News Versus What's Important

Found this quote in a post on Bayou Renaissance Man this morning, and it inspired me to comment. Republishing it here.

"Look at the endless coverage of what Maddow said about what Hannity thought about O’Reilly’s harassment of soft-porn star Megyn  and how much she might make at CNN." - Fred Reed

That's why I don't watch TV News, or soap opera's for that matter.

I don't think you can blame the reporters for what gets published. They may have written something great or something worthless, but it's the people above them, the editors and publishers who decide what gets published. The publishers decide what kind of slant they want their publication to have, and the editors implement it.

The Publisher's agenda is overwhelmingly driven by newspaper sales, the prime directive at every successful newspaper. This is done by stirring up shit: sex, drugs, politics and dirty money. This covers most of what you see in newspaper.

But what's the point of being a media mogul if you can't bend the world to your will, at least just a little? So there might a thin string of stories getting published in a particular newspaper of a particular subject that I didn't cover in the previous paragraph.

We need a better national newspaper. USA Today, is okay I suppose, but I've never found much meat. Seems to be mostly fluff.