Why does the mainstream media neglect these stories?

Question

http://wcbstv.com/national/topstories_story_054064722.html
http://www.thepilot.com/stories/20070223/news/local/20070223soldier.html
http://www.examiner-enterprise.com/articles/2007/02/23/news/news823.txt

Sure they comment on them, but why don't they give them as much attention as they do all the violence? You know, why do they neglect them?

Answer 1

Dude - do you understand what "mainstream media" even means?

That first story is not only an AP wire service story, as the guy above me pointed out, but it's on the website of a CBS broadcast affiliate. Sorry, you can't get more mainstream than that.

The second story was a CENTCOM press release. It got picked up by The Pilot, cuz one of the soldiers in the operation was from that small town, Southern Pines. Otherwise, no, it probably didn't get front-page national news treatment. Why? Not as newsworthy as one of a 100 other stories in the world. Look at the article again - other than it's importance to that particular small town, the event is small potatoes. If they had captured a major player, it would have been a big deal. But otherwise, it's just another day in Iraq. Do you really not see that?

Story #3. Again, the title says it all "Local man on leave from Iraq" - that's their lead. That's national news? I see there's some real hoorah stuff in there about reconstruction operations, and that's great. That's why you should read your local paper. But seriously - one individual soldier is in rural Kansas on leave from Iraq. Not breaking or headline news, quite obviously.

While the second story undoubtedly made it to the major media newsrooms, and got shuffled aside, for what seem to me obvious reasons, the third story would never even have been a blip at a major news desk.

Opening up the Washington Post webpage, which for me is my local, back home newspaper, just scanning the headlines, it's easy to see why one small-scale military operation didn't exactly burst onto the national scene.

It is sad that the newsrooms have to make choices, but it's true that not everything can be a big story. Let's realize that we have a mass media system that is run by big business, not the federal government, as in some countries. I thought we liked that, capitalism, free market forces, etc. But if my business is newspapers, my concern is selling ad space. The space that is left over is called the "news hole" and I'm going to fill it with whatever I think will help sell newspapers. "Lost kitten rescued from tree by local firemen" won't do it. There's a balance, with the newsroom fighting corporate to get stories on the front page, and the business managers fighting back to push a more sensationalist, "if it bleeds it leads" sensibility. This battle is usually lost at the local TV news level, where all you see is hard news about local crime, then what amounts to infomercials for local business, and maybe a "soft" human interest story, to avoid accusations of yellow journalism.

But back to the mainstream media newsroom - there's only so much that can get into print/broadcast. The most important stories are all that make the cut. Iraq is an important story, but only the most 1, 2 or maybe 3 stories are going to make it. No one is going to read an all-Iraq/all the time paper.

Here's a good book for you, that gets into the news cycle and how decisions are made in the newsroom:

Jane T. Harrigan. Read All About It! A Day in the Life of a Metropolitan Newspaper. Globe Pequot Press, 1987.

This article gets into the pressures of the TV news 24-hr news cycle:

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2004/03/15/lott_case.html

It also gets into the issue of blogs vs. Big Media. Which reminds me to point out - all those articles were in traditional media, albeit on their websites. Those weren't bloggers, or any other kind of "alternative news."

If you yourself want the all-Iraq/all the time news format, just go directly to the CENTCOM press release page - you'll get a bellyful.

Answer 2

Anna Nicole and Brittney--two stories that require minimal investigation and funding to proliferate.

Maybe if Cheney and his minions weren't calling the head cheese's at the major media outlets to threaten them we'd get those stories covered.

Were 45th in the world rankings regarding a free press--down from no. 1.

Corporate Fascist Republican Bastards!!!

Answer 3

I have seen all of these stories before. Maybe you do not read enough news???

Some questions I would like to see covered in mainstream media:

Is Bush still drinking??? Is that why he looks like an idiot in interviews and speeches?

Why do public service announcements discuss only the smallest risk problems instead of pounding the fact that heart disease is the number one killer??? Instead of asking 4800 breast cancer patients how they got it, ask 1.5 million heart attack victims how many steaks and french fries they eat.

Why are cigarettes still on the market when the companies making cigarettes lose every lawsuit??? If they are poison why are they still available?????

Get a grip and explore threats that you can change and leave Iraq to the Democrats.

Answer 4

The articles you posted are from mainstream media sources.

Answer 5

Because it's good news or the truth.

Answer 6

they do cover those.. i read the first one on the Associated Press website..

Answer 7

dude im on foxnews right now and they have all of them... they are just condensed into one big article... so idk what your talking about...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254020,00.html

good stories tho..