Skip to main content

Chicago attack...news media is just pathetic

Media is so frustrating...

The four kids who attacked another kid in Chicago is all over the news.



Not going to comment on the incident but rather the media coverage. What's ridiculous to me is:
  • None of the media seem to be talking to psychologists or sociologists to get expert opinion on why this kind of behavior manifests. Instead, it's just know-nothing reporters spouting off their opinions on why this happened. Honestly, I write fiction and it feels less made up than what these reporters do every day. This is directly contributing to the dumbing down of society, where opinion is being portrayed as intelligent insight - and then we wonder why people think that opinions are the same as facts. (If you type into google news "Chicago man attacked psychologists" you'll see no articles because there are none with any media speaking to a psychologist about this. Take out the word "psychologist" and there're a thousand articles).
  • For the love of God, why are they plastering the victim's face on every paper and tv show? The blurring they do may protect his identity, but the victim will now have to deal with seeing these images for a long time to come. The media doesn't care one iota about revictimizing this person; if it bleeds it leads as they say, gotta get those ratings even if it causes the victim further pain in the future. 
  • Why the hell is the media playing the video of the attack? If this were a rape would they play that? This constant flooding of the airwaves with violence is, in part, what is desensitizing society to violence. "This was so disgusting, let us show it to you." (why? Because you think we won't believe you if you don't?). Howard Stern use to be "the king of shock media", now CNN is worse than anything you'd see on Stern 10 years ago. 
  • While the media obsesses over this one incident, they do nothing to focus on violence in society as a general issue. In America it's estimated each day there are: over 240-to-800 rapes (stats vary), over 3,000 violent assaults, over 40 murders per day, and on and on. Yet, instead of looking at violence in society as a larger issue, the media just goes hysterical over specific incidents as though they were producing an episode of Jerry Springer.

In my opinion, the "news" media is so pathetic at this point that they should all have their FCC licenses pulled and taken off the air. The gov can then reissue licenses to new owners with some kind of rules around what news is (note: not limitations on freedom of speech, but at the very least not calling an episode of Jerry Springer news). 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Featured Post: Where Can You Buy My Books?

Interested in purchasing one of my books? Below are the links that will take you to the right place on Amazon. A Manufactured Mind On Amazon On Kobo On Barnes and Noble On iTunes Obey On Amazon On Kobo  On B&N  On iTunes  The Fall of Man Trilogy Days of Judgment (Book One) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes System Crash (Book Two) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes A Fool's Requiem (Book Three) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes

E-cigarettes: A PR battle Health Canada cannot win?

So I've now been using an e-cigarette (e-cig) for two months and thought I'd talk a bit about how I see the upcoming battle between Health Canada and e-cigs going. First though, let's do a quick overview of what exactly an e-cig is. Basically an e-cig vaporizes liquid that contains nicotine. The vapor is then inhaled. People who use e-cigs are called vapers (not smokers). Because the liquid is atomized (ie. vaporized), not burned the way tobacco is, vapers do not consider themselves 'smokers' in anyway. An e-cig is comprised of basically three components: The tank - this is the component that holds the juice (sometimes referred to as e-juice or e-liquid). The atomizer - this a coil and wick unit that atomizes the juice. When the coil is heated (from the battery) it atomizes the juice that has soaked into the wick. The battery - batteries for e-cigs come in various capacities (some last 8 hours, others 40+ hours, depending on their size).  The ba...

More evidence of the Internet Revolution

Bell ushers in new era with CTV deal  So Bell has purchased CTV.  Not really that big a deal under normal circumstances, except when you realize why they did it... Driving convergence this time, the Internet-enabled mobile devices such as smart phones and computer tablets are threatening home television’s lock on viewers. Bell, like its rivals, wants to offer more content to its subscribers, however they receive the signal. Viewers are increasingly interested in watching their favourite shows on their phones while they ride the bus or sit in the park, and the cable and phone companies that have served as middle men between viewers and broadcasters were in danger of being marginalized. You know what sort of worries me about this kind of acquisition? It's clearly an attempt to own (control) content. When they say marginalized what they really mean is service providers being nothing more than dumb pipes - providing connectivity to the internet and nothing more. As ...