h a l f b a k e r yLeft for Bread
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This way you get to choose what you hear about. Stations could broadcast Good News on the even hours, and Bad News on the odd hours. The Good News program would only air stories about new medical advances, rescued cats, etc. and its weather forecast would only tell you about sunny days. The finance
reports would only mention the stocks that have gone up.
This would save the newscasters from having to schizophrenically bounce between emotions within a short time, and prevent their needing to restrain their enthusiasm for a new product because the previous story was a terror attack. Now they can be happy for an hour, or sad for an hour.
Workplaces that have a TV tuned to the news could boost employees' morale by having the TV tuned to just the good news programs.
Sports results would be difficult to categorize; better leave them out.
Thanks to my friend Meng for this wonderful idea.
[link]
|
| |
I bun this just for leaving out sports news. The splitting of news stories is just a bonus. I suspect "Good News" bulletins would be about 15 mins whereas the "Bad News" bulletins would take up a good hour. |
|
| |
I fear that some days the good news would be limited to "Welcome to the Channel 5 Good News Hour. I had a bowel movement. Thank you, we'll see you again in two hours." |
|
| |
And then cut to Everybody Loves Raymond. *shudder* |
|
| |
The *good news* people would have to watch it four times over and all the pessimists will be wondering why there is no bad news. (on that channel)
oops, I'm not sure if there are different channels or just on at different hours. (?) |
|
| |
Sunny days and stocks going up can be bad news. Consider the drought-stricken farmer and the investor who has just cashed out. My point is that good and bad depends on the viewpoint, so is hard to categorise. |
|
| |
Well [Texticle], the names may be inappropriate, but the viewer can still choose whichever program s/he will find favorable, at least as far as weather and stocks go. Unfortunately, people who like the rain will also get stuck with crime and casualty reports that they really do find unpleasant. |
|
| |
Also the definition of "Good News" can depend on the viewer. |
|
| |
"President Bush announces new strategy to combat Domestic Terrorists" |
|
| |
"Pope sends Missionaries into Africa" |
|
| |
"Senator Moneybags indited for scandal" |
|
| |
"Senator Moneybags cleared of scandal charges" |
|
| |
Are those good news? Or bad? |
|
| |
I assume different TV stations would classify news differently, but within accepted etiquette - e.g. it would be overly harsh criticism if a respected political leader dies and a station run by the party's opposition broadcasts that as "good" news. |
|
| |
Viewers would gravitate towards TV stations whose views of the news matched their own. But there are right-leaning and left-leaning TV networks, and news program producers with different strategies right now anyway, so this would be no different from the present. |
|
| |
[Phundug] I agree that there would certainly be unambitious cases. I tried to give some more careful examples. |
|
| |
How about a third slot for pointless news? |
|
| |
Perhaps to handle the numerous in-between cases, the news could be presented as a spectrum - unambiguously good news at the start of the hour, followed by probably-good-for-most-people news, then the tricky stuff, then the probably-bad and unambiguously bad news. |
|
| |
You could also do this with a newspaper - good news at the front, bad news at the back, hard-to-decide news in the middle, sports and other trivia in a centre pull-out section. |
|
| |
true news? real news? impartial and objective reporting of facts-news? Or just your usual infotainment... |
|
| |
PS I knew good old Moneybags was innocent! |
|
| |
"And in other news today, the Halfbaker known as [zen_tom] has won the super-mega-jackpot-lottery, and plans to spend the money on a lifestyle of excess and meaningless indulgence before learning martial arts and walking the Earth, meeting people and getting into adventures - a bit like Caine from kung fu." |
|
| |
That's not news, it's wishful thinking, and I wouldn't wish a jackpot on anyone. |
|
| |
why don't they just put the onion on tv a la the daily show? |
|
| |
//and I wouldn't wish a jackpot on anyone// Really? - I suppose there's the potential for change in the relationships you have with the people around you - but you don't have to tell anyone (obviously, if it's broadcast on the news, that's a different matter) Out of a jackpot of 1 million units, you could give 40,000 to 10 close family members/friends, leaving you with 600,000 to pay off mortgages and all that stuff. And once all the cash is gone, everyone should revert back to normal - business as usual. |
|
| |
I think its a great Idea. Our local TV station always finishes on a high note such as, |
|
| |
Local Body builder stops runaway car whilst on his cycle! |
|
| |
Escaped Cow found safe in Mrs Goggins back yard! |
|
| |
I love these types of story and would like to see them get their own 10 minute slot |
|
| |
I guess some stories can be easily categorized as being good or bad but there are many more stories that fall in a grey area where good news for some could end up being bad for others- Like if a snowstorm is about to hit the area it would be bad news for the people who have to go to work but good news for the kids that don't have to go to school. |
|
| |
[Jscotty]: In that case, the news would simply report that kids don't have to go to school (but it wouldn't say why). |
|
| |
Just kidding. all of you are right, of course. Some news is obviously "good" and some "bad" and a lot is neither. |
|
| |
There could still be "good news" programs, useful for having on TV in the workplace or at restaurants where some people are trying to celebrate. Non-good neutral, or "tragic" news could be removed. |
|
| |
//And once all the cash is gone, everyone should revert back to normal - business as usual.// |
|
| |
American lottery winners are routinely faced with demands for cash from relatives and friends, litigation over winnings, 'opportunities' for highly questionable business 'investments', a multitude of sales pitches, get-even-richer-quick-schemes, cons, scams, tax libilities, etc., often with disastorous results. |
|
| |
'Jackpot' is slang for big trouble. |
|
| |
Bun, but I wonder about the news that is
good for some, but bad for others. |
|
| |
Most Republicans in the U.S. didn't like the
fact that David "Gay-Marriage-Will-
Weaken-The-Institution" Vitter got caught
playing hide the family values with a
couple of hookers, but I went Tee Hee. |
|
| |
[phundug], you've been around here long enough to know better.... joshin' ya... |
|
| |
Maybe the newsreaders could wear masks to give an indication of the nature of the bulletins. Shrek perhaps, Hannibal Lecter, Patrick Bateman etc., spring to mind. How about a dolphin? Or TV nicies e.g. The Waltons? Mmmmm. Surreal news, now that'd cut it. |
|
| |
I like the basic idea... but I'd be more interested in the deletion of the cheesy & dull news stories from My Personal News -ie; tap-dancing/surfing dogs; anything relating to rich a$$holes and their familial problems; absolutely anything to do with Big Brother et al. |
|
| |
We could persuade the different 24hrs news channels to alternate their good news/bad news hours so I could live in a pink and fluffeh good news world forever and the depressed could have all the bad news they can handle. |
|
| |