The real reason the news business is in trouble…

Too many Americans would rather watch Paris Hilton or learn about Anna Nicole Smith.

How do I know that? Cause there is a reason why CNN and Fox kept playing AnnaNews all day long a few weeks back. They do focus groups. They know what people are watching and just how much of something they are watching.

All the discussion today about whether newspapers are dead or aren’t won’t solve that one.

Today’s top headline in the local paper? Above everything else? Foodblogging.

Is that REALLY the most important thing in the world today? Hell, I’m a blog evangelist and even I don’t think that if you really pressed me on it.

107 thoughts on “The real reason the news business is in trouble…

  1. The problem with the news media is they do not report the news they spin it over and over for profits and commercial saturation. They work the emotional itch of the television bound populace. Their news casters are now Pope's giving the mass at saint peters. The spin tends play to the corporate advertises platform. Never would the corporate media enhance the principles that make Americans free and independent they continue to promote our victim status as they ingrain the slow subtle message that enslaves our souls and bodies into an increasingly impotent, mass of addicted , the price is right , viagra dependent, cowardly ,fa,consumers.

  2. The problem with the news media is they do not report the news they spin it over and over for profits and commercial saturation. They work the emotional itch of the television bound populace. Their news casters are now Pope's giving the mass at saint peters. The spin tends play to the corporate advertises platform. Never would the corporate media enhance the principles that make Americans free and independent they continue to promote our victim status as they ingrain the slow subtle message that enslaves our souls and bodies into an increasingly impotent, mass of addicted , the price is right , viagra dependent, cowardly ,fa,consumers.

  3. I agree with you very much. Actually, I’m writing a persuasive essay on the topic. If you know of any good websites where I could find more info about this subject, pls let me know!
    Thanks,
    Toni, student in Alabama

  4. I agree with you very much. Actually, I’m writing a persuasive essay on the topic. If you know of any good websites where I could find more info about this subject, pls let me know!
    Thanks,
    Toni, student in Alabama

  5. I agree with you very much. Actually, I’m writing a persuasive essay on the topic. If you know of any good websites where I could find more info about this subject, pls let me know!
    Thanks,
    Toni, student in Alabama

  6. First, just to get it out of the way, people are NOT famous for being famous. People are famous for “being famous” are really famous for SEX. They are famous for looking sexy, being sexy, dressing sexy, having sexy videos, having sexy pictures and / or even sexy audio.

    Anna Nicole Smith (big-breasted former centerfold), Britney Spears (breakout music video had her in a mini-skirted Catholic schoolgirl outfit, scantily clad on the cover of Rolling Stones as a dress-up doll), Paris Hilton (online sex video), Pamela Anderson (well-endowed Baywatch star who got national prominence with an early online sex video), et. al.

    As for newspapers, people are interested in what they care about. Ratings spiked in the Anna Nicole Smith story not because people were interested in the news, they were interested in sex, sexy pictures and videos that the news networks always put onscreen. It wasn’t news it was entertainment.

    Just like the judge, Sideling(?), who was entertaining. Roe Conn, a local talk radio host, does a killer impersonation of the voice that’s hysterical.

    Speaking of entertainment, that’s what the news has increasingly become. The target demographic for tv news and cable news who are actually interested in news, in information, simply go online. So that leaves entertainment, news reporters being funny or angry or funnily angry (ala Stephen Colbert or Bill O’Reilly) or angrily funny (ala Lewis Black or Keith Olbermann). Or syrupily compassionate ala the flood of newsmagzines and “morning (news/talk/variety) shows” interviewing someone who has gone thru some traumatic and being asked “How do you feel?” or various variation thereof (e.g. “What was your reaction?”, “What’s your take?”, “What’s your impressions?”, etc.).

    If you want people to watch or read the news, then report on stuff they care about–or EXPLAIN WHY THEY SHOULD CARE, as in how it affects them. And here’s a concept, show NEW news, not merely repeat the same story and call it “news” or worse “breaking news” (like the same news story is “breaking” for an hour or two or three or four).

    As for the news BUSINESS, I think the problem is that news is too small a fish in giant oceans. The Powers That Be over them no longer are the maverick millionaire newspaper owners who cared about the news as a craft but executive who’s only interest and relationship with the news is a single line in an accounting report or a single entry in some electronic spreadsheet. Maybe if the news was a third or even a quarter of the whole business it belonged to then at least those in charge would care or at least know about news other than its profit and loss. Maybe.

    – Ken from Chicago

    P.S. Also focus helps, targeting a niche market and not trying to be all things to all people.

  7. First, just to get it out of the way, people are NOT famous for being famous. People are famous for “being famous” are really famous for SEX. They are famous for looking sexy, being sexy, dressing sexy, having sexy videos, having sexy pictures and / or even sexy audio.

    Anna Nicole Smith (big-breasted former centerfold), Britney Spears (breakout music video had her in a mini-skirted Catholic schoolgirl outfit, scantily clad on the cover of Rolling Stones as a dress-up doll), Paris Hilton (online sex video), Pamela Anderson (well-endowed Baywatch star who got national prominence with an early online sex video), et. al.

    As for newspapers, people are interested in what they care about. Ratings spiked in the Anna Nicole Smith story not because people were interested in the news, they were interested in sex, sexy pictures and videos that the news networks always put onscreen. It wasn’t news it was entertainment.

    Just like the judge, Sideling(?), who was entertaining. Roe Conn, a local talk radio host, does a killer impersonation of the voice that’s hysterical.

    Speaking of entertainment, that’s what the news has increasingly become. The target demographic for tv news and cable news who are actually interested in news, in information, simply go online. So that leaves entertainment, news reporters being funny or angry or funnily angry (ala Stephen Colbert or Bill O’Reilly) or angrily funny (ala Lewis Black or Keith Olbermann). Or syrupily compassionate ala the flood of newsmagzines and “morning (news/talk/variety) shows” interviewing someone who has gone thru some traumatic and being asked “How do you feel?” or various variation thereof (e.g. “What was your reaction?”, “What’s your take?”, “What’s your impressions?”, etc.).

    If you want people to watch or read the news, then report on stuff they care about–or EXPLAIN WHY THEY SHOULD CARE, as in how it affects them. And here’s a concept, show NEW news, not merely repeat the same story and call it “news” or worse “breaking news” (like the same news story is “breaking” for an hour or two or three or four).

    As for the news BUSINESS, I think the problem is that news is too small a fish in giant oceans. The Powers That Be over them no longer are the maverick millionaire newspaper owners who cared about the news as a craft but executive who’s only interest and relationship with the news is a single line in an accounting report or a single entry in some electronic spreadsheet. Maybe if the news was a third or even a quarter of the whole business it belonged to then at least those in charge would care or at least know about news other than its profit and loss. Maybe.

    – Ken from Chicago

    P.S. Also focus helps, targeting a niche market and not trying to be all things to all people.

Comments are closed.