CNN and headlines

[Wiley]

In another thread, we have been lamenting over CNN's propensity for sensationalistic headlines. With the recent announcement that asteriod NT7 will come very close to the Earth in 2019, I thought it would be interesting to compare the headlines from different news organizations.

CNN: Asteroid may hit Earth but don't panic yet (when should we panic?)

NY Times:New Asteroid Has Long Odds for Earth Crash

AP Wire: Astronomers: Asteroid Hit Unlikely (from NY Times' link to AP)

New Scientist: Astronomers tracking new near-Earth asteroid

[beskeptical]

Interesting that the non-astronomer, (I presume), reporters felt the need to interject their conclusions in those headlines. Only the New Scientist had a neutral title, but it implied new asteroid finds are reportable when they are really only reported on when someone thinks they are coming close.

My most likely conclusion for how these headlines were chosen is the fact they got burned the last time. When an asteroid's early path calculations said it was going to impact Earth in 2024 (or something like that), the news media all reported it as a fact. Then the trajectory was recalculated and they all looked dumb.

[David Hall]

Here's a humorous tounge-in-cheek editorial about this new asteroid. He takes on the scientific calculation thing also.

http://www.eightballmagazine.com/dia...tribes1028.htm

So, what do you think of his plan? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

[nebularain]

On 2002-07-26 08:51, David Hall wrote:
Here's a humorous tounge-in-cheek editorial about this new asteroid. He takes on the scientific calculation thing also.

http://www.eightballmagazine.com/dia...tribes1028.htm

So, what do you think of his plan? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Congress thinks it's too expensive for the second calculations to be made; they go with the first set. The nuke is fired. It misses! Z-O-O-O-O-O-M...*KABOOM*! OOPS! The nuke hit Venus!

----------------------------------------
OK, so sarcasm isn't my gift, but you can't blame a girl for trying....

[Wiley]

On 2002-07-26 03:33, beskeptical wrote:
Interesting that the non-astronomer, (I presume), reporters felt the need to interject their conclusions in those headlines. Only the New Scientist had a neutral title, but it implied new asteroid finds are reportable when they are really only reported on when someone thinks they are coming close.

Since CNN, NY Times, and AP are not geared to scientists, having the general conclusion in the headline does not bother me. NYT and AP give the article's jist succintly: a newly found asteriod has a remote chancing of hitting Earth. Actually what really torques my cookies is CNN using the graphic of a Moon-sized asteriod plowing into the Earth. Can't they get a more realistic graphic?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wiley on 2002-07-26 13:36 ]</font>

[Wiley]

On 2002-07-26 11:43, nebularain wrote:

OK, so sarcasm isn't my gift, but you can't blame a girl for trying....

Yes. Yes, we can. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

True sarcasm is a state of being. You must clear your mind of all distractions and all worldly sincerity. Clear you mind of thoughtfullness and caring. Most importantly, tell the truth.

[NEOWatcher]

It seems like CNN is getting even worse with thier headlines.

This article about a 35 car pile up, which has this statement:

Authorities say it appears ice on the bridge caused the wreck around 6 a.m.

Is on CNN's page as "Fog causes 35-car pileup".

And that's probably going to change another 3 or 4 times in the next 48 hours to make you think it's a new story.

[Fazor]

There was one last week that had a headline of "Attempted robber killed*", then when you read the article, the man was arrested without any shots fired. And he was alive and awaiting booking.

*I can't remember if it was a robbery or assault or what, but whatever the incident was, the man the headline said was killed in the act, was being arrested and booked in the first paragraph of the article.

[Swift]

This just in...

NEOWatcher posts in 8 year old thread.
Panic sweeps over BAUT

Maybe I could get a job at CNN!

[Gigabyte]

CNN? What about FOX News?

[NEOWatcher]

This just in...

So;
Does the real story say that there is no Panic in BAUT?

But; true. It's an old thread, and my post is minor, and not much thread history, and it is related, so it felt right.

CNN? What about FOX News?

With them, it's not just the headline, but the entire story.

[Argos]

[sigh] 2002, it´s been a good year... I was young then...

[Swift]

[sigh] 2002, it´s been a good year... I was young then...

At least you still have your looks.

[sabianq]

Fox news: imminent collision with spaceship shaped asteroid.. Al-Qaeda behind attack... more to follow..

[SolusLupus]

I'd advise caution here. Fox News is a hot political topic...

[PetersCreek]

I'd advise caution here. Fox News is a hot political topic...

Not in and of itself, it's not...so please don't drag it there.

[AstroRockHunter]

CNN. That bastion of accuracy.

I heard on local radio some years ago that when Johnny Carson died, a CNN staffer called Rodney Dangerfield's publicist to get Rodney's thoughts on Carson's death.

Carson died in 2005.
Dangerfield died in 2004.

[Jim]

CNN. That bastion of accuracy.

I heard on local radio some years ago that when Johnny Carson died, a CNN staffer called Rodney Dangerfield's publicist to get Rodney's thoughts on Carson's death.

Carson died in 2005.
Dangerfield died in 2004.

So, what did Rodney have to say?

"What!? Carson died, and no one told me? I still don't get no respect."

[AstroRockHunter]

So, what did Rodney have to say?

"What!? Carson died, and no one told me? I still don't get no respect."

[Jens]

CNN. That bastion of accuracy.

I heard on local radio some years ago that when Johnny Carson died, a CNN staffer called Rodney Dangerfield's publicist to get Rodney's thoughts on Carson's death.

Carson died in 2005.
Dangerfield died in 2004.

So what? A staff member is allowed to forget things. The problem is if it gets into print or broadcast.

[Fazor]

So what? A staff member is allowed to forget things. The problem is if it gets into print or broadcast.

That's my problem with CNN.com . . . or really, almost all online news outlets. But CNN is the worst, because most of their stories are picked up from affiliates' websites all over the nation. Theoretically, they should have been through editing once. Then when CNN.com gets them, you'd think they could take a second to read through the stories again before posting them on their national news outlet.

It's been increasingly obvious that they do not read articles before posting them. It seems that they must have a team that just scours local news headlines for things that sound interesting, and pick those up with little more than a direct copy-and-paste. My evidence for such assertion is the shear number of incomplete articles, incomprehensible articles, or headlines-dont-match-story type articles on their site.

[NEOWatcher]

I heard on local radio some years ago that when Johnny Carson died, a CNN staffer called Rodney Dangerfield's publicist to get Rodney's thoughts on Carson's death.

I also heard an un-named reporter from an un-named station interviewed Lamb Chop after Shari Lewis died.
The story ran that Lamb Chop was speechless.

It's been increasingly obvious that they do not read articles before posting them.

Agreed.

Here's another example:
'Pet Psychic' finds missing dog
At least that was the headline CNN had. I linked to the same story but a different source since I can't find the CNN one anymore.
They have since replaced it with a psychic finding a missing cat.

Now; what this version of the story doesn't say is what the psychic actually did.
She told the woman that she senses the dog is alive, period, nothing else.

First of all, any optimist would have said that. Second of all, what is the psychic going to say? "your dog is dead, goodbye"? No, she's looking for more money.

It was the search and rescue crew that found the dog.

[Swift]

I also heard an un-named reporter from an un-named station interviewed Lamb Chop after Shari Lewis died.
The story ran that Lamb Chop was speechless.

I'm sorry, we don't allow discussions about Lamb Chop on BAUT. It violates our rules on sock puppets.

[NEOWatcher]

I'm sorry, we don't allow discussions about Lamb Chop on BAUT. It violates our rules on sock puppets.

[sarongsong]

Current headline comparisons:

...It violates our rules on sock puppets...

Hee-hee! (not CNN):
Label chief defends Swift's Grammy performance

Comparing current "Big 3" headline stories:

CNN

MSNBC

Fox

I think the 'sensationalizing' going on is the fallout from the intensive rush for ratings between these three leading TV cable news channels who go head-to-head each day, with their teams of individual highly personalized "anchors" competing for advertising dollars, against each other.

[NEOWatcher]

Comparing current "Big 3" headline stories:
CNN
MSNBC
Fox

What am I supposed to see on those?
Especially since the major story can change at any minute.

[sabianq]

i like Amy Goodman...

[sarongsong]

Yes, Amy is good. I especially like tuning in to BBC America for their relatively calm approach to presenting the news.

What am I supposed to see on those?...

Nothing in particular; just a quick way to compare headlines, as in the OP...

[NEOWatcher]

Nothing in particular; just a quick way to compare headlines, as in the OP...

Fair enough. I just do that as a natural course of reading the news.
A single source of news is just asking for trouble.

[traceur]

John Stewart wins them all!
*hides*