CNN going down the tubes

November 17, 2001 3:38 PM

CNN going down the tubes A view from writer for San Fransisco Chronicle that appeared in Japanese paper. Other news channels strike me as "sexier," but CNN, still, for many, best bet on worldwide news coverage. Does sexy make more interesting presentation?
posted by Postroad (19 comments total)

"but CNN, still, for many, best bet on worldwide news coverage."

damn.. now that was funny!!! hahah
posted by BlitzK at 4:30 PM on November 17, 2001

Yeh, fox news is definetly sexier.

In a stupid, gaudy Las Vegas street hooker kind of way.
posted by delmoi at 5:05 PM on November 17, 2001

damn.. now that was funny!!! hahah

It's the honest truth - what's funny about it? "Still, for many, best bet" is true. The many may be wrong - the post doesn't even say a majority! - but perhaps it would be better to say why and actually discuss the subject. Or is it your comment that's supposed to be funny?
Personally I've never liked TV news, because it's such an uneconomic medium for information. In the time you watch 30 minutes you could read 20 times as many words.
But CNN is becoming worse and more Foxified, just as BBC World is. Ever less international, more American, less critical, more showbizzy, less journalistic. I like "Diplomatic License" and that's about it. Otherwise its job of providing grainy images of whatever's happening is well done, if you like that sort of thing.
Was CNN ever good though? I can't remember it being so.
Better to stick to newspapers and the web. NPR and BBC Radio 4 and World Service, if you're doing something else at the same time.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 5:12 PM on November 17, 2001

Jeepers Postroad, you don't like the Economist but think that CNN is the best bet for worldwide news? I don't think we could possibly mean the same thing we each use the word "world" ...
posted by sylloge at 5:37 PM on November 17, 2001

As far as American TV goes, CNN is the best bet for world news. Speaking as a no-attention-span pseudo-GenXer, I much prefer MSNBC although they specialize in "the weepy personal story". And not just because of Ashleigh Banfield. Though it doesn't hurt.
posted by owillis at 5:47 PM on November 17, 2001

I watch CNN (International) for one reason only: Richard Quest. Funniest. Reporter. Ever!
posted by frednorman at 5:57 PM on November 17, 2001

CNN? Christian Science Monitor!
posted by mmarcos at 6:17 PM on November 17, 2001

"CNN going down the tubes," implies it was a quality organization to begin with. I lost respect for CNN during Desert Storm. Let's not forget that they were then just like they are now: lots o' cool 3d spinning logos and loud theme music to intro every story. On CNN, news is never just news, it's an event worthy of motion picture treatment. CNN was the first news organization to hire staff musicians to write themes for big stories. CNN takes an hour worth of news and stretches it into 24, spending more time these days invovled in useless, and mostly misleading to the casual viewer, conjecture with unverified "facts." The only thing that makes today's CNN different from the CNN ten years ago is now they have that annoying crawl that is 90% inane filler messages.
posted by eyeballkid at 6:51 PM on November 17, 2001

My mistake, for which, sorry. I meant best news broadcast on TV rather than best news, for which, a number of better sources, most overseas, including those mentioned above.
Seems I do separate news that I read from news that I watch when I turn away from the much better print news.
posted by Postroad at 7:00 PM on November 17, 2001

I wish Deutsche Welle or Radio Netherlands had more content online. With a lot of news sites, you feel like there are dozens of stories that are filed with the organization that never make it to the web.
posted by gimonca at 7:46 PM on November 17, 2001

CNN = the communist news network. All spin all the time.
posted by catatonic at 8:08 PM on November 17, 2001

Erm, I like the Headline News, heh. Although, of course, I get most of my in-depth news from sources like the IHT and NYT, the TV *isn't supposed to be in-depth*. I don't want analysis. I just want to know what happened in the five minutes it takes me to eat breakfast.
posted by Kevs at 8:12 PM on November 17, 2001

Kevs: Just a counterpoint. Television news was always considered less in-depth than print news merely because it was tucked away into hour or 1/2 hour installments somewhere between the soaps and prime time. CNN (and Fox and MSNBC... all crap in my opinion) has 24 hours. Unfortunately, they tailor news not to the viewer who can deal with in-depth investigations of current events or gripping state of the nation/workforce/entertainment/etc. types of programming, but to the viewers that they are trying to lure away from standard daytime cable and broadcast fare.

PBS offers more factual information in their two hours worth of news than CNN does all day (hey, if I see that slogan on KCET, someone's gotta pay me). So does the BBC.


I also agree that the NYT and LA Times are still the best places to get a good grip on the what's going on in the world.
posted by eyeballkid at 8:27 PM on November 17, 2001

BBCWorld News is absolutely one of the best out there for international news - not that most people in the US care about what happens outside their boundaries. Besides, the British accents are so sexy.
posted by pooldemon at 9:13 PM on November 17, 2001

Fox News has the best looking women,therefore Fox News rules, as ENTERTAINMENT.
posted by Mack Twain at 11:38 PM on November 17, 2001

there's no news anchor sexier than shihab rattansi. where the hell has he been lately, anyway? why, having my babies.

heh.
posted by sugarfish at 12:34 AM on November 18, 2001

But when did CNN become British News Network? (Maybe only when I'm watching, late at night.)
posted by HTuttle at 12:50 AM on November 18, 2001

Daljit Dahaliwal, the muse behind the ITN World News, rules!
posted by Carol Anne at 4:43 AM on November 18, 2001

Some people like Daljit a lot.

A lot. (Includes a Daljit skin for The Sims.)
posted by mmarcos at 5:01 PM on November 18, 2001