At least they could be decent enough to leave just a tear in their eye...
2007-12-17 06:25:23 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
With all of the sadness and sorrow in the world, newscasters would be doing nothing but cry.
They must exercise self discipline, and present the news with little emotion.
The only broadcaster I ever remember crying, was Walter Cronkite, when he announced that President Kennedy had died at Parkland hospital in Dallas.
2007-12-17 06:33:06 · answer #1 · answered by bgee2001ca 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It fairly wasn't uncommon or suggestions-blowing to verify various newscasters teary-eyed and having complication staying centred on the day of 11 September 2001 -- 9/11. That 2d struck on the middle of cohesion and safety that we many times experience we've in this u . s ., and shook and disturbed maximum, professionals and amateurs alike Newscasters many times manage their function as an appearing interest-- and it fairly is. So the full element is to stay in character, and that character is to be a impressive and available potential to furnish the interior reach, national, or international information. Emotional involvement, on an identical time as human, might smash up the rhythm of handing over an excellent style of subjects, so the perfect of the perfect stay impartial and stable of their transport.
2016-12-18 03:24:40 · answer #2 · answered by ballow 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's there job to cast the news, not to tear up about it.
Professionalism is important in a job like that.
2007-12-17 06:33:37 · answer #3 · answered by <3 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because they didn't know them and they aren't personally effected.
Do you cry about every single person you hear about dying?
2007-12-17 06:32:35 · answer #4 · answered by kittenslayer 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
They would sound mushy.
2007-12-17 07:03:25 · answer #5 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sometimes they do.
2007-12-17 06:49:26 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋