wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] AWM from UWS December 10, 2007 - 11:13AM

  Oh, if everyone would sit still and watch Jim Lehrer for an our we wouldn't have so many problems that are rooted in the apathy and ignorance of Americans

  
  
• [2] Q from Manhattan December 10, 2007 - 11:14AM

  Speaking of adult diaper ads on Network News, Who do you think listens to WNYC?

  
  
• [3] B.C. from Jersey City December 10, 2007 - 11:14AM

  I read in The Nation the theory that Morrow was never apolitical and that programs such as "Countdown" could be the future of network news where commentators are poltically biased or at least have an opinion.

  Would Kurtz agreee?

  
  
• [4] judy from NYC December 10, 2007 - 11:14AM

  I read the NY Times for the news. I watch The Daily Show and Steven Colbert for the humor. The network nightly news shows are so full of commercials and so lacking in honest content, that watching them is torture.

  
  
• [5] Mark from NY December 10, 2007 - 11:15AM

  Aiming for young viewers usually means dumbing things down and appealing to the narcissism in today's youth. This is the antithesis of the news and so I'm glad that the networks are not pandering to this demographic.

  
  
• [6] RJ from Brooklyn December 10, 2007 - 11:15AM

  My difficulty w/the nightly--with all "news programs," in some way, including NPR--is that they all cover *the same things.* Of course they have to report on the latest blowup in/about Iraq, but there is so ... much ... happening ... in the lives of people around the world that yes, does have an impact on Americans (would that we could get snippets from an Indonesian news program?). As well as people day-to-day around the US that just aren't caught.

  
  
• [7] antonio from park slope December 10, 2007 - 11:17AM

  Actually if you want the most unvarnished perspective of WORLD news try democracy now...

  
  
• [8] Eric from B'klyn December 10, 2007 - 11:17AM

  As for the reason the networks continue w a newscast. I believe that they have their licenses issued contingent on their providing a percentage of 'public intrest' programming and the nightly news has been the public interest segment

  See the Communication Act of 1934

  
  
• [9] Susan Schneider from Chatham NJ December 10, 2007 - 11:18AM

  Dont call Bill O'Reilly - or anything on FOX "news". The network anchors are supposed to be unbiased. FOX and O'Reilly are commentators and air inflammatory, biased broadcasts. No wonder they generate so much talk. It's cheap and emotional, not news.

  
  
• [10] Ayesha from New York, NY December 10, 2007 - 11:20AM

  The only news show worth watching these days is the Lehrer News Hour.

  It has great original reporting, interesting segments, and in-depth, smart, coverage of world events which is such a change from the 'news' that is fed to viewers on the network news.

  
  
• [11] suzanne from nyc December 10, 2007 - 11:20AM

  Please don't say my Last name. THanks. Too nervous to get on air.

  But, Please mention the gross commercials we baby boomers ("older viewers")have to endure about various bodily function difficulties. They almost make me feel like I SHOULD have bladder control probs, my boyfriend should have a limp weenie, the mucus ad is gross and offensive and if I see that guy with the Jurasic whatever inventor /Lipitor ad, Im going to vomit. I watch and listen because I dont want to read all day in isolation. Good show.

  
  
• [12] Anne December 10, 2007 - 11:25AM

  I remember hearing that seniors actually control significantly more money than the 18-26 year olds, although they may not spend it as freely. Perhaps the news shows are actually on the cusp of something as baby boomers retire rather than being at the end.

  
  
• [13] Paulo from Paterson, New Jersey December 10, 2007 - 11:32AM

  I wouldn't say the cable news people are targeting those who have felt marginalized. They're convincing people who have never been marginalized that they have been. The "angry enfranchised" as Stewart put it once.

  
  
• [14] Derek from brooklyn December 10, 2007 - 11:36AM

  What about Digg, or Reddit? The role of self-organizing online communities.

  
  
• [15] Cynthia from Chicago December 10, 2007 - 11:40AM

  About why people are not watching news programs: what about the time the shows are on TV? Who gets home at 6 pm anymore?

  
  
• [16] holden from NYC December 10, 2007 - 11:42AM

  I think that any show that calls itself "news" should be required to post the date and time that each clip was filmed so we can tell the difference between live and stock footage. More and more often News shows are playing stock footage as live . I just found out that the images of people in the middle east celebrating and firing their weapons in the air that was shown after the September 11th attacks were in fact stock footage.

  
  
• [17] Meech from NYC December 11, 2007 - 12:06AM

  Networks are behind the times and should come clean about what their "world" news. All the major networks really cover national news -- and not very well at that. As I type this, I'm watching BBC America's new nightly newscast. The top stories covered in-depth were: Al Gore's accepting the Nobel Prize, the loss of rain forests in Borneo, the upcoming climate conference, the oil spill in Korea, Putin's successor, and a crackdown in Afghanistan -- all within the first 30 minutes.

  I also TiVo ABC's nightly news. All of the above stories didn't register a mention in the broadcast. Instead, the broadcast devoted main stories to Oprah's rally, the promise of a new treatment and a parachute suit. Instead of reporting on what's happening in the world, almost the entire broadcast was devoted to speculation and teasers for things yet to come.

  I can't imagine Walter Cronkite settling for such fluff.