12.07
A few weeks ago, during the debates on Health Care and Whether or Not To Send Troops to Afghanistan, I thought of something interesting: why aren’t news shows designed subjectively rather than topically?
I thought it was funny, in regards to the Health Care and Troop Deployment debates that they were looked at in totally different ways. The health care issue was always discussed as a financial burden and the troop deployment was seen as a security and foreign affairs issue. The bottom line was that they should have both been discussed from a cost perspective. Sending troops to Afghanistan is as much a cost issue as keeping people healthy is an internal security issue. But the media folks, especially the ones on TV, only reported each issue through one angle, leaving me with questions, such as:
How much safer would be from disease and illness under a health care plan with a government option?
What about the cost of sending troops halfway across the world?
After not hearing the answers to these questions, I came up with the idea that the news should be broken up into subjects, like in high school. Imagine a news channel that broke down the subjects of its topics by the hour with a “bottom line” news ticker announcing the latest breaking news items. The day could go something like this:
- 6AM – 7AM: Economics
- 7AM – 8AM: Politics
- 8AM – 9AM: International Affairs/Relations
- 9AM – 10AM: Religion
- 10AM – 11AM: Gossip
- 11AM – 12PM: Sports
- 12PM – 1PM: Legal and Law
- 1PM – 2PM: Art
- 2PM – 3PM: Media Studies
- 3PM – 4PM: Transportation and Autos
- 4PM – 5PM: Science and Technology
- 5PM – 6PM: Military Science
Then after 6PM, the networks would just repeat the first show with new updates and news. The way I see it, if the news examined every issue through every spectrum, the viewers would get a 360 degree view on the issues. There might even be calls to debate on some of the issues; hopefully those debates would be more poignant and meaningful. And then perhaps we would have a more educated viewing audience, one that is more well-rounded and fluent on all aspects of the issues.
What do you think? Could this work?
No Comment.
Add Your Comment