- Joined
- 28 March 2007
- Posts
- 428
- Reactions
- 0
I guess in a way we do. If we like it, we watch it or listen to it and our demographics of "tuning" in are recorded. Not many TV shows keep hanging around once ratings prove they are not attracting an audience. So in summary if we all decide to log out of ASF and never to return will this website keep going? Probabaly not.
Mmmm interesting Trainspotter - I have noticed how shallow the news is these days. I mean, it seems that trivial stores are far more important than major events that impact the country.
Maybe as a nation, we are more concerned with trivia - I sometimes find TV news is like reading the Woman's Weekly (no offense girls). Issues such as Kevin Rudds hair dryer, the lady with the baby in parliament etc etc, it all seems pretty lame - and it looks like I may be in the minority.
So yep, unfortunately, I can see that ratings may have an impact on the news content.
Cheers
A couple of comments
Murdoch definately uses the media to purport his own view. For example I have not noticed any commentator in the News Ltd press being critical of the excess of executive pay. Rather the pay of top executives (such as Murdoch) are always defended.
The main problem with the media is that politicians don't control it directly but they influence it through giving of interviews. Twenty years ago the PM would have no choice but to talk to say Channel 9. Now with the internet there are so many outlets. Journalists are too scared to upset politicians and risk being out of the news loop next time. Just think of how many budget leaks the govt released before the budget
I want a government run newspaper. After all, the government wouldn't lie to us - they would let us know what's really going on.
Too true Taltan. Look at "utegate" for example. See other thread for clarity on this little gem. Howard was the first to go to "live" radio interviews, this way his message would not be polluted by the PRINT media. He specifically targeted a certain trance in the market place and it made them feel good because they could phone in and rant or praise. No grubby little journalist hack wringing all the venom and slant out of a keyboard and misconstruing the message or in some cases not at all. This was breakthrough stuff back then and it got the press core with their backs up.
(Was going to go on some horrible political rodomontade about why Rudd is refusing to do an interview with Alan Jones but chose not to)
Murdoch controls HIS section of media that as a global company has certainly got some clout in the market place. Some of it is negative to certain politicians and some is downright fluff and bellybutton lint.
Shame on you GG for calling ABC a "crowd of wankers" We all know ABC is a she ! Aunty ABC used to cost mea day to own !! Afterall, it's your ABC.
I do not like to descend to the gutteral, but girls do too mate. Men and women are poles apart.
Murdoch controls all media either directly or by the reaction of second rate commentators like Comrade O'Brien, Fran and the lady from the Age with the Rudd cheat sheet who stammers to Fran at 0754 each morning.
gg
Well I never? Which pole exactly are you referring to?
What about Media Watch (Monday 9.15pm) on the ABC? Bias, surely not ! To suggest Rupert is somehow in cahoots with Satan to give him world wide media domination (because this is what you would need for total domination) is truely an eye opener for me. It has been whispered that Rupert offered his first born son Lachlan as an offering but Beelzebub reckoned he had his hands full with James Packer now that he has sold his media empire and gone into gambling.
Even worse than the so-called "news" these days is what's happened to current affairs reporting. All we're left with there is what amounts to one long advertorial promoting the interests of their advertisers and no actual current affairs being reported.News these days IS "Womans Weakly" and NO that is not a typo. The garbage we are spoon fed on early morning breakfast shows right through to the 6 o'clock chow down is pitiful. Who cares if Bruno makes an appearance at some red carpet blancmange frock fest? Will I not be able to sleep at night knowing that Tom Cruise is staying at the Crown Casino in Melbourne?
Even worse than the so-called "news" these days is what's happened to current affairs reporting. All we're left with there is what amounts to one long advertorial promoting the interests of their advertisers and no actual current affairs being reported.
Heck, those under the age of about 25 probably don't even realise that current affairs has nothing to do with which shop has the cheapest groceries or who has the cheapest petrol. That's advertising, not current affairs.
Even worse than the so-called "news" these days is what's happened to current affairs reporting. All we're left with there is what amounts to one long advertorial promoting the interests of their advertisers and no actual current affairs being reported.
Heck, those under the age of about 25 probably don't even realise that current affairs has nothing to do with which shop has the cheapest groceries or who has the cheapest petrol. That's advertising, not current affairs.
Why do you watch this rubbish? If no one watched it, they'd stop producing it.I agree, every six months or so they wheel out a bank bashing story, or a dodgy pest control guy story, or the politicians perks story
The piece de resistance for me was the story on a retirement farm for donkeys on A Current Affair. No, Seriously.
They should change the name to A Current Cliche.
They are like a multiple car pile-up or train smash, you know its going to be bad, but you have to look anyway just to see how bad it is - or like Sea Patrol.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?