Staying Up with the News 

Published in Ouachita Citizen June 2023 

TV news broadcasts captured broad national attention in the 1960s with the popularity of Walter Cronkite (CBS), Chet Huntley and David Brinkley (NBC), and a succession of different anchors on the ABC network. Evening national news broadcasts went from 15 to 30-minutes of coverage in 1963. This was another world from the 24/7 news availability on many media outlets now.

My parents primarily viewed programs on local station KNOE (CBS affiliate – Channel 8) instead of KTVE (NBC affiliate – Channel 10), so I watched a lot of Walter Cronkite. I particularly enjoyed the short news commentary given at the tail end of each evening news program by Eric Sevareid. The Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations, the Kennedy and King assassinations, and the Vietnam War and Civil Rights protests were among the major issues that Sevareid examined.  He was articulate and sometimes eloquent in his analysis of breaking major news stories.

As a kid, I would watch my parents, extended family members, and other adults discuss political issues. I yearned to be a participant in those interesting conversations rather than a mere adolescent observer. My ticket to be included seemed to be having something significant to contribute based on having actual knowledge of news events. So, I followed closely the news, as well as had a strong interest in history, geography, and social studies in school. The outside world seemed complicated and confusing, and I believed that I needed as much help as possible to begin to understand the seeming irrationality often displayed in human decision making and behavior.

Eric Sevareid and a few other news commentators then certainly added their own perspectives or spins to hard news content. They didn’t have anything like the time available or the intense competition, though, that exists on today’s numerous TV channels and social media sources. TV investigative reporting and commentary programs such as 60 Minutes (CBS) and 20/20 (NBC) didn’t premier until 1968 and 1978, respectively. Newspaper editorials, as well as magazine commentary in Time, Newsweek, and US News & World Report, helped shape public knowledge and views then. Radio commentators, such as Paul Harvey, also had some influence.     

The term, “mainstream media,” often applied today, seems a more apt label for media options 50 or 60 years ago. Now we have more diverging streams of political spin. If any broadcast network is more of a dominant stream for news commentary today, it is Fox News. Along with Newsmax TV and One America News Network, conservatives can easily have their political sentiments reinforced, as can liberals or progressives with competing media outlets.

Online news aggregator apps have also changed how people receive news content and commentary. Readers can gain access easily through their cell phones or computer devices to many news sources that display news spins crossing the wide political spectrum. One popular aggregator that I’ve used for years, SmartNews, provides broad content options for free. SmartNews reviews many thousands of news, sports, science, and culture articles every day and offers frequent updates of top trending stories.

Curio is another aggregator that turns news content from many sources into audio choices for those who are driving autos, exercising, or just preferring not to read. Among many other news aggregators are AP News, Google News, Apple News, Pocket, Flipboard, Fark, and Feedly.

More often we see and hear faults expressed concerning modern media trends rather than words of appreciation or praise associated with these changes. We don’t always agree, also, on what we find disagreeable. Although I find more positives than negatives in recent news reporting trends, I’ll comment on a couple of personally irritating online practices.

I can understand, to some extent, the need for many advertisements that intrude, slow, and distract my digesting online news content. My major problem with many news sources and stories, though, is not keeping promises made through their enticing headlines. These headlines often sensationalize and overpromise, and then these content providers underdeliver. Some news sources seem to have excessive “click-bait” intentions and employ a version of the old “bait and switch” ploy. The news sources often can’t provide much new or informative related to the headline topic, so they divert you to a related topic.  

It's also frustrating when online content providers fail to answer the basic questions of who, what, where, when, why, and how. Breaking news reports often can’t answer these questions immediately, but even some commentaries days later don’t provide fundamental information surrounding important events or key issues.  

Fortunately, news consumers today can usually find multiple sources delivering news and commentary about national or global events. We can also learn which news outlets do more reliable reporting and analysis. Search engines, such as Google or Bing, can help locate sources that provide “the rest of the story.” It’s much more a question if we have the interest or inclination to learn more about local, regional, national, and global events. Generations ago, many readers or viewers didn’t have convenient access to more than a very few news outlets.