How could people act in this manner?
“It’s possible that I’m more sensitive to the editorial process due to my background in public radio, where no decision I ever witnessed was predicated on how a topic or guest would ‘rate,’” she writes. “The longer I was at MSNBC, the more I saw such choices — it’s practically baked in to the editorial process — and those decisions affect news content every day.”
Pekary adds, “Likewise, it’s taboo to discuss how the ratings scheme distorts content, or it’s simply taken for granted, because everyone in the commercial broadcast news industry is doing the exact same thing. But behind closed doors, industry leaders will admit the damage that’s being done.”
Isn’t that terrible? Before they make a program they ponder whether anyone would like to watch it.
It’s almost as if people in industry should think about what people desire before they go make something. And we know that’s not how it should be at all, people should accept what they’re told they will get and be grateful for it.
The language we use matters - it provides clarity to our own thoughts and enables…
It is now generally acknowledged that the structure of the NHS needs to be overhauled…
In the film Apollo 13, a loss of oxygen causes the crew to start inadvertently…
There's an idea out there which seems intuitive but then so many ideas do seem…
When we think about the darkly opaque goals of modern central bankers as they relate…
As the papers recently filled with the distressing images of desperate souls looking to escape…
View Comments
Yes! networks do have a customer base, and they do think about what will please their customers. MSNBC's base wants all-NeverTrumper, all the time, and that is what they get. Fox was created to appeal to conservatives, and thrived despite a CNN president's protest that it was solving a non-problem. Recently, it has become more faithful to the "Fair and Balanced" slogan despite dropping it, and its news programs are now uselessly aimed at the vapid of any stripe, with as much Covid Panic Porn as any other network.
PS - Pekary never saw such content bias in "public radio"? That's preposterous. National Public Radio's audience intrinsically prefers a government agency over a for-profit business to understand current events. The spin it gets is the spin it wants. This is why Republicans have issued idle threats to shut it down since Ronald Reagan.
I think her point about NPR is that they never thought about whether something would draw an audience. They didn't have to, they had funding from the taxpayers. They just cranked out left-wing stuff that suited their tastes.
They may have imagined that they were just pursuing the truth and doing the Lord's work, but given that they all saw the world from a strong left-wing perspective the output was LEFT. But they never gave a thought to whether it attracted customers, 'cause they didn't have to.
Same in Oz. ABC Oz put out so much propaganda for decontructionistas then run ads claiming to be most trusted news source
Equally accurate as a description of the BBC.
It's akin to complaints that that there is a right wing bias in the press in the UK.
There are, in fact, plenty of left wing newspapers - it's just that people tend to choose to not to buy them and go for the more centrist and right wing ones.
But the people who write for left-wing newspapers believe Rupert dictates The Times editorials every day.
They certainly do.
I have lost count of the number of times lefties have told me that Leave won the referendum because Murdoch dictated his newspapers' editorial line on Brexit.
In fact, of course, The Times was against Brexit whereas The Sunday Times was in favour. A better indication of editorial independence you would find difficult to find.
But it's not relevant anyway since nobody is obliged to buy Murdoch newspapers - there are plenty of alternatives.