Geek Chic
So I go to CBSNews.com and I click on Science and Technology to see what is going on in such areas. The first thing I see is Geek Chic, a segment that was on The Early Show discussing technology in today's fashion. First of all this is not news. I'm sorry but fashion does not count as news worthy material and should especially not be the top article for the science and technology section, which is supposed to tell us the cutting edge of human discovery. We should be hearing about new advances in medicine or the next space shuttle launch not what to wear if you are a nerd.
After I watched this program it turned out that there were only 3 unique technologies (if that's what they can be called) being shown. The first was an integrated button system to control an ipod. This was shown on the first two models. The third had on a jacket with many pockets to hold all their portable technology and he had on military tactical pants where the "geek friendly technology" was once again a plethora of pockets. His shoes had a device that talked to his ipod and recorded his running stats. The final model had on a holster for all of his technologies which goes back to the "need" for pockets. None of this was crucial information for me to know.
The thing that should be known about these models is that none of them were by any stretch of the imagination attractive people. The were less than average Joes. This automatically sends out the message "if you want to be trendy don't buy these items." These items are not fashionable and CBS wanted you to know it. The probably were sponsored by these companies to show their products and they figured they would kill a few birds with one stone. The final model even has his pants high, his socks over his pants and tape on his glasses. These people knew what they were doing, deliberately telling the majority of the public not to buy these items but they still wanted the advertising dollars. This segment was five minutes out of a program that should be much more informative than this.
Smith talks about this problem in his chapter on the business of journalism. He points out a few cases where profitable influences played a part in the determination of what is news. Here, CBS wanted to make money so they showed a bunch of products that they really didn't care about in a way that showed their feelings but still would get them paid. Smith states on page 317 that "in a democracy, citizens must know what's going." and it is the news media's job to let them know. CBS is not doing this when showing such segments.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Monday, February 2, 2009
response to "Canadian Immigration Laws Allow Convicted Terrorist and Killer to Make Home in Ontario"
Canadian Immigration Laws Allow Convicted Terrorist and Killer to Make Home in Ontario
This article is about a man who was a convicted terrorist by the Greek government in 1968 who was released as part of an airplane hijacking deal in 1970. He now lives in Canada to get away from his past. What first led me to this article was the fact that it was put under Fox News's "America's Future" section. This man poses no threat to To the US. He has done nothing since his attack on a airplane in 1968 and is now 65 with a cane in one of the pictures that Fox has put up. Another problem with this article is that it was made to seem like this was a recent event. The date on the article is August of 2008 which is old news but it still appeared on the main page of the "America's Future Section." The last problem that I have with this article is that the quotes do not seem to be complete. I feel that there is more to the dialogue which went on between this "terrorist" and Fox News. The accountability factor is jeopardized with no access to the conversation that occurred. Smith talks about a similar situation where a newspaper grants readers access to all of a cases resources to prove its credibility in a high profile case (pages 81-82). I feel that all news outlets to allow people to their sources. This is the most raw form of news and it allows people to make their own opinions free from influence. The editor of the newspaper in this case said "Again and again readers told us how much they appreciated seeing the background material." (page 82). This should not be a one time thing.
This article is about a man who was a convicted terrorist by the Greek government in 1968 who was released as part of an airplane hijacking deal in 1970. He now lives in Canada to get away from his past. What first led me to this article was the fact that it was put under Fox News's "America's Future" section. This man poses no threat to To the US. He has done nothing since his attack on a airplane in 1968 and is now 65 with a cane in one of the pictures that Fox has put up. Another problem with this article is that it was made to seem like this was a recent event. The date on the article is August of 2008 which is old news but it still appeared on the main page of the "America's Future Section." The last problem that I have with this article is that the quotes do not seem to be complete. I feel that there is more to the dialogue which went on between this "terrorist" and Fox News. The accountability factor is jeopardized with no access to the conversation that occurred. Smith talks about a similar situation where a newspaper grants readers access to all of a cases resources to prove its credibility in a high profile case (pages 81-82). I feel that all news outlets to allow people to their sources. This is the most raw form of news and it allows people to make their own opinions free from influence. The editor of the newspaper in this case said "Again and again readers told us how much they appreciated seeing the background material." (page 82). This should not be a one time thing.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
