[IceBreaker]

CNN PRODUCERS TOLD ON-AIR GUESTS: GET ANGRY
Mon Sep 12 2005 12:42:11 ET

After weeks of intense Katrina coverage from the main press, LA TIMES guru and former CNN host Michael Kinsley divulges that CNN was coaching guests to artificially enhance emotions!

Kinsley writes:

"The TV news networks, which only a few months ago were piously suppressing emotional fireworks by their pundits, are now piously encouraging their news anchors to break out of the emotional straitjackets and express outrage. A Los Angeles Times colleague of mine, appearing on CNN last week to talk about Katrina, was told by a producer to 'get angry.'"





http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

[Y3a]

Typical for "Clown Network Nooze"

CNN - where entertainment is valued over the facts.

[saddino]

Yes, Kinsley's excellent editorial is certainly noteworthy for taking a rational, arguably cyncial look at the fallout of Katrina. As Drudge seems so focused on, yes, Kinsley's opinion is that the media is simply reactionary. But more importantly, so is everyone else: the public (hence the media's self-conscious mirroring of their anger), the politicians, the analysts. Everyone. We're all to blame because we fail to understand that foresight (e.g. stopping any possible disaster, tragedy, attack) is impossible and thus hindsight is used instead to "prove" incompetence, failure, blame, etc.

I think Kinsley is saying something very important here: that the instutions that we expect to "protect us from danger" are doomed to always be blamed when something goes wrong. But if you were to look at every potential danger, you would realize that it's not possible to stop every one. And thus, instead of understanding how impossible the task is (and trying to have sympathy for those in charge), we just point fingers (e.g. state/local vs. federal, federal vs. state/local) because that's the unfortunate reality of being human.

His point is extremely cycnical, but I think it has some merit. Definitely worth a read.

The entire text can be read here unti the Wash Post decides to bury it in their archives.

[alphasubzero949]

Originally Posted by Y3a

Typical for "Clown Network Nooze"

CNN - where entertainment is valued over the facts.

You could say the same for all of the other networks.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by saddino

Yes, Kinsley's excellent editorial is certainly noteworthy for taking a rational, arguably cyncial look at the fallout of Katrina. As Drudge seems so focused on, yes, Kinsley's opinion is that the media is simply reactionary. But more importantly, so is everyone else: the public (hence the media's self-conscious mirroring of their anger), the politicians, the analysts. Everyone. We're all to blame because we fail to understand that foresight (e.g. stopping any possible disaster, tragedy, attack) is impossible and thus hindsight is used instead to "prove" incompetence, failure, blame, etc.

I think Kinsley is saying something very important here: that the instutions that we expect to "protect us from danger" are doomed to always be blamed when something goes wrong. But if you were to look at every potential danger, you would realize that it's not possible to stop every one. And thus, instead of understanding how impossible the task is (and trying to have sympathy for those in charge), we just point fingers (e.g. state/local vs. federal, federal vs. state/local) because that's the unfortunate reality of being human.

His point is extremely cycnical, but I think it has some merit. Definitely worth a read.

The entire text can be read here unti the Wash Post decides to bury it in their archives.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=269346

FOR THE RECORD.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by mojo2

FOR THE RECORD.

Warning! Warning! Warning!

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Pendergast

Warning! Warning! Warning!

I couldn't have said it any better!

But HE can ---> http://www.barbneal.com/wav/uncat/robot01.wav

[spauldingg]

[QUOTE=IceBreaker]CNN PRODUCERS TOLD ON-AIR GUESTS: GET ANGRY
/QUOTE]

No big deal. It's just their version of perfectly fine Presidential Photo Ops.

[Troll]

IceBreaker reads Drudge!

[dreilly1]

Originally Posted by saddino

But if you were to look at every potential danger, you would realize that it's not possible to stop every one. And thus, instead of understanding how impossible the task is (and trying to have sympathy for those in charge), we just point fingers (e.g. state/local vs. federal, federal vs. state/local) because that's the unfortunate reality of being human.

If you think the task is impossible, then the... um... weather has already won!

Seriously, it's one thing to say that it's impossible to concieve and plan for every conceivable terrorist attack. But the weather is a different story. We can plan for the worst case weather scenario. We know how strong hurricanes are likely to get in the Gulf Coast region. And this storm, while large and perhaps stronger than all the storms in the past 50-100 years, was not so large as to be totally unexpected. We knew it was coming eventually.

Do you really think that the fact that the levees broke in NOLA should let emergency planners off the hook since they weren't expecting it, as everyone from the FEMA director to the President has suggested? Planning for the levees breaking seems like pretty basic emergency management to me.

[saddino]

Originally Posted by dreilly1

Do you really think that the fact that the levees broke in NOLA should let emergency planners off the hook since they weren't expecting it, as everyone from the FEMA director to the President has suggested? Planning for the levees breaking seems like pretty basic emergency management to me.

No I don't really think that at all. I never said I agreed with Kinsley's editorial. In fact, I think it's a bit too cynyical. His points are, however, interesting.

[IceBreaker]

Originally Posted by Troll

IceBreaker reads Drudge!

you don't?

You end up getting the news on Drudge before it is reported anywhere else.

Yes some of it is hollywood bull as it started out as a hollywood gossip site, but it is a must read for anyone who wants the scoop on whats going on as everyone leaks to him now before it goes mainstream.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by IceBreaker

you don't?

You end up getting the news on Drudge before it is reported anywhere else.

Yes some of it is hollywood bull as it started out as a hollywood gossip site, but it is a must read for anyone who wants the scoop on whats going on as everyone leaks to him now before it goes mainstream.

IceBreaker, I agree with you. Among the thousands of ways of categorizing the mix here, I believe these two may be among them...

There are some posters who bring new information, different points of view, a broader perspective and ahead of the curve news to the table...

And those that, for 'what-EVER' reason, don't.

Someone ragging on you for reading Drudge reminds me of someone who only eats at Mickey D's laughing at you for eating at a buffet.

IceBreaker, it is you who will have the last laugh.

Oops, I just noticed the remark came from troll. That means he would prefer everyone be less well informed than he.

[spauldingg]

[pre-emptive strike] I don't wanna hear no crap about my links now that I've discovered DailyKos, thanks, inadvertently, to Simey. [/pre-emptive strike]



Hey, props to a community site that a real live congressman not only posts diarys to, but responds to questions and comments.