• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

CNN is Ridiculous!

That is a dumb ass title.....

'Should CNN be rated R'
Those images and ones like them have been around since I was a kid.
You wouldn't remember the images from the Vietnam War, but what we
saw on the evening news back then is at least as graphic as those images
they warn us about now. The difference is they didn't feel obligated to warn you that pictures from a war zone might be graphic and or shocking.

Sadly, we knew they would be.....
 
I'm going to be harsh with my criticism, so please remember you asked...

"Now I can just turn on CNN and watch a young girl known as "Neda" being shot to death, or see a tattered corpse covered in blood sitting in the back of an automobile."

"Now I can just turn on CNN and watch a young girl named "Neda" being shot to death, or see a tattered corpse covered in blood sitting in the back of an automobile."

Which is better?


I too saw the footage yet *I* never saw Neda "being shot to death." I saw the aftermath of her being shot.

Words have meanings and it might be helpful if you proofread your writing a bit more closely.



"If I want unbiased coverage of world events, I would like to think the news media would be that medium. Sadly, that is not the case anymore, if it ever was." If it ever was??? Oh my God!! Do you know who Walter Cronkite is? (Is you don't, you'll likely be hearing a lot about him very soon, sad to say.) How about Chet Huntley or David Brinkley? Edward R. Murrow? You would never questioned the integrity of network news if you grew up watching those news anchors. I may be wrong, but it seems you don't have a strong working knowledge of the history of television news. Maybe a history lesson is in order before opining.
 
*Actually*, Andy, the footage clearly showed her walking around with her father before falling. While I didn't track the actual bullet, I did indeed watch her being shot to death. :)

And CNN themselves had only been calling her "Neda", and since I cannot verify that Neda is indeed her real name, I feel I was accurate in telling the reader that she is *known* as Neda. :)

Thanks for the read though, bud!
 
That is a dumb ass title.....

'Should CNN be rated R'
Those images and ones like them have been around since I was a kid.
You wouldn't remember the images from the Vietnam War, but what we
saw on the evening news back then is at least as graphic as those images
they warn us about now. The difference is they didn't feel obligated to warn you that pictures from a war zone might be graphic and or shocking.

Sadly, we knew they would be.....


And the listed body counts, like a baseball scoreboard.

"And that's the way it is."
 
CNN has fallen off the back for the last 15 years.

That Christy Amanpour needs to be shot too.
 
If you think CNN sucks, try Headline News (also a CNN network.)
They think that John and Kate is headline news worthy....

That is why I hate flying. They always have Headline News playing in the airports :/
 
Last edited:
The real story coming from Iran is how there leaders react to public protest.and how risking there lives the people of Iran continue to protest.we americans have the right to protest yet we rarely do. we sit and watch our politicians ship our work out of the country, watch oil companys charge whatever they like for oil on any given day, watch banks that the government knew would fail pave they way for them to do just that.the coverage is overkill, but it's a story that needs to be told.americans need to be out doing what the iranian people are doing.instead we all just sit and complain as this great country falls apart. rant over... my .02
 
Sorry to say, that article is way off base. If you want to criticize anyone for those graphic images on TV, criticize the american public. It is, afterall, the public that drives the media.

You want unbiased news coverage, then find a bunch of quality anchors that are willing to work for free.

Media is a capitalist engine just like any other major corporation. If CNN chose to be completely neutral, the right wing fascists and left wing socialists would have nothing to do with them....it would be either Fox or NPR which caters to their crowd and tells them exactly what they want to hear. Ultimately, CNN would be out of business and then where is the unbiased coverage.

People don't want news anymore. They want to feel special. They want to be entertained. They want to be taken care of. They want to believe that world peace, the elimination of climate change, and the end of world hunger can actually be achieved. People are idiots! The problem is, with the spread of democracy, the idiots now run the world. Pretty sad if you ask me.

But again, you're bitching at the wrong person. Trying to shoot the messenger doesn't do anything but stir the pot. You want the end of this crap, educate the world....of course, you'll have to do it without inconveniencing them or, again, they'll have nothing to do with you.
 
Sorry to say, that article is way off base. If you want to criticize anyone for those graphic images on TV, criticize the american public. It is, afterall, the public that drives the media.

You want unbiased news coverage, then find a bunch of quality anchors that are willing to work for free.

Media is a capitalist engine just like any other major corporation. If CNN chose to be completely neutral, the right wing fascists and left wing socialists would have nothing to do with them....it would be either Fox or NPR which caters to their crowd and tells them exactly what they want to hear. Ultimately, CNN would be out of business and then where is the unbiased coverage.

People don't want news anymore. They want to feel special. They want to be entertained. They want to be taken care of. They want to believe that world peace, the elimination of climate change, and the end of world hunger can actually be achieved. People are idiots! The problem is, with the spread of democracy, the idiots now run the world. Pretty sad if you ask me.

But again, you're bitching at the wrong person. Trying to shoot the messenger doesn't do anything but stir the pot. You want the end of this crap, educate the world....of course, you'll have to do it without inconveniencing them or, again, they'll have nothing to do with you.

LOLOL!! You are *so* right! Sad. Really sad. :)
 
sandiego xj said exactly what i was thinkin - BTW, they put those warnings up there as a teaser to get us blood-thirsty peeps to watch, kinda like why our freeways don't move when there's an accident - GOTTA see the blood
 
This is typical of the liberal method of presenting the "news". Everything is presented in a way that supports the liberal point of view or in a way so as to sensationalize it in hopes of attracting viewers. They seem to feel the more "train wrecks" they create the more doe eyed watchers they can attract.
 
It is, afterall, the public that drives the media.
I'm not sure I agree with this point. It seems to me that the media has the intent of influencing the public by appealing to their hunger for controversy and catastrophy and presenting these things in a way that bends them just a little more toward thier view. JMHO
 
I'm not sure I agree with this point. It seems to me that the media has the intent of influencing the public by appealing to their hunger for controversy and catastrophy and presenting these things in a way that bends them just a little more toward thier view. JMHO

Honestly, I don't see a difference. As you stated, they are "appealing to their hunger for controversy and catastrophy". If people didn't desire the controversy and catastrophy, news wouldn't show it. People do, so the news does.
 
Back
Top