Do we really have to?Status Update: Notice how local TV is pimping off Facebook?
Have you no shame? Of course radio is just as guilty too. But seriously, how much more gimmicky and crap can we take?
Is there no forum where Facebook, in essence, being subsidized by news outlets to augment, enhance, even act as a conduit--something is rotten here in Denmark.
Look, I acknowledge the enormity of Facebook as a 21st century phenomena--I myself use it to promote this blog, but I'm a one-man band and not a TV station. Bad enough that puny little market-64 stations, (and KRON here locally, big surprise), utilize FB in its news content, but you other big guys have no excuse.
And that goes for CNN too, which given its position as a cable behemoth knows better than to use FB as a source for its questions on the GOP debates, for example.
We're not pooh-poohing modern-day technology and its Godzilla Superman--we simply say it looks tacky that major news outlets, local, network, cable, whatever, has to resort to creating "reaction" and lobbed "questions" from the Zuckerburg factory. Did it ever occur to the nitwits who dreamed up this idea that the vast majority of people already on FB probably has zero interest in their current program--be it a debate, a news program, etc and if they did, wouldn't they be watching in the first place and not posting pictures of their neighbor's cat? Hello!
I'm struck by the moron quotient that brings this crap onto the airwaves. I'm dumbfounded that we continue, at least the majority of us, simply to acknowledge this shit. Talk about sheep. Please don't tell me about the new media, the new way, the new news business model--all this is is a group of lazy hacks that couldn't produce and create any new content if their life depended on it.
Facebook is a lovely gargantuan mega-corp. Between it and Google and Twitter, they have become 100% ingrained into the culture, be it news, sports, entertainment--whether we like it or not. And that's OK, after all, life without Facebook would be the end of civilization as we know it. And God knows no Facebook, might as well be the equivalent of the end of the dinosaurs, 2012.
Dare I say, a debate without some schmendrick question from "Ike in Fremont, on Facebook", who's a "cook", has a "family" and likes "dockers", asking Mitt about nuking Iran seems out of place, cheap, bizarre, lazy, duh!
We don't like that, do we? No, I guess we do. We watch this crap.
You obviously don't understand how people consume media today. It's all about multitasking. People are watching TV and surfing the net at the same time. And chances are that net surfing includes Facebook for most people. It only makes sense to use that medium to try and drive potential viewers to another.
ReplyDeleteExcellent commentary, Rich.
ReplyDeleteAnd then, we sink to the "LA Weather Babe Hotties." Amazing.
facebook is crap and so is "multitasking", which isn't actually occurring in one's brain anyhow.
ReplyDeleteI quit facebook before it had such a following... I do not trust their privacy policys.
ReplyDeleteI feel a little left out by my self imposed avoidance yet I believe there will come a time I will be glad I dropped out.
I must admit that there were newspapers and blogs I did respond to that I no longer do. All that to say Thank you for not forcing your responders on to facebook.
Rich, I could not agree with you more.
ReplyDeleteI think that television stations are, at best reaching a desperate arm out to what they hope are potential viewers who use social media and who get news and information, such as it is, from the Internet. The stations may be drinking out of an empty bottle; I think there is still a gap between Internet junkies and people who regularly tune in to broadcast news. I'm 54, and I use Facebook and Twitter, but I don't interact with TV station Web sites, which mostly work well for finding a story you might have missed or getting a link to an organization featured on a broadcast.
But the pandering to urge viewers to "join the conversation" and the resulting "Jim in Pinole likes this" or "Danielle in Los Gatos said this at 9:27" is a complete bore and a waste of good electrons. I think all this loading of social networking by television stations is the creation of executives who want to get out in front of the parade and seem "with-it".
Great program on "Coast to Coast" this morning with Katherine Albrecht as guest. Eric and Mark are leading the sheep to the slaughter. Good luck with your Google and Facebook. Coast to Coast is no replacement for our beloved Ray Taliafero but it sure beats inane red eye trucker talk. Sadly the loss of Ray and Gene have left a massive void in Bay Area talk radio.
ReplyDeleteHave you noticed since the Zuckerberg as King of Assdom movie came out FB has become more ubiquitous, infiltrating almost every website, consumer product, food product, everything and anything that can be bought, sold, viewed, speculated, listened to, thought about, it's endless. He's pulling it off before our eyes and we keep bending over saying "thank you sir, may I have another." And in his kingdom he's just getting started.
ReplyDeleteThe one positive is in FB's ability to help folks come together to share info, etc., as when KGO fired all the hosts and "Former Listener's of KGO" formed a FB page and acted as a clearing house for us to vent, organize, galvanize, and pulverize Scumulus. That's FB put to its best use. The rest is chicken manure.
Whatever goes up eventually comes down. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but someday.
ReplyDeleteChoose wisely grasshopper..
Facebook is going public and wants to be a major digital hub to share and seek information being a default system for all communications. How long will it last as a public company & has to deal with share holders who may not share silicon valley views.
ReplyDeletehttp://bit.ly/facebookaih
Anon 8:45, that is the only reason I became active on Facebook... to be a part of "The Former". Otherwise, I have one relative living abroad who only communicates via FB. Beyond that, I don't want or need to see peoples' cute kitty/baby pictures or party/pub crawl pics. I don't want to amass 500 FB "friends" when I have real life, real time face to face friends.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, Zuckerburg, when I hear or read the phrase "Corporate Culture", I want to gag. Culture is about art and music and literature...things people do to enrich their lives. Contrary to the IRS's proclamation, corporations are NOT people and they therefore cannot have "culture".
I think many people in our society today are so distracted and lonely, that going on-line is a way for them to feel they exist and are making some kind of a connection. I understand it, and yet it's really kind of sad.
ReplyDeleteWe've become so deeply embedded in the cyber world that many folks now are in a state of semi-consciousness, walking around staring at tiny screens and texting and tweeting madly while ignoring the real world and people that are around them.
Our preoccupation with computers, i-pads, smart phones, blackberries, etc has become so excessive, I'm beginning to wonder if it's like an addiction.
While all of this amazing technology has allowed us to access more info and get to it more quickly than ever before, it seems that we as human beings, have lost our sense of who we are and what we are doing. And the sheer volume of information that is flowing non-stop out there is sometimes too overwhelming to digest.
Therefore, many folks, young and old are not really understanding what is going on sometimes because they don't have a chance to actually sit down and concentrate on something for more than say,
15 or 20 seconds at a time.
Radio and TV feed into this kind of practice with their quick soundbites and short bursts of video. It's very distracting, dizzying and disturbing for many of us who grew up in the 1960s. It reminds me of a more sophisticated brand of the 'multi-media shows' that we used to go to where three or four big screens were set up along with a bunch of large loud speakers. You'd take a puff of grass or drop a tab of acid and then sit and watch the screens for the myriad images of just about anything and everything while lisltening to the loud music that was booming over it all. It was a sensory experience.
Is it little wonder then, with our current 'addiction' to modern technology and it's constant transformation that many of us suffer from some form of attention deficit?
if you look at TV ...take the commercials and add the time they promise to tell you a news bite... and then how many times they flash part of the news bite at you ...and break the story into 5 segments in 30 minutes....
Deletethey hardly tell you anything but have managed to keep you tuned to them for 60 minutes.
Yep. It's cause for concern, particularly among our young folks who know no other way....Basic social skills are becoming a thing of the past. Really being "in the moment" with anyone or anything other than a gadget..thing of the past. Young people can barely hold one-on-one conversations any more; they are unable to relate human-to-human. They are clueless as to know how to truly entertain themselves without their gadgets. Forget taking the time to really learn about, discuss, think about, digest, and form opinions of even the most light-weight issues. Not just sad, but scary! "We the people" is going the way of the dinosaur because a few powerful, greedy, shady manipulators are encouraging and taking advantage of this phenomenon. The "Occupy" movements were encouraging signs of positive change but have fizzled because of no cohesive message/s and the infiltration of trouble-causers whose only interest is causing trouble! We have to wake up, people! Put those i-phones down for awhile. Spend more than 30 seconds on any given thought. I dare you!
DeleteThe great thing about surfing for news via internet vs. watching TV: i can pick and choose the news I want to read. NOT the news the tv producers tell me is news. Local news is so biased politically and otherwise, the last thing I want is to watch some politically uneducated news reader telling me what democrats and republicans did right or wrong today. I'm so sick of the "we are unbiased" attitude, yet, if you really listen to what they're reading, it is totally slanted. I'll take my news via the web anyday. Read the columnists and papers that matter to me. And yes, like this forum, the "reply" category does make me feel my voice is heard. It is strange social interaction compared to 15 years ago but its the way we communicate now.
DeleteAs a 30 year old, self proclaimed news junkie from the age of seven, your analysis is totally misguided.
ReplyDeleteWhen major news events break all of us are glued to television and IN REAL TIME use social media to discuss the event at hand to our friends and peers. In the old days, we'd just BS at the watercooler THE NEXT DAY at work about that big news event. Venues such as Facebook and Twitter provide that real time, instant reaction and conversation.
Rich, you may call it a gimmick, but I just think you just fail to see what good actually comes out of it.
I don't use Facebook anymore, but here's my take. I agree with the posters above saying that FB allows you to make a connection with a "community" that is attractive to people and the immediacy of it makes it compelling. The thing I think a lot of folks don't realize, is that it's the same desire for connection and immediacy that drives good talk radio programs such as the Gene Burns Program. And I think that is what the yahoos missed when they took over and ruined KGO.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree
Delete'Surfing' the internet is not really the right term to use when we navigate on our computers through the internet.
ReplyDeleteSurfing was a sport invented by native Hawaiians hundreds of years ago, and it combines the healthy components of good exercise and spiritual refreshment. Surfing requires using a board, a wave runner, or the body to ride one of the most primal forces of nature.
For those of us who do it, it's sometimes an ethereal or spiritually enlightening experience. It's physical benefits are also quite obvious, as some of the best athletes I see when I surf are right here, enjoying the beautiful waves of our Northern California beaches wherever the conditions are right.
'Surfing' the internet (if you want to call it that) however, is a physically static experience that requires very little in the way of physical effort. While the mind is engaged, one can be sitting or standing, or even lying down. The time spent 'surfing' the internet is time that the body doesn't appreciate, as it become more sedentary and perhaps even more flaccid.
That's why calling it 'surfing' when you're going on the internet is really a bastardization of that word.
And if more people spent time in the water and less time on their PCs, we'd probably have a much happier, healthier, and more relaxed society! Of course, our best breaks would then probably become overcrowded, so I guess there's no perfect solution to the ills of our society!
Rich, I use Facebook to post current weather events and forecasts that are timely. Weather and forecasts CAN change a lot during the day. Unless a weather event is happening while someone is on the air at 6 a.m. Noon. 6 p.m. or l p.m. it is OLD news. Record high temperatures, unique weather events happen at anytime; Facebook allows me to trump the other weather folks who might no have the latest forecasts, rainfall, Sierra snowfall or original research pertaining to significant weather events. I am looking at weather all day via the internet, what you see on your local news is like comparing a pimple with an elephant. Why watch at TV weather cast when you can get any weather forecast via internet or smart phones, etc? I look for the weather information that you will not get from TV or radio and put it on Facebook.
ReplyDelete9:26AM, spot on, there is definitely an addiction to the digital realm. Intense web surfing is altering the neural pathways as well, as has been noted in various studies.
ReplyDelete