Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HuskyNan, post: 2017551, member: 4"] I do genealogy and read a ton of newspapers from the 1800's and early 1900's. Nothing has changed except for the fact that the lurid stories now have instant access to a worldwide platform. Remember the phrase [URL='http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spring04/vance/yellowjournalism.html']"yellow journalism"[/URL]? That was coined in the 1800's. Back in the repressed 60's, people wanted a guy in a suit, sitting in front of a camera, reading the news with little intonation. The 70's brought the war into peoples' living rooms and the audience was fascinated, in a "can't look away from the car wreck" way. People watched those stories, and more like them, and then wanted more coverage like that. Now, when everything is Breaking News! on the national news, it's because people have shown they want [I]that[/I]. They want to be outraged, horrified, and entertained. If the majority of the viewing audience wanted to see the guy in the suit, that's what we'd be seeing on the TV. Online, search engines are driven by metrics so that what interests people is what they'll see in their news feed. So, if you click on news articles that have to do with, say, the death of a celebrity, you'll start seeing more articles like that in your news feed. If you click on articles that lean one way or the other, politically, you'll start seeing like articles. It's not so different from the [URL='http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spring04/vance/pennypress.html']Penny Press[/URL], which tailored the news to its audience. You are driving your news feed and what you see on TV, for the most part. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,541

Messages: 4,400,693

Members: 10,214

Latest member: illini2013