Anyone know why MSNBC thinks we want to hear what is being said

[RB TexLa]

in their control room? It's almost as stupid as the reporters telling us their names, I don't even care that they have names, much less what they are.

[Cooley Hurd]

1. "Um, Chris, we're waiting for the news conf... er, okay who farted?"

"Crap! That went out over the air??":rofl:

[FearofFutility]

2. It's very strange

Seems like they're going for the "mission control" feel.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. All the news is like that nowadays.

If some big news story breaks in Timbuktu they cover the actual incident for thirty seconds and then to a five hour expose on how the news covered the news in Timbuktu.

[jobycom]

4. Always good to understand the process, so you can better understand

the bias. There is always a bias, both personal, and procedural (such as the bias that occurs when only 10 second sound bites are used to capture the essence of a speech or debate).

I want to know names, faces, backgrounds, donation histories, club memberships, voting records, past lovers, and every other damn connection. Rather than knowing what Mell Gibson says when he's drunk, I'd rather know what each and every talking head talks about when they are off camera. And I want everyone else in the country to know, too, so people stop thinking of the "News" as something fact based and objective. These are entertainers, and people need to see the direction and production that shapes their views of the world.