O/T: Do you find the evening news to be overwhelmi... - Page 10

baddest_dog · ‎04-29-2010

On 3/28/2014 Raider Fan said:
On 3/26/2014 chrystaltree said:
Huh? I don't even understand the question. I think people who are "overwhelmed" by current events are overwhelmed because they watch news programs all day long. The jump for news to news to news and inbetween they read the papers and search the web for.....news. They immerse themselves in every tragedy and negative story they can find. Sadly, I find that many older people do that. I watch a half hour of local news while I am getting dressed for work in the mornings, I log onto CNN around lunch time every day and I watch the network evening news, sometimes. Not always. And that's it. It's nice to keep abreast of current events but you do have to keep things in perspective.

Oh, geez, chrystal, really? I am a news junkie because I keep up with world affairs as well as the USA. I travel a lot. I need to know what is going on. I never "dwell" on the news and by the way, the news to me is not horrible stories of maimed children, the news to me means what is happening in the world today. I avoid watching pandering sensationalism. I am very interested in politics not train wrecks. I am heartened to see that many of you DO care about our world, not just the next new thing happening in pop culture.

I think this is an unfair statement. Look at how many threads are posted on these boards about news events and they are discussed in minute detail to the point where other posters often comment on those news stories being "overkill". I think most people watch or read the news daily but are not consumed by it. Every news outlet reports the same stories but with their own biased twist on it. Our local news alone has 3 and a half hours of continuous coverage every night then you can go switch to another channel and watch their take on it.

Being informed is great, but unless each individual can DO something to make positive changes, hearing about dire news all day long can only leave you frustrated and depressed. I already know there is much tragedy going on in the world, but I cannot change it. I educate myself on issues important to me so I can vote properly, I often write letters to elected officials about issues and make my voice heard but in the end that is all I can do. I sometimes get a "canned" response back from whoever I wrote to but nothing more.

I don't think it's fair to criticize others who do not immerse themselves in-depth in news stories. We are all trying to survive and try to remain hopeful and optimistic not only for ourselves, but our children and grandchildren so it would do no good to be constantly reminded of all the atrocities going on in the world.

baddest_dog · ‎04-29-2010

On 3/26/2014 house cat said:
On 3/26/2014 fromthebronx said:
I do find the news to be overwhelming at times. I only watch once a day before I get dressed for work in the morning. Having said that, I don't find the news nearly as overwhelming now as I did when I was a teenager growing up during the Vietnam War. Now THAT was some realistic journalism...

Good point. That's one of the reasons Americans stood up in mass and called for an end to that war. The wars we've been involved in that last 30 years have been "airbrushed" for the media. There's no easy answer.

the correct term is en masse. And BTW you are wrong. I was there on a college campus during Vietnam and lest you forget 4 students were gunned down by the National Guard. And people protesting the war were not doing it because they were well informed, educated citizens. There were many underground societies at that time and they were scary. Walking across campus was frightening and when they got together for a protest, things became violent. Most were protesting because they didn't want to go, they fled to Canada, became conscientious objectors, got married and had kids when they got out of high school so they would be exempt. It was a horrible time and no one really even knew why we were there fighting. The "news" was not about being informative or in depth reasons of why we got involved. And when the soldiers came back, they were treated very poorly. Go rent the movie "Platoon" and see why Americans were up in arms. The media did anything but "airbrush".

house cat · ‎08-23-2012

On 3/28/2014 pridequeen said:
On 3/26/2014 house cat said:
On 3/26/2014 fromthebronx said:
I do find the news to be overwhelming at times. I only watch once a day before I get dressed for work in the morning. Having said that, I don't find the news nearly as overwhelming now as I did when I was a teenager growing up during the Vietnam War. Now THAT was some realistic journalism...

Good point. That's one of the reasons Americans stood up in mass and called for an end to that war. The wars we've been involved in that last 30 years have been "airbrushed" for the media. There's no easy answer.

the correct term is en masse. And BTW you are wrong. I was there on a college campus during Vietnam and lest you forget 4 students were gunned down by the National Guard. And people protesting the war were not doing it because they were well informed, educated citizens. There were many underground societies at that time and they were scary. Walking across campus was frightening and when they got together for a protest, things became violent. Most were protesting because they didn't want to go, they fled to Canada, became conscientious objectors, got married and had kids when they got out of high school so they would be exempt. It was a horrible time and no one really even knew why we were there fighting. The "news" was not about being informative or in depth reasons of why we got involved. And when the soldiers came back, they were treated very poorly. Go rent the movie "Platoon" and see why Americans were up in arms. The media did anything but "airbrush".

Thanks for correcting that term, en masse… I knew something was wrong with it but the old brain couldn't figure out what it was Smile

I agree with what you say here. It was a terrible, scary time. I was referring to the airbrushing of our recent wars. Coverage of the Vietnam War was very realistic. That coverage, combined with the fact that our young men were being drafted, contributed to the public outrage and the end of that war.

paShar · ‎03-10-2010

I do not watch any of the early evening news shows - national or local. It's just not the right time of day for me - too many other things to do. I do make a point of watching either the 10 PM or 11 PM local news (local news for me is one of the Pittsburgh stations). I also read our local paper daily - and I like the paper version over the online version for that.

Most of my news on a daily basis comes from the internet. I browse a variety of sites and get a good look at what is happening in our country and our world.

I think it's our responsibility as citizens to keep up with what is happening. The news is not always happy and joyous. Much of the time it is depressing. It saddens me to hear younger people talk and realize a lot of them do not have a clue as to what is going on in a world that will be their responsibility in a few years.

magicmoodz · ‎03-16-2010

I used to be a news junkie and then became very disillusioned with the political slant of news outlets. Perhaps if I could find true, unbiased journalism, I would be more interested.

willdob3 · ‎11-01-2010

Years ago I watched just about every news show there was, all day long, all night long. Provided they did not interfere with my long list of soaps! lol... Obviously, I was not working at the time.

I finally broke myself if the habit. The constant media coverage of some big trials and disasters helped me stop. No one on the face of the earth should have horrific info pounded into them 24/7. It is pretty unhealthy. I don't even sit down and give the evening news my undivided attention. I still know all that is going on & important but I don't have as much drama and horror from it. I refuse to listen to it. I'll turn the channel or turn it off. I have not ever missed anything important.

I just avoid hearing things like how so & so murdered 20 family members in a fit of rage over and over and over. I don't need to hear the details about how hundreds died in disasters and suffered horribly more than once. I won't make myself sit through things like that over and over and over again. There is nothing to be gained from that.

Raider Fan · ‎03-11-2010

On 3/28/2014 magicmoodz said:
I used to be a news junkie and then became very disillusioned with the political slant of news outlets. Perhaps if I could find true, unbiased journalism, I would be more interested.

It is out there Magic but you have to look for it. In addition, I read foreign news (it is biased too) to see what other countries are writing about then I will talk to a cousin or two in Europe and get their take. It usually is different. I have no problem switching the channel when I am not interested (news programs) however I spend most of my tv watching on the HGTV channel. Now THAT one is very good. I'm crazy about the Property Brothers. ${#emotions_dlg.thumbup}$

scotnovel · ‎12-31-2013

On 3/28/2014 pridequeen said:
On 3/26/2014 house cat said:
On 3/26/2014 fromthebronx said:
I do find the news to be overwhelming at times. I only watch once a day before I get dressed for work in the morning. Having said that, I don't find the news nearly as overwhelming now as I did when I was a teenager growing up during the Vietnam War. Now THAT was some realistic journalism...

Good point. That's one of the reasons Americans stood up in mass and called for an end to that war. The wars we've been involved in that last 30 years have been "airbrushed" for the media. There's no easy answer.

the correct term is en masse. And BTW you are wrong. I was there on a college campus during Vietnam and lest you forget 4 students were gunned down by the National Guard. And people protesting the war were not doing it because they were well informed, educated citizens. There were many underground societies at that time and they were scary. Walking across campus was frightening and when they got together for a protest, things became violent. Most were protesting because they didn't want to go, they fled to Canada, became conscientious objectors, got married and had kids when they got out of high school so they would be exempt. It was a horrible time and no one really even knew why we were there fighting. The "news" was not about being informative or in depth reasons of why we got involved. And when the soldiers came back, they were treated very poorly. Go rent the movie "Platoon" and see why Americans were up in arms. The media did anything but "airbrush".

Sorry but I disagree, I knew many students and others, including myself, who protested the Vietnam War in a PEACEFUL way and they, in fact, WERE very well informed and educated about what was going on around the world. I was also very familiar with the events of May 4, 1970. It is also a myth that everyone who protested the war treated the returning soldiers poorly. Many of us had good friends and relatives who also served. You can be against a war but still support those who chose to serve or in the case of Vietnam those who chose and those who were drafted to serve.