news and views

propped up by unsolicited opinions.

And here we go again, down the same prepaved roads watching news on TV. Fifteen seconds of se­lected news – repeated twice, fol­lo­wed by who­ever's views and opinions that are ac­cept­able to the station and those in control of it, until it is time for com­mer­cials or some­thing totally dif­fe­rent but equ­ally news-unworthy.
This common ap­proach to news pre­sen­ta­tion is prob­a­bly fine with those who like to be told what, and what not, to think. It is how­ever nothing but noise and waste of time for those of us who do not want, nor need, such “assistance”.

News media's rule #1: what we can not be bothered to broad­cast, surely is not relevant to anyone within our media-sphere.

Those who are shaping and refor­mat­ting news for broad­casting, are all too often the same who select what is to be pre­sen­ted as news, or not. This makes both selec­tion and pre­sen­ta­tion pro­ces­ses pre­dict­able, and news value highly questionable.

News media's rule #2: opposing views should not be accep­ted nor broad­casted, except when they can be ridiculed.

warning lights left and right…

Whichever way “news and views” get angled – poli­ti­cally or other­wise, chances are it will be too far off to be of much use to those of us who want to know the facts, and only the facts.
Admittedly; reporting facts accu­rately is near impos­sible even for born-and-cer­ti­fied neutrals, but taking sides on any sub­ject before pre­sen­ting them sure doesn't help.

News media's rule #3: repeat the same views and opinions enough times, and the public will share them for us as solid facts.

Preaching to the choir day in and day out, may work wonders for ones self-con­fi­dence. Quality of content will inevi­tably suffer severely over time, but who cares as long as all in ones own groups believe ones views, opinions and angles are the right ones, and agree that we are doing great and that we are the greatest.

News media's rule #4: if we haven't formed an opinion to sell to the public, we'll have no “news” to serve today.

news “blah blah” cor­por­a­tions…

Views and opinions are often fil­led with mean­ing­less jargon, which does not help to clarify what who­ever uttered about what­ever actu­ally meant. Whether or not lack of clarity is inten­ded, or not, does not really matter, as it usually sounds just as mean­ing­less either way.

That top-down language better suited in poli­tics and kinder­garten is also often used – often inter­mixed with gob­ble­dy­gook to under­line who­ever's impor­tance, comes over as equally non­sen­sical to those who bother to listen. People in broad­casting cor­por­a­tions appar­ently have strange views of the public they pretend to be serving.

Fact-checking all the copy-and-paste “blah blah” that big media cor­por­a­tions release, would be a full-time job for hundreds of fact-checkers – or an ad­vanced AI setup – for each media corp.
For us indi­vi­duals (who obvi­ously do not have access to that kind of fact-chec­king resour­ces) it is easiest to ini­ti­ally regard all big media corps releases as “un­re­li­able“. We can then change that basic notion to “poten­tially true“ later on, in those rare cases where the evi­dence mounts up that way.

social media, etc…

Less news and even more views and opinions, but over­all not all that dif­ferent from what is pre­sen­ted above. As anyone with a bare minimum of technical means can become their own “broad­casters” via the World Wide Web, the pos­si­bi­li­ties are endless.

The wider view and multitude of details provided by the many, help im­men­sely in balan­cing out the head­lines the big cor­por­a­tions want us to pay atten­tion to.
Scanning the web for in­ter­est­ing bits and pieces of infor­ma­tion while the “impor­tant people” (try to) sell us their thoughts and what­not on major news chan­nels, can be excel­lent use of our precious time.

Social media can of course also become addic­tive, and steal time rather than provide us with use­ful infor­ma­tion. It all depends on how we use it: to our advan­tage or to some­one else's.

Fact-checking can be a problem on social media and the web of minor “news and views” sources as a whole, but no worse than checking what comes out via the major channels1.

who cares…

Not sure why I am com­plain­ing – if that is what I am doing here, as most of what I write is nothing but “views and opinions”. Dif­fe­rence seems to be that I hardly ever call my wri­tings “news” and then turn them into some­thing totally dif­fe­rent, and that I am not trying to waste any­one's time.

To state the obvious: I am of course always right, but that is another matter entirely and not open for fact-checking 

I am a strong believer in common sense, and not much else. How­ever, we all need hobbies, and study­ing how things, and people, work at all levels is one of mine.

Stay safe…

sincerely  georg; sign

Hageland 05.jun.2020
last rev: 10.jun.2020

www.gunlaug.comadvice upgradeadvice upgrade navigation