Breaking News

 I have an amused laugh when the term "breaking news" is used daily, whether online or on retro television.

Often when the details are finally revealed, it is not breaking or that important.

The misuse of exagerrated labeling or reference does cheapen words, descriptions and their meanings or implications.   No wonder many people I know do not bother to keep up with the news, or the overloading transmission of news.

Concurrent with the use of such terms as breaking news,  the news industry is observed to lure and bait readers, watchers or listeners with falling standards of integrity, rising sensationalism and agenda backed selection of what to report.

Trust by consumers of news holds it all together.  News that are increasingly seen or understood to be politically massaged lose their attractiveness.  On the other hand, some have argued that groups of believers take comfort in being reinforced and embedded in what they honestly reckon is their way.

News delivery that try to balance opinions and explain the diversity of views are getting hard to find.  The choice of words in headlines can also reveal the sell of the news provider.  Less we see are non prejudiced descriptions and more we see the obvious bent towards what they want us to be convinced about.

If you only know about news on channels of social media, you also do not escape what I mention above.  

Communication media seem to be categorised according to political colour.   We are less encouraged to maintain an open mind.  I do not want to take sides and can only see the ridiculousness of a circus of news transmission.

The world of newspapers, screen media and video clips have such a significant volume of material that any individual cannot handle.  Even if I want to be cocooned away from this calvacade of over kill, I get news in my personal or group messages online.

This information overload does test our intelligence, sanity and mental vibrancy.   The worst scenario to me is to subscribe for a fee or not.  Reaction to this can be to shut down, get sucked in or to be more cautious in what we hear or read.

"Breaking news"?  If this is followed by interviews or opinions that want the masses to toe the line, there is a canary in the coalmine.

Promotions for a product, service or opinion are also blatantly parceled as news.  The commercial communication industry needs funding and there is no such thing as a free lunch.

The upside is that the most discerning amongst us can see and understand better, sift the corn from the cob and spare our minds from poor quality stuff.

#yongkevthoughts

What "News"?

 

The way so called "news" is being dished up to us these days is not worth the time and attention we give it.

"News" is delivered to us on so many varied platforms, from social media video clips to the presenters still appearing on retro media.

There is street level news, of episodes that are hyped up, whinging accounts, tearful recoils, nasty damage, road rage, domestic violence and consumer matters.

There are advertorials, disguises of pushing for a commercial product or service.

There are self opinions flagged as news - just observe the background of so called experts interviewed.

There is the ten minute dedication to sporting matters.

There are the repeatitive
pronouncements and forecasts on the weather.

There are increasing  sections of news bulletins that promote the channel's own productions.

Some news broadcasters still maintain time for arts, culture and heritage.

Anything sensational is often pushed to the front of a news bulletin as "breaking", "exclusive", "do not miss" and
"live".

Increasing numbers of news watching fans feel stressed, intimidated and uncertain being fed content thar affects the nerves, mental uncertainty and visually provoking reactions.

News on the other hand can often coddle us by providing preemptive reminders that the next content to be presented may cause stress for some viewers.

How do news producers and editors choose what to reveal to us, especially on an endless circuit of 24 hour news streaming?

How do we differentiate propaganda, opinions and tampered news from the truth?

Perhaps the significant matter is what we are not informed of - instead of the constant barraging of selected information.

Be careful of news content that hardly criticise the side they support -  and over the top aggression against the side opposed.  Taking things out of context is a technique often utilised

Most relevant is who and what are behind the news we receive.   The contemporary world of well funded and often hidden backers no longer want to feed us with balanced viewpoints, alternative considerations and varied points.

There is a growing information overload.
It is up to each of us to better discern the quality and intent of what is flagged to us as "news".

What looks like initially ridiculous is the canary in the coal mine.  Choice of words, gaslighting attempts, AI modification and pumping of relentless messaging are assaults on the unique intelligence of each of us humans.

#yongkevthoughts

Shades of the News

So now we have one business, Nine, that operates across a wide spectrum of traditional, contemporary and emerging technical, media, entertainment and advertising platforms in Australia.

Increasingly we get the news content when and where we want and with most convenience to us. The coffee and breakfast are still tasty whether you are holding them next to a smart phone, laptop or newspaper.

The more significant issue facing each of us continues to be the validity and emphasis of what we are told and provided as information.

The lack of choice of providers in this regard is most pronounced with other aspects of daily life in countries with lesser options in expression and human rights. 

However, the consolidation of media players in societies with small populations like Australia can also negatively impact on popular opinions, communal thinking and the development of democratic trends.

Coverage of news in any country has always been a widespread and effective means of cultural and political control.
So called capitalist economies may seem to allow more diversity in news information, but what happens behind the ownership of the powerful media companies operating there can throw dark shadows.

Most news publications in Asian nations are owned and run by the political parties in power. It is an alien concept and practice to have so called independent news publications surviving and prospering. Previous such attempts like Asiaweek or in Asian editions of American and UK mouthpieces met the inevitable end of not being viable.

So what you read and digest in any form of media we come across has to be strongly tinged with a huge dose of caution and cynicism.

The current USA President is vocal on his stand against the output of media operators like CNN and the New York Times. Each of us also has a preference for what shade of journalism we support, often synchronised with our label of political thinking. 

We tend to get our already existing views of the world consolidated with what we like to be fed, whether on web sites or with our daily paper. 

This brings us next to deal with whether differences of opinion can be twisted to meddling with the so called truth or facts.

A fact is supported by untampered evidence while an untruth is not. An opinion need not be objective as it can be tampered by random experience and selective thought. News dished out to us can be facts, opinions or fake.

Whilst the journalistic profession can have serious concerns about integrity and expression while working for powerful enployers with much financial and political clout, let us remind overselves where the buck stops in news transmission.

If we do not buy it, news provided to us loses its meaning, relevance and capability.

#yongkevthoughts