|
"The growth of big news organizations means there is less competition and less diversity of news sources today compared to a few years ago."
|
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
>
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total # of Responses: 182 - 9/28/03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66% |
|
13% |
|
3% |
|
13% |
|
7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have received feedback on this issue from people all across America. Review the graph to the left for a quick snapshot of the responses received to date, or read the responses below.
|
|
Anna, AK
|
|
... major news
... 
September 17,2003
|
Nothing is more critical to all Americans than the media. Having all the major news sources interconnected by stock ownerships and "cooperative agreement" leads inexorably to the development of group-think and self-censorship. Thanks for tackling the issue and stimulating some public debate.
|
|
Steve, FL
|
|
|
... Mega-Media
...
September 17,2003
|
I guess censorship survives even with Public television. The response I left last night (at the cost of missing 25% of the broadcast) although opinionated, was clean, clear, and not name calling. Perhaps by living in Florida, this is par for the course. Mega-Media was the topic and censor ship is one of the concerns with Media consolidation.
|
|
Jean Sherm, PA
|
|
|
... false argument
...
September 17,2003
|
I was stunned to watch Michael Powell's ridiculous statements about the end of "free TV" go unchallenged by Bryant Gumbel. See William Safire in 9-17-03 NYT: "The F.C.C. chairman, Michael Powell...has resorted to a fear appeal: that stopping more gobbling up of local stations by the broadcast networks will be the ruination of "free TV."
That's the ludicrous party line being peddled by G.E., which owns NBC. [And PBS] But four-fifths of broadcast network TV is now delivered to homes by cable or satellite — not free — and NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox are making money hand over fist. "Powell's Last Stand" on this false argument has become an embarrassment to the Bush White House, which has been foolishly threatening to veto any disapproval of the F.C.C.'s abdication of the public interest."
|
|
Robert, ND
|
|
|
... more indepth
...
September 17,2003
|
As far as the piece about Clear Channel Radio & Minot, ND, I would have liked to see a more indepth report of what really happened on the train derailment and what corrections have been made since then. I think the crew from 60 Minutes should stop by Minot and question the people in charge of Clear Channel Minot until we get some valid explinations as to what really happened and the reasons for it. I guess profit comes before public safety.
|
|
Amber, IN
|
|
|
... fall short of expectations
...
September 17,2003
|
Though the news organizations are bigger and perhaps less diverse, I think that they still attempt to provide diverse coverage. However, I think that those attempts often fall short of readers' expectations.
|
|
Janet, SD
|
|
|
... with a grain of salt.
...
September 17,2003
|
One thing that went completely past you is that the media never carries stories about anything that will cost them advertisers. Perhaps that is because you share that concern.
I think the media is disgusting, I regard everything they say with a grain of salt.
|
|
Ira, CT
|
|
|
... has gotten lazy
...
September 17,2003
|
The news media have grown to such a proportion that they now have a commercially advantageous position in that they can CONTROL the news, and MAKE the news.
This really got underway in 1991 when CNN was providing real time intelligence (available to combatants, which would not otherwise have this information).
As another example, in DC during the sniper shootings. CNN / MSNBC managed to paralyze the city with paranoia.
Unfortunately, I find that this leads to pandering to certain news makers (like Bush), at the expense of objective journalism.
That is, the news sources such as CNN are thrilled to have opportunities to report on large controversial subjects that require little effort.
It is much easier (cheaper) to hang around a news hot spot, and scoop an ongoing story that actually go out and investigate something.
Look at the media buildup and hype about Iraq in Feb & early March. The media couldn't wait to get things going. I think this can be substantiated by our "in the field" reporters waiting to enter Iraq with the troops.
What ever happened to those domestic matters? For example, what about the dry boring reporting of OMB and GAO data? It doesn't blow up or go "boom in the night" but, I think it affects me a lot more than a tank flipping 1/2 way across the planet.
The commercial news stations are simply an excuse to run advertisements for new cars.
They certainly do not provoke thought or generate wisdom in the average viewer.
I think the media has gotten lazy (cost effective) at reporting to the extent that the news constitutes reports on the symptoms of the news, and not the factors that cause the news.
|
|
Alan, IA
|
|
|
... free TV is dying
...
September 17,2003
|
If free TV is dying, as predicted by Michael Powell, then it doesn't matter whether the regulation is 35% or 45%. What DOES matter is the Re-funding of public TV and radio by Congress
|
|
Loren, AZ
|
|
|
... What view
...
September 17,2003
|
What view are we seeing? The peoples view or main stream finest.
|
|
Jill Gerin, AZ
|
|
|
... holding those of us captive
...
September 17,2003
|
I only caught some glimpses of the program. It was simply a rerun of a rerun of a rerun. So I left it on in hopes that it would not be a rehash of a rehash of a rehash.
Those of us who want information are left out of the loop. We turn on the news because we want information. It does not matter which channel, it is all the same repetitive main story. I am sure that it draws the crowd that watches survivor and normally skips the news. As well as holding those of us captive who only want what crumbs of news are embedded in the reports.
Ratings are not a public service, the news should be.
|
|
|
|
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
>
|
