTA unable to handle winter driving conditions"?

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I know this is dated, but:

Kim Kardashian

I never have.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I never have.

Is that like "I can't even"?

Sineed

Twelve posts in and nobody's mentioned Doug Ford?

Unionist

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
I never have.

Is that like "I can't even"?

No - in this context, it meant "I never have... dated... Kim Kardashian."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

One more "un-done" on the bucket list.

NDPP

Pogo wrote:

My blood pressure goes up when the Media talks about the stock market hitting record numbers. Is there anything more stupid? In the same vein I hate to hear a reporter demonstrating with their story how little they understand about a subject.

 

NDPP wrote:

Global Markets Plunge As Dow Records Biggest One-Day Point Fall

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/02/06/stoc-f06.html

"Wall Street stocks plunged yesterday amid a global market sell-off. At the end of the day, the Dow Jones was down by 1,175 points, its biggest one-day fall in history, after a day of violent moves..."

Unionist

NDPP wrote:

Pogo wrote:

My blood pressure goes up when the Media talks about the stock market hitting record numbers. Is there anything more stupid?

 

NDPP wrote:

Global Markets Plunge As Dow Records Biggest One-Day Point Fall

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/02/06/stoc-f06.html

"Wall Street stocks plunged yesterday amid a global market sell-off. At the end of the day, the Dow Jones was down by 1,175 points, its biggest one-day fall in history, after a day of violent moves..."

Nice one, NDPP!

Is it possible that the media organized that Dow drop just out of spite against Pogo's post?

6079_Smith_W

Certainly it can't be because they wanted to burst the cheetofaced shitgibbon's balloon after his speech last week.

Thing is, you only have to look at the last few years (never mind the full nine that the DOW has been climbing) to put this in perspective. Reading too much into this one way or another is kind of like those who claim global warming can't be real because we are having a cold winter.

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/djia

I'm actually with Pogo on this one. The market is bigger; of course the fluctuations are also going to be bigger. So yeah, it is stupid. Though not nearly as stupid as the recent trend of announcing that every full moon is some special one that we haven't seen for 150 years.

Caissa
Aristotleded24

In some cases where there is a high profile criminal trial there may be news articles talking about "what the jury didn't hear." It's irrelevant because it's not going to have any impact on the jury's decision, and if the jury didn't hear about it then there was a reason for it. Does that mean there aren't cases where there is critical information the jury missed that would have an impact on their decision? No, but the standards of evidence for criminal trials exist for a reason, and it's up to the defense and crown attorneys to make sure that the evidence they need is presented in court.

WWWTT

Here’s an odd thread. I don’t believe the corporate media has the masses best interests at heart when anything beyond weather traffic are reported. And they probably only report those two just to hook you in to their long winded propaganda or diversion (Kate Middleton/Justin Trudeau). I forgot which is which. 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

The Columnist