Las Vegas Sun

July 24, 2014

Currently: 98° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

Change the channel, change the world

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

Rex Smith stated that governments have adopted a phrase to combat domestic terrorism: “If you see something, say something” (“Where NRA’s LaPierre is on target,” in a column in Saturday’s Sun). I appreciated his example of a gym member who asked that the steady diet of violent, bloody movies on some of the gym TVs be changed to something less violent that day. The gym officials decided to keep the upbeat change.

I found a way to lighten up everyday lives, too. After passively watching the main news channel offered at our gym for the past four years, I realized that it was time to try to change the biased news “climate.” Now each time I go to the gym, if the popular prophecy-of-doom cable channel (Fox News) is on, I request that one of the other TVs be changed to CNN or MSNBC.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 40 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. All the news media are biased depending on the political slant of the owners, management, and operators. If you think not, you're biased and the media has done its job well.

    CarmineD

  2. As a democratic backer, I certainly can't blame Pam Price for her support for MSNBC. Fox News has the largest viewership among cable news outlets and attracts twice the number of viewers over MSNBC. Additionally, the Fox News lady anchors are smart, very articulate and much more attractive than those on the other cable news channels. Envy is a terrible thing.

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/01...

  3. Fox News anchors smart? Now that gave me a laugh. I never realized Jeff Garner was a comedian.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blo...

    ""We expect that watching the news should help people learn, but the most popular of the national media sources seem to be the least informative," said Dan Cassino, professor of political science at FDU and analyst for the poll."

    The response below this quote by Fox News is an example of an ad hominen attack that completely fails to address the substance of the study...thus further proving why avoiding Fox News, unless "attractive" is your standard of excellence for news, is what intelligent people do.

  4. "After passively watching the main news channel offered at our gym for the past four years, I realized that it was time to try to change the biased news "climate."

    Price -- if you want to be part of the herd, your choice.

    "I've never liked, even as a kid, television shows, movies or computer games with violence. . . . . I'm still consumed, as an amateur with singing and recording music from the days of Frank Sinatra, Louie Armstrong, Dean Martin, Tony Bennett, Jimmy Durante, etc."

    BChap -- we've all been raised on violence as a kid. The popular cartoons were all about that, yet how many of us have ever pounded someone over the head when asked "How may lumps with your tea?" (from that rare Looney Tunes with Pete Puma)

    As for your taste in music, I've found myself now liking some of the music Dad made me listen to in the 50s -- Hank Williams, Carter Family, and so on. And pre-60s delta blues rules.

    "All the news media are biased depending on the political slant of the owners, management, and operators. If you think not, you're biased and the media has done its job well."

    CarmineD -- your post made an important and sobering point. But how many here will pay attention?

    "...the Fox News lady anchors are smart, very articulate and much more attractive than those on the other cable news channels."

    BoliB -- one reason I hate TV is in 2010 my housemates insisted on that show being on all the time. I got tired real fast having those bimbos shout their opinions day and night, with minimal substance to any of it.

    "We expect that watching the news should help people learn, but the most popular of the national media sources seem to be the least informative..."

    mschaffer -- good quote. Personally I give TV news minimal if any credibility since its mission shifted from real news to entertainment. The banal chatter by beautiful people without regional accents complete lacks any credibility whatsoever.

    "I think TV is very educational. Every time someone turns on a TV, I go in the other room and read." -- Groucho Marx

  5. "Comments like CarmineD's here are intended to deflect and conflate. There's not a shred of evidence that ANY news outlet is as biased as Faux News." @ Motorsports

    Really? I have one word for you: Beghazi.

    CarmineD

  6. BoliBlingBling - "Fox News has the largest viewership among cable news outlets and attracts twice the number of viewers over MSNBC."

    ... and the average IQ is about 100 and the bulk of adults in the country read at a 6th to 8th grade level.

    In a 1970 memo to Richard Nixon, Roger Ailes (the head honcho at Fox) wrote:

    "Today television news is watched more often than people read newspapers, than people listen to the radio, than people read or gather any other form of communication. The reason: People are lazy. With television you just sit--watch--listen. The thinking is done for you."

    "This is a plan that places news of importance to localities (Senators and representatives are newsmakers of importance to their localities) on local television news programs while it is still news. It avoids the censorship, the priorities, and the prejudices of network news selectors and disseminators."

  7. Comment removed by moderator. refers to removed comment.

  8. "If the attack on the embassy in Benghazi would have happened under Dubya, Fox News would have ignored it." @ antigov

    Fox will likely get a Pulitzer for its coverage of the Benghazi massacre. When it does, don't forget to acknowledge that they did.

    CarmineD

  9. CarmineD - "Fox will likely get a Pulitzer for its coverage of the Benghazi massacre."

    Nonsense! They've already blamed everyone under the sun in a multifaceted "conspiracy" manufactured in their zeal to make Obama, Rice and Hillary unappealing to their viewers. Once again, like what happened with the elections, Fox's world is upside down.

    Do not be surprised the shift in power on The Hill will occur in the next election cycle, giving Democrats the upper hand.

  10. A Pulitzer for Fox News? When did they become a print medium?

  11. Keep up Schaffer:

    "The Pulitzer Prize pron.: /pltsr/[1] is a U.S. award for achievements in newspaper and online journalism, literature and musical composition."

    CarmineD

  12. "@CarmineD you are wearing your tin foil hat again aren't you. " @ Motorsports

    Only when I have to try hard to understand some like you.

    CarmineD

  13. "Nonsense! They've already blamed everyone under the sun in a multifaceted "conspiracy" @ Branco

    Actually, two "GOVERNMENT" reports which blamed everyone and put the responsibility on noone.

    CarmineD

  14. Here is my answer to "change the channel":
    For television: turn on the Travel Channel, and set your mind on "cruise control".
    For listenin pleasure: The Kingston Trio, Peter, Paul, and Mary, The Weavers, or any do-whop/1950s/60s music.

    Do that, and you never feel the pain of your workout! :)

    Blessings and Peace,
    Star

  15. Ditto for movies. How about something with a PLOT? How about something without so much violence, noise, and flashing lights? So many movies are unwatchable. Perhaps the movie industry could float a few trial balloons and see what else sells. And let's not get into endless romantic comedies. Again, how about something with a plot? Agatha Christi wrote some. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle remakes? And let's try something for kids--enough of the singsong stories where the boys are always the focus.

  16. Pam Price,

    You and yours scare me. As you are from Henderson, as am I, it is likely that I have passed you on the street or smiled at you at the market. It truly frightens me that the illogical & irrational are amongst us out in public.

    Worse, is that the rest of us have to work harder and pay more to compensate for your idiocy.

    Purgatory

  17. Lucky for me that I logged on now, so I wouldn't have missed Purgatory's complaint.

    I take it that the reason I'm irrational is that after four years of being open-minded enough to watch Fox News, I dared to write the popular sentiment that it is the prophecy-of-doom channel. I could say that I witnessed many outright lies, let alone the twisted, fear-mongering stories on Fox News. However, the easiest way to offer support for my statement is to say: view the archives (with an open mind) on Comedy Central's Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" website. He regularly shows Fox News clips that speak for themselves; they scream propaganda.

    On another note I think that "change the channel, change world" has multiple meanings. As others have said, when you personally need peace, don't watch news. You can change your mindset/world by what you view and think. However, Rex Smith's article (referred to in the letter) notes Margaret Mead's sociological observation: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

    I am concerned that politically-motivated, polarizing doom and gloom stories create self-fulfilling phophecies. Believers hoard, stop buying stock... want to shut down.

    I should write a letter to the editor, asking EVERYONE (including the previous congressional and presidential candidates): Tell me what exactly are your foolproof ideas to generate jobs, so the moochers can get busy?" How do we alter a business world that is increasingly global and mechanized?"

  18. Carmine is wrong, as usual:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Pr...

    "Awards are made in categories relating to newspaper journalism, arts, and letters and fiction. Only published reports and photographs by United States-based newspapers or daily news organizations are eligible for the journalism prize. Beginning in 2007, "an assortment of online elements will be permitted in all journalism categories except for the competition's two photography categories, which will continue to restrict entries to still images."[8] In December 2008 it was announced that for the first time content published in online-only news sources would be considered.[9]"

    Fox is not news...it is propaganda.

  19. "Carmine is wrong, as usual:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Pr...

    Mark Schaffer

    I excerpted my post above about awards for on-line journalism from the cite you quoted above.

    Newspapers are obsolete. They are going the way of the horse of buggy. On-line news is the media. It's updated instantaneously in real time. When Fox News wins the Pulitzer for its coverage of Benghazi, I'll remind you again to keep up.

    CarmineD

  20. "When Fox News wins the Pulitzer for its coverage of Benghazi, I'll remind you again to keep up." Such a wonderful combination of arrogance and invincible ignorance!

  21. It's not arrogance when you're right.
    CarmineD

  22. WRT ignorance, read your excerpt above for the line that is preceded by footnote 9. Then, go to your source and note this footnote:

    "Pulitzer Prizes Broadened to Include Online-Only Publications Primarily Devoted to Original News Reporting" (Press release). Pulitzer Prize Board. December 8, 2008. "

    Fox was the first and ONLY news reporting from Benghazi. They were the first to have reporters their reporters on site reporting the story back to the USA. The other networks and newsmedia reluctantly followed Fox's lead after weeks of denying and avoiding coverage.

    CarmineD

  23. Carmine, Try reading for understanding please. And you aren't right about much of anything...in fact nothing I can think of at the moment. Is Fox propaganda "online-only" or do they have some kind of television presence???

  24. Carmine suffers from the first part of this definition:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%...

  25. Schaffer:

    Read the definition of on-line "only." It is not ONLY on line but includes "almost on-line only." The definition was expanded. Why? For all the reasons I explained above. Newssprint is out of date. And most are TV net works with on-line cites. That's the world we live in. The reason FOX will win the Pulitizer is because it was first in Benghazi on the ground with the news reporting: Original! And on-line!

    CarmineD

  26. Here's an excerpt Schaffer:

    "This year, Pulitzer officials note that digital content "played a role in seven winning entries: Public Service, Breaking News Reporting, Investigative Reporting, Explanatory Reporting, National Reporting, Editorial Cartooning and Breaking News Photography."

    Digital content was a particular emphasis in the breaking news category this year, with the call for entries that emphasize speed and real-time reporting that, "as quickly as possible, captures events accurately as they occur, and, as times passes, illuminates, provides context and expands upon the initial coverage." The Tuscaloosa News picked up the prize in that category for "coverage of a deadly tornado, using social media as well as traditional reporting to provide real-time updates, help locate missing people and produce in-depth print accounts even after power disruption forced the paper to publish at another plant 50 miles away."

    It's a mix: Traditional reporting and on-line.

    Keep up Schaffer. Times change.

    CarmineD

  27. From the Pulitzer administration website:
    http://www.pulitzer.org/administration

    "By January 25, about 1,100 journalism entries have been uploaded to the Pulitzer entry Website. Those entries may be made by any individual based on material coming from a United States newspaper or news site that publishes at least weekly during the calendar year and that adheres to the highest journalistic principles. Magazines and broadcast media, and their respective Web sites, are not eligible."

    Now what does that last line say Carmine? Do try to break out of that cognitive deficit you are exhibiting.

  28. Schaffer: What's the date of your source and excerpt?

    CarmineD

  29. "For 2011, the Plan of Award was revised to encourage more explicitly the entry of online and multimedia material, with the board seeking to honor the best work in whatever form is the most effective. And for 2012, the board adopted an all-digital entry and judging system, replacing the historic reliance on submission of scrapbooks."

    Keep up Schaffer. Times change rapidly. You scnooze, you lose.

    CarmineD

  30. Carmine, It is from the administrative page of the Pulitzer Prize committee. Rational people will know that by definition it is up to date. Your quoted excerpt is right in line with my quote. Also, please let readers know when you have found television winners in any form among the 2012 award winners listed here:
    http://www.pulitzer.org/awards/2012

    Oh! Look! The Huffington Post won a Pulitzer. It is online but is most certainly NOT a "...Magazines or broadcast media, and their respective Web sites..." And why is this Carmine? Why, because they "...are not eligible."

    What does not eligible mean Carmine?

  31. To be clear for the cognitively challenged my last post was referring to Magazines or broadcast media as not eligible.

  32. "A Pulitzer for Fox News? When did they become a print medium?" @ Schaffer Jan 4, 10:08 PM

    This was your original post Schaffer. You were wrong by implying only print media was eligible for a Pulitzer. I proved that beyond a shadow of the doubt. And you did too with your excerpts.

    Perhaps when FOX wins the Pulitzer for Benghazi, you'll finally comprehend the truth about the reforms in the Pulitzer awards to move into the 21st Century. And accept the fact that "mixed media" not just print is eligible.

    You should try it: Moving into the 21st Century. Then again, you probably never will.

    CarmineD

  33. That would be the same 21st century that has taught you to have the attention span and cognitive ability of a five year old with downs syndrome. I have used all the usual tech and worked in IT support for years. Neil Postman wrote a very good book, "Technopoly" that questions our society's addiction to change and the unintended consequences of that addiction. You don't have the ability to read and appreciate such though.

    In the meantime I am waiting for you to show any Pulitzer for mixed media. Fox is propaganda and has no place in any thinking person's life.

  34. "In the meantime I am waiting for you to show any Pulitzer for mixed media. Fox is propaganda and has no place in any thinking person's life." Schaffer

    I provided it above in your mythical defense of printed journalism and/or on-line ONLY. Go back, reread, and catch up. Jan 8; 4:36: "The Tuscaloosa News picked up the prize in that category for "coverage of a deadly tornado, using social media as well as traditional reporting."

    What part of "social media" and "traditional reporting" and my usage of "MIXED MEDIA" don't you understand?

    CarmineD

  35. Comment removed by moderator. Personal Attack

  36. Thank you. My point exactly. "Mixed media." We finally have agreement.

    Recall Schaffer the expanded mixed media Pulitzer criteria is very recent, as in the last few years.

    Like I said, when FOX wins for Benghazi, don't forget our exchange.

    No need to apologize for being obtuse.

    CarmineD

  37. Now where was that Pulitzer nomination or given to television or radio with an internet presence again? Why don't you pay the money and nominate Faux News for a Pulitzer? Or you could ask the Sun about it...

  38. Schaffer: Lest you forget it was the issue of printed journalism only. As you posted. As I said the criteria was updated to include ALL forms of news media including social, online, and mixed venues. Albeit recently. And many like me would argue it took the Pulitzer Committee too long to reform and move into the 21st Century and throw away the scrap books and albums. Except perhaps you.

    CarmineD

  39. Here's breaking news for you Schaffer. The next Fox Pulitzer, for Benghazi, won't be its first.

    CarmineD