Quote:
Originally Posted by Humpy Leftnut
CNN should have also responded to their flag wavyness for how many years before they remembered they were supposed to pretend to be objective.
|
CNN do have a number of respected journalists on their staff or contracted, and they do produce balanced footage within their reporting. Much of this appears to be shot "on the ground" and the final result is what it is - hard to re-script or reshoot these events.
Where there appears to be a difference is when content comes from a studio. That opens up a whole range of possibilities to sway and it's a more controlled situation - from basic background graphics, "opinions" from pundits (who often have never been in these situations in their lives) - to anchor personalities who elect to give their "opinions" of the news they are supposed to be delivering to the public. (The latter is prob more "amateurism" than anything - doubt their "opinions" are scripted - just that they talk too much
)
CNN is more than capable and fully understand what delivery of straight news reports involve. The do exactly that on the CNN International version. It is hard to imagine the editorial staff in Altanta and New York get so carrying away attempting to produce colorful news delivered by "all hair and smiles" anchor girls that they manage to produce the same studio news stories in a totally different way for the US market (allowing leeway, since there is nothing wrong with regionalized news and accented on what affects people in that region).
On CNN's side - they have a commercial problem to overcome in that their revenue depends on sponsors. It would probably be a conflict of interest with sponsors when discussing, in this instance "Sicko", aspects of healthcare and the pharma industry when every ad slot is yet another advertisment trying to purvey pills and attempting to convince the US public they need them
But.. that's their biz angle problem...