Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

David Byrne: No More News

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 07:57 PM
Original message
David Byrne: No More News
Anyway, it will be strange if the USA becomes a large industrialized country with only one or two newspapers — the NY Times and The Wall Street Journal — practicing in-depth coverage; the latter, now owned by Murdoch, may find itself eviscerated, assuming its fate follows those of his other newspaper purchases around the world. There is no way the Times can afford all the foreign desks, local reporters and journalists that a country of this size requires.

What will happen when most of the country has nothing but entertainment, gossip and sports as sources of information? It’s a country ripe for takeover, if you ask me. A place where public opinion can be easily manipulated, as long as the consumers keep buying. Blogs and Internet news sites can’t fill the gap, as they don’t have the resources to sustain a team of reporters working and digging into a story — sometimes for months before anything sees the light of day. They don’t have African or Southeast Asian bureaus either. Besides, most Internet news sites like Google News are aggregates of traditional print and wire service news gatherers. Without sources they’d be pretty much nothing. Local sites like Gothamist and national ones like The Smoking Gun are cool and up-to-the-minute, but they don’t assign staff to conduct long-term investigations into the how and why of a scandal or news item. They break stuff, it’s true, but mostly they rely on others to feed them information.

I have plenty of beefs with the arts and culture coverage of many newspapers; I can easily spot the biases and lack of research. I’m of that world, so I have my own personal biases as well — which sometimes match those of the critics, and sometimes don’t. I myself have gone in and out of favor a few times, so I regard their reviews and reporting with what I feel is healthy skepticism. News, though, is another story. I imagine that cops, thugs, hedge fund dudes, politicians and bureaucrats all have their own beefs with the press, but from my point of view, I’d much prefer some seriously researched coverage in those areas — with a little bias — to nothing of any depth.

I’ve been trying to imagine what this country would be like without a serious news source. Like Cuba with only Granma, the organ of the party — that and bootleg satellite TV broadcasts of American Idol. Or Russia, pre-Gorbachev, when the choice was between Pravda and some samizdat mimeographed publications. Iran under the Ayatollah or the Shah. The Philippines under martial law — when all press critical of the Marcos regime was silenced.

We tend to get all holier-than-thou when we look at countries without free press. We think their lives must somehow be more pathetic or sad. Needless to say, this attitude makes us feel better. But people go on. They know, or at least suspect, that they are being denied something, but they maintain hope and optimism. They don’t go around moping. They get on with their lives, and sometimes, at least now and then, feel like maybe the censorship doesn’t matter all that much. There are still reasons to be cheerful. We might like to think of life in an oppressive regime as sheer misery, but from what I can tell, it’s rarely viewed that way. Life goes on and people make do with what they have, and they fall in love and get drunk and sing and dance. It takes a lot — a whole lot — to bring them to the flash point, like what just happened in Greece. Mostly, people adapt to the way things are — and to feel miserable about it is fruitless. And that’s what we will do when there are only two serious newspapers left in the USA.

http://journal.davidbyrne.com/2008/12/121808-no-more-news.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sad..I'm reading a book ..
called "The Art of Political Murder" about the murder of a bishop in Guatemala, and the political reality is so familiar, without the recent past bloodshed. Something about the way it was written, really got me. Very much like this piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. The problem is, I don't see a solution. Not even a theoretical one.
What is the value of a good, investigative story? The value is infinite in one sense--only an informed public can be entrusted with a democracy-but in another sense, the story is only worth what someone will pay for it. Traditionally, good investigative stories sold newspapers, and the profits financed the pursuing of more good stories. But these days, with the race to the bottom that we have seen, why should anyone go to the bother of developing an Abu Ghraib story, or a Duke Cunningham story? There has to be money in doing it or it ain't gonna happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Dan Rather and Mary Mapes spent a great deal of time developping
Abu Gharib, in fact their program on "Sixty Minutes II" was the first place to expose the situation at Abu Gharib.

Sadly, those two were fired when their George W Bush goes AWOL story made Les Moonves nervous and he had Mapes fired and Rather retired.

If it is any consolation though, the news duo won a Peabody for the Abu Gharib story in Spring of 2005.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Media consolidation is what Byrne and others see as the problem
Edited on Thu Jan-01-09 08:45 PM by Ichingcarpenter
Don't know what the solution is but it really is getting to be
a one news source state.

edited spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
navarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. You mean 'consolidation', of course, and
I couldn't agree more. Once the newspapers are gone, and they ARE going, all we have is this here internet.

What's to keep them from taking this away? What do we do then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Mot stories
seemed to be paid by the top. When popular ratings or interest spur truth or investigation as opposed to what corporations want to buy you have a conflict but an uneven one. The corporate news might concede something to the public interest or the common good- but never much until the corporations lose the power of their top down money. In that balance, the competition itself is not healthy and is inhgerently against an informed public interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. I prefer honest gov't to dishonest, self-censored reporting
I could live without the "Grey Lady" and the WSJ, provided I could trust the Gov't to usually do the right thing and tell the truth more often than not.

Gov't sources are nearly always where real news and power originates, anyway. If the Obama Administration is half as transparent as I think, we'll end up with five times as much real information as we got from its predecessors and the MSM.

Granma would be great if its editors didn't believe their own propaganda so much. They really need to get out and see the world more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi-Town voter Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. DB
I love Talking Heads, but is it just me, or is this commentary kind of incoherent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. well his lyrics are kind of incoherent, why should we expect anything different?
i love talking heads also :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Depends on your comprehension skills.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. Did you read the original, or just the excerpt in the OP?
The OP is just a few paragraphs from the middle of what Byrne wrote: http://journal.davidbyrne.com/2008/12/121808-no-more-news.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronopio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. It's one of the most coherent things he's written.
Edited on Fri Jan-02-09 11:46 AM by OmelasExpat
Especially the part about living in an oppressive regime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. while it may not be much, we can give them our pageviews....
I read the news articles I am interested in and that I want to reward the paper for covering on the originating newspapers own web site.

DU offers 4 paragraphs but I still make a conscious effort to click through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 03:15 AM
Response to Original message
11. For years we've been watching our newspapers turn into corporate mouthpieces.
The only viable REAL news is now found in independent papers or on the internet or Pacifica-style radio/TV which is scarce.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
12. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
15. David is always interesting
and I really respect his work. I saw the filming of Stop Making Sense and it was one of the art/stage highlights of a lifetime of such events. He was amazing, as was every person on the stage and all of the genius techs who made it happen. Bliss. Empty to full. The world created, the house burned down.
And he's right about this too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC