On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Kevin M.<[email protected]> wrote: > > Here's the deal, if you are a news organization that insists on > continuing to cover the death of Michael Jackson, at least make an > attempt at actual journalism. Here's my analysis of how "Anderson > Cooper 360" failed last night: > > http://www.tvornottv.net/2009/07/10/send-the-ac360-team-to-journalism-school/
That is funny Kevin. I very rarely watch AC, but I got home yesterday about the time the show came on, and happened to tune in CNN to see if there was any news on the G8 and Obama's trip (silly me, why did I think there would be news on CNN?) and then had this exact material on my screen as I started working through my afternoon's work email inbox. I agree with everything you say here (would it have been any different if AC had actually been on the job, or are his standards just as non-existent?). But my reaction to it was a little different, as I thought it may have been a step up from most of the previous coverage I have seen. Instead of covering a non-story badly, they were now covering an actual story badly. Is it possible the next step might be covering an actual story adequately? The story here is that Jackson's death may have been a homicide (they flashed that on the screen several times, and may or may not have mentioned it, but I don't think they ever really explained it). My presumption is that the homicide here is Jackson died as a result of over-prescription and doctor-shopping (both crimes) then his death was a homicide, and someone (or some people) are criminally responsible. The underlying problem is real and important (it is the Rush Limbaugh syndrome) and deserves more than the tabloid treatment it got last night. The first step should have been to just nail down the rumor that the LAPD is treating the death as a crime. Then work the story. We know the problems of a 24 hour news cycle, but when you have an actual, regular news program, it seems you should have more discipline. Whoever functions as the managing editor of the program should set a deadline every day - any story not properly locked down by, say 6:30 for a 7:00 pm broadcast, does not go out. If it is locked down by the next day at 6:30, it can go out then. If it gets locked down at 8:30, and it is really important, they can break into whatever else they have running and report it then. Really, you would think with 24 hours of news, there would be less, not more pressure to air unfinished stories, since if they need to they can break it whenever they want. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
