|
If you'll excuse the punning.
Maybe it IS just his looks and smooth manner that I miss, after all. I don't watch just CNN's morning show, after all. I watch theirs and MSNBC's and even Fox's just a tiny bit in case they find a story or have a guest that I'm not seeing on the other networks. But I don't stop there.
I watch a lot of History Channel in the a.m., usually what was played during primetime the night before which I missed because I was watching a good dramatic episode on TNT or wherever I find one. And I tune in C-Span A & B, check out the babies and dieters on DHC, baby critters on AP, geez, I guess I sort of run the gamut of the cable listings just to see what's greeting the world every morning!
But then I'm also listening to NPR (from KBIA where my cousin hosts the morning show) online, and scanning through a few of the mainstream and progressive news outlets on the Net as well. Some people might call me "hypervigilant," but I just like to know what's headed my way. ;)
And lately I've been reading DU first thing when I wake up, too -- almost before my cappucino's ready. Superb forum you guys have here! Congrats, to all who make it work and make it fun. :applause:
Strange, though, that I hadn't really noticed Hemmer being particularly toadying to the right. Either I'm slipping (could be), or I watch so many news anchors and commentators they're all running together in my mind, OR ... or I'm more discerning than I give myself credit for and don't need to worry. Hah!
Some strong opinions are held here at the DU forums, I've noticed that already. Of course I expected that; and probably I wouldn't disagree with most of those opining because I'm in the ballpark with 'em too.
But once in awhile I am quite surprised at something I read. I mean, I don't know anyone who has watched any more of the three cable news networks than I have, and I basically see CNN as leaning left, Fox as very much way-out-there right (usually), and MSNBC as pretty much centrist and balanced. Lester Holt reminds me of news anchors from way back when, like Cronkite or Edwin Newman or John Chancellor.
And I get a lot more out of all my news gathering from cable TV if I keep the remote busy, switching around to find only those shows or anchors or guests or topics that I feel are relevant and well-presented. Even Fox has on a guest now and then who really leaves them all speechless, almost embarrassed, if they had sense enough over there to be embarrassed!
And I remember during the first days of the ground war in Iraq in '03, I had to keep flipping around the news channels to get all I could from everyone -- especially the imbeds, who, no matter who employed them, all seemed to become very much "for" the troops they were living and traveling with and therefore seemed pretty much "for" the war effort. That was only natural, and getting to see the video, hear the audio, so clearly live from the desert, from the tanks, from the battlefields wherever they were ... man, that was amazing. I remember during Vietnam when we had to be satisfied with reports delivered to the public several days or even weeks after they were filed from incountry. This time when Saddam's humongous statue was being pulled down with ropes in a square in Baghdad, I was watching it live along with a lot of the world......
Sorry, I ramble... :blush: The gist of my observation is that ya gotta pick and choose to get the best out of TV news in particular. I may change the channel 20 times in a one-hour show -- or skip out of the news altogether to watch the Weather Channel for awhile. Gives me a lot of perspective to glean some info from a LOT of sources.
I guess I figure, if we always listen critically, avoiding the pitfalls of buying into what any one source is telling us, then we're not likely to go too far wrong. Journalism in any of its formats isn't what it used to be. But what is?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(809 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
