NationStates Jolt Archive

Another thread on the Daily Mail and its inciteful articles led me to make the following:

There was a recent comment I heard that the news media promotes a view of a nastier, more violent world than really exists.

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.

The UN even has a report out that world conflict has subsided over 40 percent compared to a decade ago - but we only see the Iraq stuff and terror bombings in London and Israel on TV here.

Adding a few stories about idiotic and isolated incidents of political correctness only fuels the anger of the reader or viewer, and increases sales.

Bad news sells. Not one news organization is in the business of showing us the world as it really is. Even so-called unbiased organizations like the BBC and NPR show us a world of corruption, conflict, mismanagement, and death.

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?
I'm told there was a good-news-only news station in America, but it went bankrupt. The tale may be apocryphal, though. Who wants to listen to good news anyway? Bad news is so much more exciting. Would you rather watch pictures of fluffy bunnies, or of a country tearing itself apart?

\
Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?
Where did you hear that news, Psychic Friends?

And what do you want from the news, to paraphrase Jon Stewart-how do you do a story about a building not blowing up?

It is hard to do a story on something not happening.

Bad news sells.
That sound you hear is the nail wincing from being hit on the head. On the front page of yesterday's KC Star, the headline read "GRIM REMINDER AMID IRAQ PROGRESS" or something like that. Even when forced to admit that things aren't all bad, they need to put as negative a spin as possible to grab attention and sell papers. They save the stories of puppies being let out of trees or whatever for section B, when you've choked on just about all the crap they can shove down your throat and need a lift. It must be working; they still sell subscriptions, anyway.

Another thread on the Daily Mail and its inciteful articles led me to make the following:

There was a recent comment I heard that the news media promotes a view of a nastier, more violent world than really exists.

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.

The UN even has a report out that world conflict has subsided over 40 percent compared to a decade ago - but we only see the Iraq stuff and terror bombings in London and Israel on TV here.

Adding a few stories about idiotic and isolated incidents of political correctness only fuels the anger of the reader or viewer, and increases sales.

Bad news sells. Not one news organization is in the business of showing us the world as it really is. Even so-called unbiased organizations like the BBC and NPR show us a world of corruption, conflict, mismanagement, and death.

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?


Very true. I studied the sociology of media at A level and just as we were discussing the topic of how it portrays crime and deviance, there was a big media hype about how violent crime has apparently slightly risen since last year.

When you dug deeper into the info, it turned out that it was only official police statistics that recorded this, which could just mean more violent crime was being reported, and victim surveys showed a decrease in violent crime. In fact, all other kinds of crime rates as a whole had fallen a great deal in both police statistics and victim surveys. However, all the news reported was the rise in violent crime and how it showed that Blair was doing a bad job.

As a side note - this is what Micheal Moore blames the amount of shootings in the US for in Bowling for Columbine. A lot of people assumes it is a film against gun control, but he points out that Canada has loads of guns and yet very very few shootings. He claims the media only reports on the bad, which leads to people feeling afraid and like they need a gun for protection.

Where did you hear that news, Psychic Friends?

And what do you want from the news, to paraphrase Jon Stewart-how do you do a story about a building not blowing up?

It is hard to do a story on something not happening.

It is happenning:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/firearmnonfataltab.htm

I view the MSM news as more of an alert system than anything else. I don't really need Tom Brokaw or whoever to putz around saying, "10 o'clock, and all's well!" I'd rather have them focus on warning me about hurricanes and killer bees and such. If I want "cheerful news," I go to other sources.

It is happenning:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/firearmnonfataltab.htm
Not what I meant.

Another thread on the Daily Mail and its inciteful articles led me to make the following:

There was a recent comment I heard that the news media promotes a view of a nastier, more violent world than really exists.

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.

The UN even has a report out that world conflict has subsided over 40 percent compared to a decade ago - but we only see the Iraq stuff and terror bombings in London and Israel on TV here.

Adding a few stories about idiotic and isolated incidents of political correctness only fuels the anger of the reader or viewer, and increases sales.

Bad news sells. Not one news organization is in the business of showing us the world as it really is. Even so-called unbiased organizations like the BBC and NPR show us a world of corruption, conflict, mismanagement, and death.

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?
If the American media is anything like the papers over here, then I'd imagine a bulk of it is owned by right wing nutcases who feel it's role is to disseminate scare stories about social groups they don't like in order to encourage its readers to vote for authoritarian control freaks. (Clear Channel and Fox seem to be, but I've not read any of the American newspapers.)
To balance that, it's probably worth pointing out that while world isn't necessarily any more corrupt as a whole than it was fifty years ago, information about corruption is disseminated a lot more widely now. That may or may not be a bad thing: it depends on your own viewpoint, really. It is unfortunate that the more widespread the media seems to become, the more dumbed down it gets. Frankly, I'd like to see a lot more in the papers about mismanagement, corruption and death, and less about Kate Moss's coke habit and whatever the wankers off the last Big Brother are doing at present. One has an impact on people's lives, while the other is a pointless distraction.

For cheerful news, I... wait, never mind.

If I want to hear news that's high-quality, which isn't doom & gloom or overly fluffy and candied, I might turn to WNYC. They have their biases and their own version of "fair and balanced", yes, it is true.

If I want to read the news and be amused by it, or at least by the writing, I pick up the Economist. Excellent quality, and the writers are also golden. They can make you laugh out loud reading an article about the position of Federal Reserve Chairman.

Not what I meant.

The violence in the US is obviously going down, by a wide variety of measures, in a number of prominent long term studies.

So it's going down. In a very large way.

So why does the media not report this? Why do they make the US look like a combat zone on the evening news?

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.65 percent? Where the hell did you get that statistic, you tryin to tell me violent crimes are down by more than half since 1995. I don't think so! There has been a decline but I think you missed a decimal point in there somewhere.

The UN even has a report out that world conflict has subsided over 40 percent compared to a decade ago - but we only see the Iraq stuff and terror bombings in London and Israel on TV here.Have you stopped to consider just what was happening a decade ago? With the genocide in West Africa and unrest in the former Soviet bloc nations it was a particularly bloody time, a 40% drop from that still means a lot of blood is being spilled. Mainstream media cover only a fraction of what's going on, the stuff that effects us in the west. Much more isn't even given coverage, like the genocide in Sudan, because most of the 'western' populace frankly don't care.

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?You dismissed NPR and BBC. You don't want the truth, you say it flatly, you want good news. I suggest you put on a pair of rose colored glasses and tune into Sesame Street. We'll try not to disturb you with reality.

The violence in the US is obviously going down, by a wide variety of measures, in a number of prominent long term studies.

So it's going down. In a very large way.

So why does the media not report this? Why do they make the US look like a combat zone on the evening news?
Ugh. I give, dude. We're not having the same conversation.

65 percent? Where the hell did you get that statistic, you tryin to tell me violent crimes are down by more than half since 1995. I don't think so! There has been a decline but I think you missed a decimal point in there somewhere.

The Department of Justice Crime Statistics. Other studies confirm this. And I didn't miss a decimal point.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htm


Have you stopped to consider just what was happening a decade ago? With the genocide in West Africa and unrest in the former Soviet bloc nations it was a particularly bloody time, a 40% drop from that still means a lot of blood is being spilled. Mainstream media cover only a fraction of what's going on, the stuff that effects us in the west. Much more isn't even given coverage, like the genocide in Sudan, because most of the 'western' populace frankly don't care.

You dismissed NPR and BBC. You don't want the truth, you say it flatly, you want good news. I suggest you put on a pair of rose colored glasses and tune into Sesame Street. We'll try not to disturb you with reality.
Obviously, you don't want the truth - you dismiss all the studies that show the decline in violence because you want to believe the world is a bad, nasty place full of psychopaths.

Not what I meant.
Then what did you mean? Obviously something that isn't related to the topic.

Then what did you mean? Obviously something that isn't related to the topic.
Wow. Just...wow...

Wow. Just...wow...
It is hard to do a story on something not happening.

And I showed you that it IS happenning, and then you said never mind.

It most certainly is happenning. Or are you going to argue against studies and statistics with "wow"?

Go back to your bong.

Obviously, you don't want the truth - you dismiss all the studies that show the decline in violence because you want to believe the world is a bad, nasty place full of psychopaths.
I think The Lost Planet isn't trying to say the world is a bad nasty place full of psychopaths, but that there are still violent psychopaths and ideologues out there, where he saw (incorrectly, perhaps) that your position was that the world is a peaceful place.

By and large, individuals aren't fighting in wars or being victimised by them, that's true. If that was your argument, you are correct. I think The Lost Planet was (understandably) overreacting to what he saw as underestimating the conflict in the world.

Every death by violence is a tragedy, and while we are pleased that the rate decreases, let's not forget that the numbers are still there. It doesn't hurt to strive yet more, and yet more, to reduce the casualties further.

I think The Lost Planet isn't trying to say the world is a bad nasty place full of psychopaths, but that there are still violent psychopaths and ideologues out there, where he saw (incorrectly, perhaps) that your position was that the world is a peaceful place.

By and large, individuals aren't fighting in wars or being victimised by them, that's true. If that was your argument, you are correct. I think The Lost Planet was (understandably) overreacting to what he saw as underestimating the conflict in the world.

Every death by violence is a tragedy, and while we are pleased that the rate decreases, let's not forget that the numbers are still there. It doesn't hurt to strive yet more, and yet more, to reduce the casualties further.

No, I'm not saying the world is a peaceful place.

But it is far, far better than it was 10 years ago. There is plenty of evidence in the US of this, and the level of world conflict measured by the UN study is also dramatically lower.

He, and it looks like most other posters, want to deny this - they want to believe that the violence is WORSE.

It obviously is not.

And I showed you that it IS happenning, and then you said never mind.

It most certainly is happenning. Or are you going to argue against studies and statistics with "wow"?

Go back to your bong.
Alright, I'll draw it with a crayon for you.

You asked why they only report bad things happening.

I said it's hard to do a story on a building not blowing up, then followed it with 'It's hard to do a story about something not happening." As in a building not blowing up. Get it? Have I slowed it down enough for you? Do we need to get a graph? A flow chart? Your reading comprehension teacher? Maybe you need a bong rip...you might fuckin' relax.

The Department of Justice Crime Statistics. Other studies confirm this. And I didn't miss a decimal point.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htmNice spin sheet. "total victimizations per 1000 population". Too bad the statistics on actual number of crimes commited doesn't paint as rosey a picture. The drop in number of violent crimes commited has been in the single digit percentages. Yeah it's progress, with the population growing crime is dropping, but not to the extreme you'd like us to believe.





Obviously, you don't want the truth - you dismiss all the studies that show the decline in violence because you want to believe the world is a bad, nasty place full of psychopaths.I'm actually a pretty optomistic fellow, but I'm also no fool and very aware of my surroundings. I have hope for the world, but skipping through it thinking all is rosey is a sure way to become a victim. I've been around the block a time or two, even slunk through some of the alleys, I know what's out there. Hold your hope for the world, but hold your purse tighter when you walk through my neighborhood.

I heard on the CBC that there was a town in the States that paid their local newspaper to print only good news. One imagines that might be a tilt too far in the other direction.

I think we all realize that bad news is exciting. It sells. Good news, not so much. When was the last time you saw a network raise its share of viewers by doing 24 hour coverage of a sun-shiny church picnic where the Johnson twins won the three-legged race? No one would tune in to watch that. But we will watch horrifying hurricane coverage for weeks. Sex, scandal, and violence sells.

Also, the press is lazy. When police department budgets are up for review, they issue press releases talking about how much they need more money to fight crime. They won't admit that crime has dropped over the last decade or more - they want to keep their budgets up. And the press just prints the release (more or less).

Politicians don't get elected by appearing soft on crime. But to be tough on crime, you have to make sure people are aware that there is crime. So they do lots of speeches and sound bites about how dangerous it is out there.

And hey, the US still merits a mention in Robert Young Pelton's "Dangerous Places" (although it has the lowest possible rank on the list), which means plenty of people believe that the US is more dangerous than it should be.

Alright, I'll draw it with a crayon for you.

You asked why they only report bad things happening.

I said it's hard to do a story on a building not blowing up, then followed it with 'It's hard to do a story about something not happening." As in a building not blowing up. Get it? Have I slowed it down enough for you? Do we need to get a graph? A flow chart? Your reading comprehension teacher? Maybe you need a bong rip...you might fuckin' relax.

The decline IS happenning. So why don't they do a story on that?

You haven't answered the question at all.

Nice spin sheet. "total victimizations per 1000 population". Too bad the statistics on actual number of crimes commited doesn't paint as rosey a picture. The drop in number of violent crimes commited has been in the single digit percentages. Yeah it's progress, with the population growing crime is dropping, but not to the extreme you'd like us to believe.

An outright lie of yours. Show me a link where it's in the single digit percentages.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/wuvc01.txt

And I quote from the above link:

""From 1993 to 2001 the rate of firearm violence fell 63%

The decline IS happenning. So why don't they do a story on that?

You haven't answered the question at all.
Wow...

I get a feeling that a good night's sleep and maybe a hit or two off some bong might make this discussion a lot more civil. There's no need for it to be so full of acrimony and anger. It started out, at least, as a simple discussion of an observed phenomenon.

Why have such emotional investment into crime statistics? I just don't get it.

An outright lie of yours. Show me a link where it's in the single digit percentages.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/wuvc01.txt

And I quote from the above link:

""From 1993 to 2001 the rate of firearm violence fell 63%Sorry I don't have time to do your research for you Skippy, I've got an appointment in less than an hour so this is my last post. Just look for stats on the actual number of crimes commited, not ones adjusted for population and with terms like "rate" in them. Just pull up the numbers of actual crimes... you'll see what I mean.

But keep the faith, it is getting better....

slighty.

Sorry I don't have time to do your research for you Skippy, I've got an appointment in less than an hour so this is my last post. Just look for stats on the actual number of crimes commited, not ones adjusted for population and with terms like "rate" in them. Just pull up the numbers of actual crimes... you'll see what I mean.

But keep the faith, it is getting better....

slighty.

Oh, it is getting better - as long as you're not poor, black, and living in an urban area. 200 percent better. Which no matter how you slice the numbers, is substantial improvement.

Sorry I don't have time to do your research for you Skippy, I've got an appointment in less than an hour so this is my last post. Just look for stats on the actual number of crimes commited, not ones adjusted for population and with terms like "rate" in them. Just pull up the numbers of actual crimes... you'll see what I mean.

But keep the faith, it is getting better....

slighty.

Ignore it if you will.

FBI: from 1991-2004 a 61% drop in violent crime rate w/ about 30% drop in total committed.

Still in the double digits. Try again.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/offense_tabulations/table_01-01a.html

I have grown weary of the MSM, a constant barrage of profit-seeking negativity disguised as reporting.

Sure, nobody is interested in a report that a bus came in on time. Maybe good news doesn't sell.

But why not have a little more in-depth and balanced discussion of current events? This shrill, breathless 'breaking news' attitude and 10-second sound bites eventually warps society's collective mind. They could do so much better.

One theory is that the MSM have found a formula for generating profit, and that's why they feed us the crap as they do. Scandals and violence as far as the eye can see.

If it's only about profit, then let's organize a boycott. Turn off CNN by the millions on a certain date. Sponsors don't like that. Maybe we can demand the kind of reporting we want.

It's a lot easier to make bad news uninformative.

Another thread on the Daily Mail and its inciteful articles led me to make the following:

There was a recent comment I heard that the news media promotes a view of a nastier, more violent world than really exists.

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.

The UN even has a report out that world conflict has subsided over 40 percent compared to a decade ago - but we only see the Iraq stuff and terror bombings in London and Israel on TV here.

Adding a few stories about idiotic and isolated incidents of political correctness only fuels the anger of the reader or viewer, and increases sales.

Bad news sells. Not one news organization is in the business of showing us the world as it really is. Even so-called unbiased organizations like the BBC and NPR show us a world of corruption, conflict, mismanagement, and death.

Does anyone know of a news organization that reports the truth about the decline in violence (or any other good news as their primary reporting)?

You and I are in agreement on this one.

News organizations try to scare and sensationalize to sell. It's maddening.

The violence in the US has plummeted 65 percent in the past 10 years, but we never hear that in the media. You would think we were knee deep in shooting victims and riots.
As usual, you make numbers up or take them from your posterior region?

Violent Crime (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/index.html)

The 5- and 10-year trend data showed that the estimated number violent crimes decreased 4.1 percent compared with the 2000 figure and 24.0 percent compared with 1995 data.

And as one would expect, the region that leads the US in violent crime, is the gun happy South:

The South, the Nation’s most populated region, had an estimated 36.1 percent of the Nation’s inhabitants. An estimated 41.9 percent of the Nation’s violent crimes occurred in this region.

BTW, I wonder if the fact that the US prisoner population (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p04.pdf)has grown by 34% over the past 10 years have anything to do with a 24% decrease in violent crime?

This is yet another in the long string of Rightwing proclamations that the capitalistic marketplace of ideas works to perfection in everything but the media.

Sex sells! Oooo, that's bad, let's regulate the marketplace of ideas. Bad news sells! Ooo, let's make them report more good news. The media is controlled by a vast liberal conspiracy (even thought it's right-wing corporate owned,) let's make them report more right-wing views!

Under-regulated energy companies gouge and pollute too much...well, the marketplace of ideas will solve that!

Yay!