Why is all news bad news ???

[cadetmongoose]

ive been thinking about this and that and if you listen/watch the news you will see that most of what you see or hear is bad news so come on tell me thats not all that happends in the world like aparts from news that put it bantly (not meaning to erfend) is easly predicted eg: "guy got killed " american kills britsh" "bomb goes of" "bad eats good"and they keep taking like that. people should say that ok but not all the time and even then its repetitive. i wanna know what you think and stuff like that? so come on give me some good news you herd today. who got a new medicin or something like that plz. and once you can do that newgrounds could start a "Newsground" were news it even Good and Bad
i wanna know ur opion so come on and tell me thanks !!!!!!

[xcrime-cyber]

The news was an information that really usefully like breakfast

[Jesus-made-me-do-it]

Would you rather prefer all the good news and be naive to all the bad things in the world

[TehChahlesh]

Bad News sells

[cadetmongoose]

At 10/16/06 05:23 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: Bad News sells

yes this is my piont people dont care about getting news around they want to get money that undersatndarble but sometimes news is on for 1hous come on do you wants us all to be diprested

[cadetmongoose]

no i dont5 thinklike that at all there should be an even balance of good and bad news

[Neoptolemus]

I don't care whether the news is "good" or "bad" all that matters to me isthat i'm being informed (hence i get my news from several differing sources).

[cadetmongoose]

yea same with me but do you think its good to have news that will disterb you metaly "depresion

[Jesus-made-me-do-it]

Acually were should be expecting good news anytime soon

"George bush has been found dead in his bath with 2 gun shot wounds to the head. Forensics believe to be suicide"

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/16/06 05:46 PM, the-man-who-knew wrote: "George bush has been found dead in his bath with 2 gun shot wounds to the head. Forensics believe to be suicide"

I laffed.

People tend to be more inclined towards bad news because it usually presents a problem which should be taken care of, i.e.: a suspect needs to be apprehended, a policy should be fixed, a certain group should not be under or over-priveledged, people are dying so how do we stop the death and so on...

Bad news presents situations in which we can be heroes or the ones to find a solution whereas good news makes people say "oh that's nice" and... that's all there is to it :)

[Cereal]

Bad news is more entertaining...

[AdamRice]

Because bad news is more interesting then good news. You even facilitated that idea by making this post. You wouldn't have made a post titled "Why is all news good news?"

[Draconias]

From what I've heard, the problem you are referring to in the media is called "Tabloidization." Media outlets believe violence, scandals, and drama will attract and interest readers or watchers.

If you ask me, it just pisses off the audience after awhile.

[cadetmongoose]

lol yea

[cellardoor6]

Disproportionate bad news is a political tool by opposition parties. If ANYTHING happens that is bad or negative, ANYWHERE in the world, people will blame the US and it will increase Anti-US sentiment even if the US has nothing to do with it. People believe that America is the center of all bad in the world therefore any bad news will be blamed on the US.

Like for example all the people in Europe who blame America for the humanitarian situation in Sudan accusing the US of not giving enough aide. But when the US used to provide aide to Sudan and had troops on the ground to prevent the civil war, everyone around the world spinned that into bad news and accused the US of imperialism. But the only reason the US was on the ground in Sudan was because the UN money that was given to Sudan ended up just arming warlords. Therefore

But in the US specifically, the media is overwhelmingly controlled by Liberals and supporters of the Democrat Party and therefore they have a position of power to bombard the American audience with bad news to lower the morale of Americans and to breed distest for the current government through the cunningy distortion of information. But the minute that Democrats are in office all the news becomes happy and positive and the leaders of the Democratic leaders are glorified and depicted as perfect, faultless benevolent leaders.

Just wait and see how the current bad news about congress turns to a glorification of Democratic leadership if/when they gain the majority in the november elections. Just you wait and see!

(end rant)

[zzzzd]

At 10/18/06 08:26 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Disproportionate bad news is a political tool by opposition parties. If ANYTHING happens that is bad or negative, ANYWHERE in the world, people will blame the US and it will increase Anti-US sentiment even if the US has nothing to do with it. People believe that America is the center of all bad in the world therefore any bad news will be blamed on the US.

Your distorted in your view my friend, People aren't anti-american were anti people like you who have to bring up America in every fuckin post you make.
I don't no how you can keep repeating the same thing about everyone being anti-US when your Blatently Anti every other country. Your always find a way to bring your love for america into every topic and your hate for Canada, Mexico, Britain, france.......etc.

[hongkongexpress]

At 10/16/06 05:23 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: Bad News sells

>> The creed of the Newsperson "If it Bleeds it leads". They'll do a news report on the wacky crazy people in a city, example some nutty arsonist, murderer, serial raper/killer, high speed chaser, police brutality, or some kid with a car. rather than report on all the good 99% of society ie regular sane normal people.

[JakeHero]

I believe it's the elite media's politics. It's mostly liberal so they'll do selective reporting. Most of the news is bad and will only feed you the negative in order to make you feel like this administration is a complete blunder. Instead of giving you good news like how well the economy is doing, the child-rapist bills put into law, unemployment is at an all time low, etc.

Point is, you can't get pissed off at the liberal media for spinning when that's all they're good for.

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/18/06 09:17 PM, BanditByte wrote: Point is, you can't get pissed off at the liberal media for spinning when that's all they're good for.

Oh my God dude, will you and Cellardoor please stfu for a second about accusing liberals? You're no better then them because you're doing the same thing: pointing fingers and making accusations! If you hate what they do so much then why are you doing it? For a second there I was foolish to believe you and cellardoor would actually be able to form a cogent argument without accusing liberals or democrats of something, but as I said: it was foolish to believe that.

Truth is both liberals and conservatives are WAY OFF BASE when it comes to attacking each other. This is more common amongst the extremists of either side; the moderates shake their heads.

[Raped]

Bad news takes up the majority of the news because more people watch the news if there is bad things happening. Honestly isn't bad news more exiting then good news? People are more intrested with bad news because it seems to keep the person watching since he or she finds that pieced of information intriging.

[IllustriousPotentate]

There's a couple other reasons nobody's really talked about yet:

1. News, is by definition, a change from the status quo. A house that catches on fire is news; millions of houses that didn't catch on fire isn't. Someone getting murdered is news, the billions of people that didn't get murdered isn't. If people constantly swindled each other, people always got into fistfights when ever they had a dispute, and the coasts constantly got hit by hurricanes, then it would be news if someone sold something honestly, settled a dispute peacefully, and the coasts were hurricane free.

2. Bad news requires more reaction than good news. Failing to react to bad news can have much more dire consequences than failing to react to good news. Take for example, the weather forecast. Tornado warnings are bad news, but require much more reaction than a good, sunny forecast. Similarly, reporting escaped fugitives and wanted criminals is bad news, but require more reaction by the public than reporting that they have been caught.

[TheThing]

they want to inform people about whats happening in the world, or area. if theirs a war, or an airport blows up, you mihgt not have heard that your son or mom who was at that airport died. also its teaching people to be uneffected by killings and such, so america can have a super-powerful army where no one cares if their best friend died or about killing anybody else

[JakeHero]

At 10/18/06 09:24 PM, EnragedSephiroth wrote: Oh my God dude, will you and Cellardoor please stfu for a second about accusing liberals? You're no better then them because you're doing the same thing: pointing fingers and making accusations! If you hate what they do so much then why are you doing it? For a second there I was foolish to believe you and cellardoor would actually be able to form a cogent argument without accusing liberals or democrats of something, but as I said: it was foolish to believe that.

Well, considering the elite media or majorly liberal I don't see what the problem is. When Clinton was in office all you ever heard about was how he took care of Sudan and the booming economy, while Bush is in office all you hear about is corruption, when politics is a cesspool of it. I'm not being a partisan-hack, but speaking what is truly going down. All the lefties in the media want to report is the bad news to help push their personal agenda.

Truth is both liberals and conservatives are WAY OFF BASE when it comes to attacking each other. This is more common amongst the extremists of either side; the moderates shake their heads.

True, but in the this case liberal media is at fault. So there is nothing wrong for calling them on it.

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/18/06 09:41 PM, BanditByte wrote: Well, considering the elite media or majorly liberal I don't see what the problem is. When Clinton was in office all you ever heard about was how he took care of Sudan and the booming economy, while Bush is in office all you hear about is corruption, when politics is a cesspool of it. I'm not being a partisan-hack, but speaking what is truly going down. All the lefties in the media want to report is the bad news to help push their personal agenda.

Clinton had his fuck-ups too. Frankly I don't think his apology for what happened in Rwanda does it justice but there's nothing we can do about it now, what happened happened and it's not bringing back those people who died because the U.S. and U.N. refused to act. There was not anywere near as much dirt on Clinton as there is on Bush though. Clinton did not wrongfully lead us into a war under false pretense. Even if 9/11 had ocurred when Clinton was in office, sure there might be military forces searching for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda but we'd have no business in Iraq.

True, but in the this case liberal media is at fault. So there is nothing wrong for calling them on it.

I can't judge who's at fault really. Both sides are slinging just as much mud at each other. But it does kind of suck that if the liberals did indeed start the mud-slinging accusations that the Conservative side has to sling back and can't professionally and maturely wipe itself off and respond intelligently and professionaly to the liberal media. Again, I'll use the "kids in a fight" analogy :/

[troubles1]

Bad stuff just catches our eye more if there is a story about a guy getting his genitals caught in a meat grinder , and another of a kitten getting rescued from a tree witch would you be talking about for days?

[cellardoor6]

At 10/18/06 08:47 PM, zzzzd wrote:

At 10/18/06 08:26 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Disproportionate bad news is a political tool by opposition parties. If ANYTHING happens that is bad or negative, ANYWHERE in the world, people will blame the US and it will increase Anti-US sentiment even if the US has nothing to do with it. People believe that America is the center of all bad in the world therefore any bad news will be blamed on the US.

Your distorted in your view my friend, People aren't anti-american were anti people like you who have to bring up America in every fuckin post you make.
I don't no how you can keep repeating the same thing about everyone being anti-US when your Blatently Anti every other country. Your always find a way to bring your love for america into every topic and your hate for Canada, Mexico, Britain, france.......etc.

I don't hate Canada, Mexico, Britain, or France. I dislike the actions and behavior of individuals and organizations within those countries. I don't hate Britain because of morons like you, I dislike certain British viewpoints that are uttered by uneducated, misinformed, and ignorant little children like you. You distory REALITY in your head, you have a predisposition to label all things that counter your untrue views as 'hatred' when really its just strident, informed and coherent criticism.

Your only method of defense is to attack me and say that I hate people and therefore that my points aren't credible. But you can't actually argue my points because you don't know much about anything. When you got disproved about your whole "Canada defeated America" claim, you just stuck by your opinion which every credible history book and source in the world disproves.

Grow up. Is the only thing you can do is whine about me? Argue my points for once if you are mentally capable instead of just saying 'you hate people blah blah blah'.

[MortalWound]

Tell me, which of the following sounds more interesting:

1) 5 puppies saved from fire.

2) Eating certain foods may lower cholesterol

3) Oprah's miracle diet secret

4) Serial Rapist kills three, rapes 10, and kills himself

sorry about #3, It came from the same stupid junk email that I get over and over

The truth is that the bad out wieghs the good in almost every case. Ahh, but you wanted some good news today? I just save a bunch of money on my car insurrance by switchin to Geiko. (sorry bout that)

But my real good new: DBHC will make you laugh, or cry, if you knew what it was.

[zzzzd]

At 10/19/06 01:55 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

I don't hate Canada, Mexico, Britain, or France. I dislike the actions and behavior of individuals and organizations within those countries. I don't hate Britain because of morons like you, I dislike certain British viewpoints that are uttered by uneducated, misinformed, and ignorant little children like you. You distory REALITY in your head, you have a predisposition to label all things that counter your untrue views as 'hatred' when really its just strident, informed and coherent criticism.

lol no it's not, re-read you fuckin posts, recently you randomely started callin canadians Cowards because of an american who sayed he wanted to move to canada, and you've proper slagged of mexicans, your continuly callin every one anti-american because everyones jealous of america., your posts are often very biased an sometimes just nicely typed bollocks. You rarely have anything to back up your claims. Your keep callin people uneducated and childish if they don't agree with the shyte you right.

If someone doesn;t agree with the war on iraq or guns, you call them cowards an hippys an shit.

I mean in the other post were i sayed 1812 was a canadian/British victory you told me to kill myself, lol

to the actuall post an not me just bitchin bout cellardoor.

The news shows Mostly Bad news because Bad news is unfortunatly more important than good news. Terrorist attacks, soldiers dying an murders are need to be told more than how Jamie Olivers getting on with his school dinners

[cellardoor6]

At 10/19/06 03:39 AM, zzzzd wrote:

At 10/19/06 01:55 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

I don't hate Canada, Mexico, Britain, or France. I dislike the actions and behavior of individuals and organizations within those countries. I don't hate Britain because of morons like you, I dislike certain British viewpoints that are uttered by uneducated, misinformed, and ignorant little children like you. You distory REALITY in your head, you have a predisposition to label all things that counter your untrue views as 'hatred' when really its just strident, informed and coherent criticism.

lol no it's not, re-read you fuckin posts, recently you randomely started callin canadians Cowards because of an american who sayed he wanted to move to canada,

Um I said that that the Canadian forefathers were the ones who decided to submit to the British rather than fight for their freedom. Hense they were cowards. I didn't say Canadians are all cowards.

and you've proper slagged of mexicans, your continuly callin every one anti-american because everyones jealous of america., your posts are often very biased an sometimes just nicely typed bollocks. You rarely have anything to back up your claims. Your keep callin people uneducated and childish if they don't agree with the shyte you right.

No i call people uneducated and Childish when they can't actually give a coherent argument to disagree with me, they just do what you are doing. You can't argue my points EVER, you just do what you're doing now.

Have you even had a post direct towards me that actually argued the points of the topic rather than saying "U iz biazed and U h8 all cuntreez butt Amerika urggh" or to that extent.

If someone doesn;t agree with the war on iraq or guns, you call them cowards an hippys an shit.

No I usually give an actual argument for how the Iraq war or Gun rights are good. Then when they attack me personally intead of attacking the message or the view, then I become critical of them.

The only person I have ever called a coward in this forum was the Ecko who said that he wouldn't have fought against the British in the revolutionary war but would rather have submitted to them and settled in Canada under British rule. That is a trait of cowardice I believe, and besides, Ecko has changed his profile about 7 times, he used to say he was Canada now he says he lives in San Francisco. Interesting...

I mean in the other post were i sayed 1812 was a canadian/British victory you told me to kill myself, lol

I said to kill yourself because you're pathetic in that you distort reality and keep spouting out lies. You say that 1812 was won by Canadians and was the reason Canada has more land today. Which are historically innaccurate, actually COMPLETELY WRONG.

And since you kept spouting out this nonsense even though you were disproved, you were showing your inability to see reality so I told you to kill yourself and rid the world of people like yourself.

to the actuall post an not me just bitchin bout cellardoor.

The news shows Mostly Bad news because Bad news is unfortunatly more important than good news. Terrorist attacks, soldiers dying an murders are need to be told more than how Jamie Olivers getting on with his school dinners

Bad news is distorted and taken out of context by people who benefit politically from the bad news. The Iraq war has claimed WAY less casualties than what is taking place in the Sudan, but nobody talks about that right now because their is more political gain to be made with Iraq. Bad news is a political tool.

For instance today CNN has been reporting that US Army General Caldwell said that the Iraq war is a failure. But they left out the fact that he said that the violence that is taking place and the coverage of it by the US media is being distorted for political purposes in the US mid-term elections. He only said that one of the combat operations in Iraq "did not meet expectations" then CNN is reporting that Caldwell said that the Iraq war policy is failing.

CNN is intentionnally creating out of context and overly bad news for political gain. CNN openly supports the Democratic party, they don't have one single Republican commentator, and they are owned by Ted Turner who was the single largest donator to the Democratic party in the Presidential election in 2004.

CNN creates overly bad news because their political goals would not be served if they reported the full truth and didn't make everything look bad. But CNN is the same news agency that had a 2 hour special on how Bill Clinton was the best president ever, completely failing to acknowledge the fact that Bill Clinton could have killed Osama Bin laden many times but refused to, and that much of the N. Korean nuclear program exists because Bill Clinton gave them money for 2 nuclear reactors and gave them nuclear technology.

CNN and other biased news agencies create bad news because it is necessary for their political goals, not because what is actually happening is relatively BAD. If they were reporting everything based on merit of news coverage, they would be talking about the genocide in Sudan which is claiming MANY MANY more lives than what is happening in Iraq.

Bad news today for the most part is propaganda, a tool, not the truth in context.

[MaGik-69]

At 10/16/06 05:23 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: Bad News sells

this is exactly right... everyone and anyone love drama,,,,

seriously would you rather read about a local donut store

reaching its 200,000 dollar mark or the latest muder.... if someone

already typed a post similar to this whoops.. my bad i didnt read all of the posts.