News to Them
A friend posted a link to social media of some clips from You Tube of old TV newscast introductions, and I love broadcasting history examples like that. Remember the old “Eyewitness News” moniker? It was developed first in New York in the 1970s, and the name and concept was popular in every TV market in the country. Some still use it, it having been such a successful device for them.
The concept was that instead of an omniscient anchor in a studio reading the news, they went out and let you hear from people who saw what happened, and the technology advancements of the time allowed not only a quicker turnaround with videotape instead of film, but also more live broadcasts. Literally, you heard from the “eyewitnesses”.
What’s the opposite of “eyewitness news”? In essence, it’s “hearsay news”…and we’ve suffered from that a lot in recent years.
All sorts of stories with anonymous sources…unverified documents and assertions…and unfounded claims of treasonous acts by the president…those were pretty common of late, despite the lack of on-the-record evidence.
Yet certain stories this year…the Biden family finances…election fraud…have been ignored despite the prevalence of eyewitness accounts.
So maybe a good way to start the new year is to revert back to the old “eyewitness news” approach…literally, hearing from eyewitnesses and downplaying stories that are unsourced or badly sourced. I suppose it might happen should the current president no longer be in the White House, since that’s when the rules changed…but that’s further indication of how badly out of focus American journalism is today.
