Monday, August 28, 2006


Can we say 'jumping to conclusions'? After the obsession of the media of John Mark Karr we now have what wasn't much of a surprise come out: here.

10 years after the girl's murder this guy comes forward and gets a ton of media attention and it all turns out to be a load of crap. So I guess the media can go back to speculating on if it was her mother or dad or cousin or dog or cat or whatever. Oh what I would give to get back to a straight-talking media where the anchor's don't think of themselves as TV stars. Jackasses.


Silent Joe said...

Agree. I'm so sick of the seasationalistic approach the news of the "new age" has taken. If we wanted to watch a made for TV drama we would. Just feed us the facts, no speculation. Let us think for ourselves dammit.

Antijen said...

It's not just the anchors - the criminals/suspects are TV stars now too. Why do you think this guy "confessed" to a crime he didn't commit? For the same reason that people go on shows like Maury Povitch to confront their fear of mustard or confess that they're cross-dressing prostitute grandfathers.

Look, ma! I'm on TV!

But really, the news is just sad to watch now. I don't know what channel I was watching while I was in the States this week, but it was hard not to laugh at the sensationalism painted over each and every pointless news story. Actually, I did laugh at most of them. Do all anchors use the scary movie preview voice now? And do we need a helicopter at the scene of a house fire, with live updates every two minutes? It hasn't gotten quite so bad on the Canadian networks yet, but I know it's coming. Because we wanna be just like you!

Silent Joe said...

If this news style goes to canada, i'm gonna have to rethink my escape plan for when the US government really f*cks up.