|
|
|
Évaluation du client type
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients
|
|
|
› Voir les points de vue les plus utiles
|
|
The Decline of the Media, Avril 22 2002
Par Un client
Another book about how the quality of news is going down the tubes. Well-written and well researched, it blames the dumbing-down of news product on an ever-more-competitive scramble for high profits in the face of fragmenting readership.
Like other such books, it raises important questions that remain unanswered: Are people less interested in news because news is getting dumber... or is the news getting dumber because people have become less interested in news? Why don't news providers lose audience for dumbing down... and gain audience from raising the bar? Will we be empowered by new media and news-on-demand to demand (and get) good journalism, and avoid (and punish) bad journalism? Or will corporate consolidation continue to undermine standards for news in a race to the lowest common denominator? The authors detail the well-known condition of today's media. But what now?
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shows Both Sides of the Coin, Avril 18 2002
I pretty much assumed this book would do what many media-oriented books do: focus excessively on one side of the story. "The News About the News" doesn't do that, however. It gives an expert, reasonable assessment of the problems of today's media, including the negative effects of corporate ownership of news organizations and how such ownership weakens coverage.There's plenty of optimism, however. I was surprised to learn how profitable news CAN be while remaining informative and balanced. The authors also assess how technology has weakened news coverage but how it also holds the potential to make covering world events easier and better. The book also gives an engaging look at how a newspaper reporter identifies, researches, and puts together a story in a way that reads like a novel. Overall, it's informative, smoothly written, and thought-provoking.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Decline of Quality Journalism, Mars 8 2002
Leonard Downie and Robert Kaiser have written a book that describes what is wrong with American journalism. Those who have observed the media during the last 15 to 20 years have noted disturbing trends: 1. News that seems more like entertainment than real news; 2. A decline in the quality and quantity of real hard news stories in papers and t.v news.; 3. More stories about actors, sports figures, and celebrities; 4. News that seems more like a paid promotion by a corporation than news.The authors tell us why this has occurred. Essentially, many newspapers, t.v. stations, and radio stations have been taken over by huge corporations like Gannett or AOL-Time Warner. These corporations are fixed upon obtaining a certain bottomline profit margin from each station year by year. To this end, they have limited space for hard news stories, laid off thousands of reporters, increased entertainment type features, and do little investigative reporting (which is expensive). They have also raised advertising rates and in some situations, involved themselves with inappropriate relationships with businesses who advertise in their mediums. The authors point out through a number of examples, exactly why good journalism is important to a community. Solid news coverage on a state/national/international level has helped inform the American people of complex realities, enabling them to make sound decisions in the Representative Democracy in which we live. It has helped cracked scandals like Watergate wide open. It has helped states realize and rectify problems in their educational and social systems. It has explained much of the current problems with Muslims and Osama Bin Laden, so that we can understand what occurred on September 11, 2001 better. The authors are wrong about some things. I noted that both Downie and Kaiser started in journalism in the sixties, before the advent of the computer age. Perhaps, this is what makes them hostile to presentation of news stories with fancy computer graphics, maps, and other audio/visual effects. I don't see this as a problem. I think an authoritative news cast could make use of both good reporting and the technologies of the information age that allow us to make better presentations and allow for more effective communication with an audience. While I largely agree with the authors, I also note this problem. The term "news" and "newsworthy" is a very subjective term. Any two people may experience serious disagreement about what is a legitimate "news story" and what is not. For example, a president having sex with his intern may or not may not be a news story. Perhaps, the line is when you can show that his doing so is somehow interfering with his official duties. By arguing that the media needs to do a better job reporting news, and complaining about particular types of reporting,the authors in essence conclude that some matters are not "newsworthy". The authors opinion on this maybe no better or worse than our own. What I found most discouraging about the book is that the solutions are going to be very difficult. Things have reached the point they have because of demands for profitability by huge multi-national corporations. Its a very involved process and will be difficult to rectify. In the end, the authors simply make the point that if the American public wants good journalism it has the power to demand it, by refusing to watch or read poor journalism. That action will send the greatest message of all to those who are in charge.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting but not especially surprising, Mars 1 2002
Downie and Kaiser's book is an excellently written and entertaining look at how the print and electronic news media operate today. The trouble is that the thesis is old news, even if the examples with which the authors illustrate it aren't. The general message the authors want to get across is, alas, all too well known: too few mega-bucked families own too many newspapers and TV stations, marketing is increasingly the tail that wags the news and editorial dog, politicians manipulatively lie to reporters whom they've cultivated, advertizers buy "info-mercials" that the media masquerade as documentaries. This is stuff that's common lore. Where Downie and Kaiser shine is in illustrating these points with behind-the-scenes anecdotes pulled from their joint years at the "Washington Post." Especially interesting is their discussion of the "Post's" greatest investigative reporting victory, the series on cops who killed civilians in Washington DC., and the "Post's" dropping of the ball on Irangate. There's a certain degree of self-congratulation in the book--the two authors clearly think that the "Washington Post" is unrivaled in the editorial integrity department--but it's difficult to deny that a good case can be made for the kudos they give their paper. A bit more reflection on how media became the mess it is today, as well as how to fix it, would've strengthened the book. Still, one does get the gratifying sense that Downie and Kaiser are two old-school journalists who can be trusted. Unhappily, one also gets the sense that they're members of a dying breed.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mas o Menos, More or Less the truth here too!, Fév 22 2002
I am going to keep this as fundamental as humanly possible. If you have never had any direct involvement with the American Press this book could surprise you. If you have been involved, even had a press person interview you and later heard this persons report in the media, then you could grasp what this is all about. I am not so surprised this book is selling, since in this time of terrorism people are demanding accurate news from various sources including the internet. When you read this you will be enlightened in a "new" way to NOT take to much of what you hear as being credible, leaving you with the sentiment of certain uncertainty. The truth is you will be aware that the only thing you can be sure of is past events that have been widely proven. There are a surprising amount of different subjects explored and researched, each properly and without opinion, exploited. What is incredible about the American News machine is that it has so many holes for the world to see, that is brought to serious light in this write. I wasn't very surprised or newly informed, just reconfirmed my belief. This is a super book for so many who have not the knowledge and workings of the system in question. A good book that exploits the reasons for press deviation is Karl Mark Maddox.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ce produit
|
|
CDN$ 16.95 CDN$ 12.37
Habituellement expédié sous 3 à 5 semaines
| |
|
|
|
Accueil Amazon
