It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Journalist Questions answered at last!

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 16 2003 @ 10:02 PM
This is an older topic I had on the war on terror board, but I thought it would be better here.

I decided to set up this topic to answer a few questions about embedded journalists. I'm not a journalist, but my father is, and he is a television correspondent who specializes in conflicts and terrorism.(When we talk its almost always about the latest conlict) Hes had about twenty years of experience in this kind of thing, and I've had to go through quite a few occasions where he was gone for a while due to a story.

Ask questions, not just about embedded journalists, but about journalism in general. I've met quite a few anchors, journalist, etc over the years and have picked up quite a bit on the way. I'll do my best to be unbiased, I'll save that for the mudpit. But seriously, this is an area where I do have a unique perspective, and I'd liek to share that.

[Edited on 11-16-2003 by Dreamstone]

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:36 AM
Didn't Ben Franklin or one of them yankee free thinking types say that a country's freedom depended on the newspapers being free? It's been said that much of today's media is sensationalist, shallow and profit driven. Do you agree or do you have a different position?

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 09:31 PM
Your first statement is correct, i think...

It depends on your source. What many people think of as news today is either a talkshow on tv, or a sensationalit reporter like Geraldo. While both are news, they aren't true journalism.

Most journalists today are young bucks, straight out of college who want to make a difference by reporting whats really going on. Unfortunately, they also have to make a living, and the only way the can make that paycheck is if they give in a little to the network's demands. Thats how it starts. Pretty soon the network is writing your stories for you, and all you do is put your name at the top.

Sad to say that your statement is fairly accurate. A large part of television coverage is prostituted sensationalist crap, just turn on your local nightly news and see.

But many older reporters, and some new reporters are able to find gold in the #. And you have to find that same gold in the #. All it takes is awareness, at ATS, I'd hope we knew when we were being led on. Don't let glitz and glamour fool you, real journalism is rarely a 36-24-36

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 09:55 PM
Editors are hand picked with a certain point of view.

This is not necessarily a bad thing due to market segments in the world of media.

The problem lies where one group of people monopolize the media and there is a single overriding political viewpoint that is expressed at every level of the media world.

This is the real problem, which many here would blame on the right wing but I am fully of the belief that in fact the left own the media overall.

In my country the media is primarily owned by liberal supporters for example and these people identify with a certain religion, nuff said lest I be called anti-something or other.

In the rest of the developed world we increasingly see large corporations owning the media which means that the elite globalists are thus able to control all media output. The corporations are desparate to please the globalists so that they can be assured various market access and unhindered operations around the globe.

new topics

top topics

log in