What the hell is wrong with our news networks?

Whats going on today in the world is terrible, so bad you would think the people reporting on this stuff would be in near tears on camera. But instead i turn on the TV and i hear a guy talking so fast and perky he sounds like hes reporting on the god damn Thanksgiving Day Parade.

Then you go to CNN and see this as there front page which looks more like a movie poster then a news story and you have to wonder where peoples heads are at. I do realize theirs a incentive with major news to get there story, but dose the tone have be be so off kilter to the story there reporting?

Heres what the CNN Page looks like.. I hope someone with a brain and a heart pulls it, but not getting my hopes up. Do you guys think if this happened in America the tone would be different?

The reporters have been trained to cope well under pressure. They get paid to do it. If your job is to quickly relay information about an ongoing event and you burst out crying, chances are you're not a very dependable news reporter. Most of these reporters are too busy being overwhelmed with incoming information that I doubt they actually process any of it, and they're not really witnessing any of the bloodshed in first person.

In terms of the "BLOODBATH" headline - I appreciate that they're calling it out for what it is. The media has a habit of portraying these terrorist attacks as "tragedies", instead of more appropriate terms like "atrocities" or "massacres". Sure, the media is going to exaggerate certain details to make it look more like an action movie, but if it's actually drawing people's attention and keeping them in the loop on current events, then it's fine by me.

Now is not the time for a sombre, sad news story. It's time for anger and change. Especially if you are French or European. This shit is happening far too often.

This video is still my favorite.

No real reason, but I always find that Univision (Spanish) news is always just the most violent, which I suppose because the current Mexican-American culture just loves to watch that type of material. Even if you don't understand Spanish, try watching Univision or Galavision. Whenever there's some type of drug cartel outbreak somewhere in Mexico, or like the recent 'El Chapo' escaping from prison incident, that type of stuff is usually the breaking news type of content they have for the week.

@456nto: I get what your saying i suppose, just something seems so disrespectful about the way its portrayed. I feel like were all becoming too numb to this sort of thing to the point where we may as well be robots. The images and footage speak for themselves without a big headline and a dude telling me about the dismemberment of the terrorist bomber.

I might just be soft i guess, its just that when we have domestic murders and school shootings here the overall tone is much different. Theres always some eye catching headlines and story's intended to shock and wow people with anything like this, but i just think some of its getting out of hand. None of this matters really, and i only bring it up because it bothered me a little, thoughts are with everyone affected by this.

No. This is the kind of tasteless crap you'll always see on CNN. I've never personally been a fan with the way they report stuff, especially with mass shootings and terrorist attacks. You will always get headlines with insensitive fear mongering displayed on TV and their front page. You will always get unprofessional, ignorant and insensitive speculation on top of speculation on top of speculations of speculations because that's their way of filling air time until they get some facts, which even then are wrong half the time. They let out so much incorrect bullshit "facts" on the shootings in Ottawa several months ago, it was infuriating. They'll continue doing garbage headlines and reporting like this as long as it brings traffic rolling through their site and people keep tuning in to their channel because amplifying fear that shootings/bombings cause is good business from them.

The way they report reminds me of the Jackal dude from Family Guy, just replace all the jackal talk with the word "TERRORISTS!".

When a massive tragic event like today happens I'll just go to a respectable news source like CBC or BBC where they're not afraid to say they don't know anything yet at the time of reporting it.

It's finny cause I was just yesterday critizing CNN for slowly turning into FOX when I saw it on the TV. They do seem out of touch. But you do have to remember that they're news reporters meant to report; they have a job to do. Imagine if paramedics didn't learn to be mostly numb to all the stuff we deal with during incidents; patient care would degrade quickly.

My big problem with the news media tonight was them reporting on the movements of special forces directly after French officials told people not to say anything if they see forces making a move. Like I thought we learned not to do this in Munich all those years ago, you don't just put those people's lives at risk, sometimes you outright get them killed! Instead our networks fell prey to the same disgusting, rating fueled habits they always do, meet the new boss same as the old boss I guess.

Spanish TV doesn't try to sugarcoat the violence caused by drug cartels. They'll show the violence as it exists. Why show that kind of graphic content you ask? Why not censor that kind of stuff from the public? Because normal everyday people can wake up and find decapitated bodies just tossed into the street right in front of their house. People don't need to be lied to.

24 hour news networks struggle to fill the day as it is. Even with events like this, they're so short on fact but they need to keep cameras rolling and trawl for witness statements to fill the air. BBC's live reporting of this bears truth to that.

"Reports of x, y, z... oh, its actually w."

@dancinginfernal: Which network were you watching? I was on the local Fox station that was getting all its coverage from Fox News, and they held off on reporting on the movements of the police. They eventually showed footage of it afterwards and said they had held off on it because the French government had asked not to air it to both protect the police and to make sure they didn't cause their response to fail due to a leak. I'm surprised either CNN or MSNBC might have covered it as it happened, given that Fox News for once didn't blow it.

I have a feeling that if the anchors slowed down for a minute to contemplate what they were saying they would likely get too choked up to continue. Not saying that many networks aren't a bit tone deaf at times, but when you are trying to report on an atrocity occurring live before your eyes, the only way to keep it together is to not think about it. Their job is to give the news, not sob on national TV for half an hour. That doesn't help anyone.

Whenever i see the latest sensationalist outbursts of US news media, i'm just happy that the german one, while often horrible, is comparatively weaksauce.

Unfortunately though, the increase in xenophobia probably will affect european countries that actually do take refugees all the same, leading to more suffering for those least deserving.

The coverage isn't surprising to me. This might sound a little harsh but I'd describe the ethos of the normal, day-to-day coverage from the major American news networks as

Be happy, buy these products

Be scared, buy these products

Be smart, buy these products

Be normal, buy these products

When shocking events like these happen out of nowhere the news outlets have to make big adjustments from their normal coverage and drop the ball. I think it's important to watch the news but I've gotten to a point where I look at a variety of outlets to ascertain what the basic facts are but tune out all of the speculation, spin and opinions because that's when the coverage goes back to catering to their specific audiences.

I think in the past people were uncomfortable relying on the internet for news since it was hard to determine the source but I think nowadays you can get a clearer, less "Hollywood" perspective on stories like this by browsing different sites and coming to your own conclusions based on the facts.

Yeah whenever I do need to find out the news, like today, I prefer normal people from the internet (kept updated through reddit today), and not the news networks. In fact I'm cut off from the news networks 90% of the time, the remaining 10% is days like today. News networks/ papers make me feel uncomfortable.

This thread's topic reminds me of Nightcrawler btw

Idk, reddit definitely loves sensationalist bullshit too.

All your news stations are independent and private corporations, they are profit driven. BBC for example is government funded. as well as NOS (Netherlands) for example. They exist on taxpayer money and their sole job is to tell you the news and nothing more. This means, professional, precise, serious, add-free no bullshit news. That's it. This has been the way for decades and is how news is shared to the masses in those two examples, which means people don't really know any better. So when you *do* go all FOX-news on people, you are ridiculed, you are scolded and looked down upon. You don't give opinions on the news, you don't sit down and talk about what happened in Paris the moment it has happened and speculate about "stuff." You. Just. Tell. The. News. So even if there are independent news stations popping up in countries like Britain or the Netherlands they follow that way of bringing the news the way the government funded news stations do. Serious, professional no bullshit news. This has never really been the case in the US. Basically, "the news" in the US is more a TV show than, well...."the news." "The news" is it's own thing here, it's not a TV show, it's "the news" and you don't fuck with the news. This probably didn't make any sense at all, the end.

@sergio: yea I thought shep did a real good job in making sure to only report facts and was clear on it by saying things like "weve heard some things but we will wait until we get official police sources"

I guess... i'm still sorta new to reddit. But from whatever I read, most people were being pretty calm and logical about everything. There were the odd genocidal comments though.

@pilgore: This is correct in theory which makes it all the more depressing how rubbish bbc news is. Better then most i would agree but still a damn site worse then the premise of it.

The more emotionless a news report the better in my opinion. I don't want to hear opinions or emotional points of view, I want to hear the cold hard facts no matter how upsetting they are and I want to hear them from all sides.

I totally agree with this. I was following the whole thing on CBC and they were fairly professional about it and did their best not to speculate at all (which they were applauded for during the Ottawa shooting last year) and they only reported things that were confirmed by the police and by reputable news sources like the AP.

Contrast this with ABC's 20/20 "special" on it that my parents were watching, where they were broadcasting information that was either not confirmed or pure speculation, even claiming over 150 dead, and had already started speculating about who did it before the attack was even confirmed to have ended while claiming that it could happen anywhere and were straight up fear mongering. It was a real shame to see it but at this point it's what I expect from American media, put the spectacle ahead of facts.

This is nothing inique to CNN on USA. The news sites wants clicks and that it. I agree with you however that i find things like this very disrespectful.

120 dead and wait there is more, 200 injured!!!

No, it would be the same if it happened in the US, because very similar headlines did appear here after tragic terrorist attacks:

this is reductive, but i think it's valid advice-

stop watching television news. no really. it's an awful, awful format.

you'll never escape bias (that's impossible)- but your blood pressure will thank you for listening to public radio and reading words on a page or screen.

now somebody pass that bong and let's listen to tool's vicarious together.

The news reporters have to be unbiased, therefore emotionless when they report their news but i do agree with your view about how news networks handle their websites. It feels like they are trying their to use this awful incident as a chance to earn more money, which it makes them seem as they are happy about it.

Um, okay.

They're profit driven companies. This is their most interesting material in who-knows-how-long.

Don't like? Don't watch. There's other places to get news.

Slightly different as it pertains to school shootings but I feel like it's also relevant.

The inherit conflict in reporting about these kind of situations is that the news networks are in a way doing the terrorists jobs for them. However inadvertent, they're spreading the exact type of fear and horror that the terrorists hoped this act would produce in order to influence the public to pressure the government to retaliate in some way. It doesn't help when the news exaggerates elements but I'd also argue that anchors being sombre or in tears wouldn't provide much hope either. Unfortunately, we live in a world where 24 hour news networks exist and that means there will always be an excessive amount of coverage when incidents like this occur.

Most news networks and press today is just about making people panic or spreading they networks own political agenda. It is sickening to see such heartless headlines over a tragedy. If anything they should have a picture of a french flag with something like 'we support you' on it. And you know, then actually try and support the people of France. But hey, being kind and thoughtful doesn't sale so I doubt it.

Shep Smith is definitely one of the better people on those 24 hour news networks, just makes it crazier that he's on Fox News of all channels.

Oh I haven't actually watched BBC news all that much these past few years. But that is how- like you said -it is on a lot of western European countries. Our own news (NOS) has been doing a damn fine job of giving the news fair and straight for more than 20 years now, like BBC also government funded.

You can have either the emotionless delivery or the emotion fueled delivery (I.E. see the Starship Troopers video). Neither are ideal, but I feel it is ultimately up to the person listening to the news to be intelligent enough to come to their own conclusion about what they are hearing. So I'd say that being given the news in a dry, matter-of-fact fashion is the safest, most neutral way to handle any crisis, or else you might see yourself getting into propaganda territory without realizing it since emotions carry a much heavier weight than words do.

@mellotronrules: This. Avoid all 24-hour news stations. These institutions have to fill time with biased speculation that often ends up spreading unfortunate misinformation. Reading a write-up by the AP or local news outlets is often times the most efficient way to consume news while still retaining accuracy.

@recspec: @bradbrains:Yeah, I've never watched Fox News, the network, but I'm okay with the local Fox news. I just left it on the local affiliate when this happened and thought they did a good job for the most part while I was watching. The only part I didn't like was when Geraldo interviewed his own daughter who had been at the soccer match. I know that she is a perfectly valid source of information, since other networks were also interviewing witnesses. It just felt creepy to me; like this should have been a private conversation between a father and daughter, but I was eavesdropping.

Rolling news is it's particular brand of weird because of their need to fill out for time while also trying to keep things as dramatic as possible.

The general BBC news bulletins are OK because they have an allotted time so don't need to worry about filler.

BBC does have its own rolling news channel too and it still has problems. I will always remember feeling kinda gross when in 2011 I was watching some of their coverage of the Norway shootings and then the next day they had coverage of Amy Winehouse's death. And they were treating both in the exact same way. That's just the format.

@paulmako: We have Nancy Grace. (Sorry, I got a little competitive on who has the worst "news.")

$

Really a headline looking like a movie poster is the least of my concerns. And yes, it would be the same in America.

I'm not really expecting trained reporters to break down on TV for something happening across the seas. Or even here. Because there's plenty enough here alone. There's plenty going on on the opposite side of the world. No one's asking them to cry when a bomb goes off in Beirut, or Syrian children wash ashore, or the West blows up a bunch of Iraqi civilians. To me the waste of human life is just as repugnant.

Should I be in near-tears watching this barrage of news? Because I just end up feeling some mixture of sad, angry, and disgusted by humanity.

News programming and reports is never about humanity, it's about ratings and hits.

It's what happens when your business is information. You want to sell it, so you try and make your information as sellable as possible. Most coverage of human tragedy/misery/trauma makes me think journalists/newspeople/editors are scumbags.

Ha, if this had happened in America, the word "Bloodbath" would have been several sizes larger. I felt icky every time I went back to CNN to check for updates, just because of those front page headlines.

@blu3v3nom07:Thank you for that, that video on modern news reporting was great.

When you're on TV there is no time to be emotional, your only job at that moment is to give the viewers the information as it comes in. Which information you present, and how you present that information is an ethical debate, which isn worth talking about, but I won't get into it right now.

CNN as a network isn't doing so great and hasn't been for years. The rise of Fox News has resulted in the fall of CNN. This is the reason for their more sensationalist tone. And what I've seen of the CNN reporting wasn't great. Guest and hosts jumping to conclusions, way to fast. There is however nothing wrong with the headline calling it a bloodbath, which is what it is. Based on what I've read and seen regarding the killings in the Bataclan theatre, 'Massacre' would have also been appropriate, sure it's missing some context, but the headline isn't really the problem. The headlines might be lacking in nuance, but that's where the article/video comes in.

As someone who is studying to be a television journalist. The lack of trust and the general opinion that the news is about sensation, selling products, ratings and hits. You hurt me. And while the situation in America is most certainly worse than it is here in the Netherlands. I want to believe that there are people working at CNN, FOX and all the other networks who want to do better.

For anyone who hasn't seen Anchorman 2, I believe that movie dealt with this subject quite well:

They sensationalize things beacuse it gets views and gets viewers riled up and talking on social media. If people were more talkative about how unprofessional their coverage is and stopped watching it, the media would scramble to listen to their concerns and produce something more professional as a result...but this hasn't happened and it likely never will.

We'll always have Last Week Tonight.

Short answer money, slightly longer answer TV is dying so there scrambling hard to keep as many views and as much ad revenue coming in as possible.

@fr0br0: Maybe it's a little flippant, but I feel like somebody could pretty easily plug in actual news reports after a real life tragedy into that Starship Troopers clip and it'd work really well. Not sure what that says about how our news is delivered and how we react to stuff like that, but it's probably nothing great.

lol at people who think only American news does this...