The Kindergartenization Of Cable News

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! (me shaking your hand) I've waited years for someone else to "no news" is now news! But saddened to learn CNN has also "dipped its pen into the well."

For several years, I monitored (meaning, of course, channel surfed) through CNN, MSNBC, FXN, and HLN, trying to find which most closely resembled a real news station. It seemed that. . .

MSNBC was for far left wing liberal kooks. . . FOX was for far right wing nut jobs. . . CNN was for big business. . . and. . . HLN was faux news for the unenlightened pop culture. Eventually concluded that none of the four big cable networks cares at all whether what they broadcast is even true, much less newsworthy.

Now, being poor myself, I have to admit I got bored quickly with CNN.

Re MSNBC and FOX--I am, freely admitted, a conservative leaning moderate. I'm what you'd call extraordinarily independent thinking; my positions/opinions are my own and not influenced by either right or left. So, to these two both, I say "liar, liar pants on fire." The extremely biased reporting by these networks beggers the imagination. They exaggerate the "truth" of their own POV, then exaggerate the "lies" of the opposition. In the end, you can't really trust anything they say!

Now, onto my favorite--HLN. I know, I know; it certainly doesn't qualify in any way, shape, or manner as real news. . . . but it's just so dog-gone funny to watch. Sometimes I try to count the number of times hosts on ShowBiz Tonight say "SHOCKING and PROVOCATIVE," and note just how much effort they put into their sincerity when addressing what Lindsey wore to court, or whether Charlie's using or is just a nut, or whether Miley can ever come back from the salvia scandal. And, of course, just what they find to be shocking and provocative. It's a riot. . .

Jane V Mitchell and her War Against Women and her War Against Children. Women are all victims, children are all victims, and what does that make men? By process of elimination, that leaves men as the perpetrators of every wrong in the country. Not to mention the fun of counting how many times she hi-jacks interviews with the interjection, "and I should know, x years an alcoholic, x years sober." At which point, she conducts the remainder of the interview with herself, identifying which addiction/personality disorder the subject has with her brilliant and insightful assessment. I find it interesting that, as a dry drunk, she now has the capacity to diagnose various personality disorders in addition to all the addictions she recognizes (even when no one else does). And, her subjects don't even have to pay for the diagnosis.

Nancy Grace interviews 3 or 4 per topic, makes a point, then asks questions. If the talking head doesn't respond with answers supporting her view, she cuts them off. After posing the prosecution POV, she asks a response from a defense attorney. When he responds, she interrupts and ridicules the answers. Now, the poor attorney went on the show to illustrate how a defense team would actually defend their client, not to give his personal views; but she not interested in any perspective except her own. So why call in these people as guests; and then crush 'em? I think she sees it as an opportunity for the audience to see what a brilliant ADA she was. . . . which, of course, makes me wonder why she left the important work she was doing for something so banal as hosting a fake news program. She is amusing, but only in small doses; she wears on the nerves if you watch too long at one time.

All of which only indicates that I . . . am not interested in big business; don't trust stations which are blatantly biased, left or right; but do find amusement in the pretend reporting of the youngsters on HLN, they just look so darn cute, all dressed up and trying to sound well-read and intellectual.

BTW, does anyone know where the real news IS??

DJ, its entertainment news vs hard news. Entertainment news is being presented instead of the awful truth of what is happening to the American people.

Instead of digging down in Wisconsin and revealing Gov. Walker's attack on all social classes except the wealthy corporate, and making comparisons to other Republican lead states; exposing the destruction of the public school system in favor of private schools; and the hijacking of the health care system and the drastic rise in premiums while people are getting their pay and benefits shoved through the floor, and when gas and food is on the rise there is much more out there than Charlie Sheen's carrying on like a clown.

When the founding fathers acknowledged that the press/media as the fourth estate, meaning the fourth and unofficial body of government to reveal the fallacies and problems in the checks and balances, the wealthy corporate found it easier to buy out newspapers, media broadcasters, and internet sites to completely ignore this responsibility. Instead, we get the Republican point of view, skewed statistics, one sided editorials about how broke we are, and how unions and common people are nothing but greedy and prickish.

Sadly enough the best places I have found have been on-line social networks. You have to double and some times triple checks facts through the whores on Major Media and purely informational sites, and even then I'm a skeptic. Even Wikipedia is getting a face lift by the Koch Brothers. Depends on who you trust.

World (1.4)--I agree, in part, to all you say. . . but let's be fair-minded here. There are no rich Democrats (i.e. Al Gore)? Or, do all the rich Democrats spread the wealth by donating/ supporting charities with at least 10% of their yearly incomes? No Democrats own newspapers with liberal leaning editorials and left-biased reporting? How 'bout television? No left wing news channel, i.e. MSNBC??

I'm no fan of conservative nut jobs, but I'm also no fan of liberal kooks. Both sides operate on the premise of "Do as I say, not as I do." There's enough dishonesty in both to go around. Your view regarding the fourth estate is primarily solid; just remember we get plenty of Democrat POV in them as well.

The reality of political news is--there's the left "truth," the right "truth," and then there's the real truth!

A bit overdue, but I was thrilled to discover al-Jazeera English. It's now my only news -- plus 2 commentary shows on cable.

still difficult to find, unfortunately.

Sadly you are correct in that.

Everyone it seems wishes to sway folks opinions, instead of just reporting the actual facts and letting folks make up their own minds.

Yes, it seems almost everyone has an agenda. It would be much easier (and save time) if they just stated it outright in the first sentence:)

Agree, haven't had TV (cable or broadcast) for years, get my "news" from the internet, that way I can get news & skip anything that has the names Sheen, Palin, Snookie, Lohan, Hilton, etc... I do catch TV "news" in the break room at one of my jobs and occasionally when at someones home and I frequently just laugh.