Do you prefer news with a viewpoint? Or do you prefer objective reporters that just tell you what is happening?
Do you prefer the fly on the wall view, omniscient narrator, on the scene what is happening there, or something else?
I prefer news that just tells what is going on.
I can make my own decisions and make up my own mind about what is shown?
What do you think?
2007-06-19 02:49:46 · 14 answers · asked by inzaratha 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Straight up would be nice but would we recognize it? Everyone has a slant, whether it's coming from the director, the control room or the anchor. Then you have to factor in the witnesses themselves. Maybe we should look into news robots?
2007-06-19 08:14:59 · answer #1 · answered by gldnsilnc 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I prefer the news reported to be just the facts, all the facts not leaving anything out. If a portion of the information is left out then any decisions I make are affected by the lack of complete information. I must have all the facts on a given situation to determine my action required, if any.
Also I believe that there are some reporters or journalists that do give you all the facts so you can decide on the issues yourself. There are also some who present both sides and this provides a comparison for anyone to make a decision on how they feel on specific issues.
Other news media put a slant on the news reported and this affects decisions made by the public. I feel that the news should just report the facts and not make any judgments or opinions as shown in how the facts are reported.
Thanks for the question
2007-06-19 10:12:54 · answer #2 · answered by Dennis A 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I too would like to get the whole picture, however, we have to consider that since each and every report is produced by humans, we will NEVER have true objectivity because the reporters have to decide which part of the picture they talk about. It is impossible (and it woud be uninteresting) for them to report on every ramification of every perspective of the day's events. They try to talk about the aspects that actually matter to a significant group of people, and that involves bias.
The cameraman can't give the whole picture; the longer the lens, the less of the whole picture it shows. That's actually what we want, we don't care as much about what was happening in the other 350 degrees around the photographer, just the photo, right? Well, EVERY photograph is biased in favor of its subject, and any good cameraman can easily bend reality with a good enough zoom lens.
It would be a lot of fun to start up something on Youtube, little sketches where we each do our own little ten-minute "objective" newscast. You'd have as many different versions of the news as you had "objective reporters", no matter how well-intentioned and fair-minded the participants were.
2007-06-19 10:43:39 · answer #3 · answered by oimwoomwio 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A little bit of both to be honest. I recall those narratives with that droning voice in school, utterly boring and lifeless. I can't imagine any news caster without some emotion and yes the words they use will slant a story one way or the other but I can change the channel and view the news on an other station I prefer.
2007-06-19 09:59:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just the facts ma'am just the facts. Unfortunately that will never happen because there are no true journalists anymore. It's funny how the liberal media talk about diversiytand open mindedness but if you suggest a viewpoint contrary to theirs you are called narrow minded etc etc. It's on the right too but not as prevelant because the liberals dominate the TV media while the conservatives dominate radio talk. I can make up my own mind about what is shown but you will be persuaded if what is shown you slanted. For example, editing what people say, taking comments out of context etc etc etc....
2007-06-19 09:57:56 · answer #5 · answered by BamaJJP 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I like Both.
Reason:
Straight up news is essential.
What sources can you trust? Opinion slips in even when the news is accurate. Reporters, writers and editors can't help but bias the news to their views even when trying to be fair.
They have to choose what to report and what to delete. Leaving OUT some details can bias the report. That may constitute truth, but misleads the listener.
When they deliberately editorialize and admit to it, then you can distinguish with certainty what the context IS.
I also DO like to hear the views of others, but also like to know that it is their personal view and get a thorough explanation as to WHY they hold that view.
Yes, both are helpful.
2007-06-19 10:05:05 · answer #6 · answered by Philip H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I prefer news where I get it straight forward, only the facts, no opinions thrown in unless I am watching something like Face The Nation where they provide you with contrasting viewpoints so that I can form my own opinions.
2007-06-19 09:54:09 · answer #7 · answered by Lori B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I prefer the news to be reported with out the commentary by the left or the right.
2007-06-19 09:59:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I prefer my news straight up. I like commentary by people who are knowlegable and can tie all the pieces together (i.e., how one situation relates to another), but I ultimately want to draw my own conclusions.
2007-06-19 10:06:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What I would really prefer is truth which I think seldom makes it into the major news outlets.
2007-06-19 10:01:07 · answer #10 · answered by trichbopper 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋