By: Giselle Rodriguez / Staff Writer
Our national media outlets have lost their collective minds. One only has to look at the travesty that is CNN’s 24 hour news coverage to see what I mean.
Last week, I tuned in to the illustrious news mogul and watched, shocked, as the reporter directed the viewer’s attention to one of the computer screens in the news room, whereupon the camera zoomed in to the computer screen so those of us at home could watch a YouTube video.
It seems there is just not 24 hours’ worth of news. Cutting these stations down to a few hours a day would force companies like CNN to report on things that are important instead of filling air-time with drivel.
Unfortunately, when there is a global event occurring which deserves up-to-the-minute news coverage, I have repeatedly found I cannot trust my own country’s news outlets. Too often in lieu of stories that educate me as to the state of the world or even my own city, I am forced to sit through the results of the latest reality show or “World’s Ugliest Dog Competition”.
If a station is going to show news 24 hours a day, I understand that some of it has to be inane, but when important things are happening, I expect 24 hours’ worth of news on that. Instead, I am often forced to head over to BBC World News for my information.
One of the major selling points of this new generation of communication is its quickness. Social media and worldwide Internet access have allowed us to connect globally as well as locally.
I can chat in real time with someone half a world away without racking up massive phone charges. This ease of access to the world has fundamentally changed the way we as humans communicate, but it has also changed our expectations of the media.
Because of these changes, we now expect up-to-the-minute updates on things that might have a global impact. With how invested we as a country are in the Middle East, economically if nothing else, I was inordinately upset that I had to turn to the British in order to receive news on the ongoing political turmoil.
When the revolution began occurring in Libya, CNN, arguably one of the biggest sources for televised news in the country, was barely reporting on it. A search of the articles published to CNN.com on Feb. 16, one of the first days of the Libyan Revolution, reveals that there were three articles on the uprising. Even CNN’s “breaking news” Twitter feed was unhelpful, posting links to a whopping two articles on the ongoing uprising over the course of the day.
CNN picked up the slack in the following days, but I cannot forget that first day as I frantically scrolled through Twitter feeds and the official sites looking for any news and coming up empty.
I know that it might seem a little over the top to expect up to the minute news coverage half a world away, but the fact remains that we have the technology. We can expect it because it is completely possible.
As Charlie Sheen had his meltdown, there was a constant stream of information coming down the pipelines. It is not too much to ask that things which deserve national attention come at the instant pace I know these services can deliver.
If I want to watch YouTube videos, I have an Internet connection of my own, thank you very much CNN.
About Post Author
