News

Took a little break from blogland. Judging from comments and e-mail, I wasn't the only one. I'll do a catch-up on daily stuff in the next post. This one has been sitting in the Drafts folder for a while.

More than a few of you know what a newsaholic I've become. Somehow, I've gone from king of totally useless trivia to news freak (esp. on issues I feel strongly about). I've had a few casual questions in person, serious inquiries on this blog and a few pretty outrageous ones by e-mail on where I get my information. I thought maybe a post on news in general might be in order.

I'm not even sure where to start. I believe that news reporting in general is at both its best and its worst ever at this point in time. The sheer volume of news available to the average person is staggering. These days it's hard to know what to trust. Major journalists are admitting to accepting government cash, the internet is filled with so much nonsense it's hard to judge, the government is issuing video pieces that are being run as hard news by major networks, photojournalists are being refused shots of U.S. disaster areas (I won't even start on Iraq just now)...even photos can be doctored (by almost anyone with a computer) to the point you can't trust them. My point isn't really so much anti-governmental preaching, it's just that wading through the crap can be a full-time job. I think I'll start with me and segue back to this (that ought to surprise about...none of you!).

I usually start my daily foray with Google news. It's pretty mainstream and getting more so every day, but that's part of what I like about it. It also allows for depth by providing a very easy way of checking multiple articles on the same topic. Mine is set for U.S. preferences.

From there I usually go to whatreallyhappened.com (linked as WRH on this blog). It's a blog that includes comments by the owner on the front page. Read them or not (I agree with a lot of what he has to say, but if you don't, it doesn't detract from the main body of the site)...the vast majority of what is linked is hard news from reputable sources. From there I usually go to informationclearinghouse.com (linked here as: ICH); another very respected site connected to some extremely talented journalists. A lot of what is linked from there was also at WHR, but it's unique enough in its selection to separate it from WRH. These sites aren't people talking about the news. They are sites that link to stories in the news. News the world over. The owners choose what news to link, but that is their choice and doesn't reflect on the stories themselves. From there, I have a lot of sites I check in on from time to time.

Anything can set me off on a new trek. A study released on Aspartame sent me two hours deep...hell, an article on BSE changed my life. Topics that interest me include (but are not limited to): The Middle East in general (Iraq, Israel. Palestine, and Iran in particular), World Politics (U.S., Japanese and the aforementioned countries in particular), Terrorism in general (the causes of it, how it's dealt with in particular), Health and Diet (basically all of it), Depleted Uranium, Ecology...I could go on. I really do spend way too much time at this computer! I don't know if curiosity will kill this cat, but the lack of sleep it causes might contribute.

The more time I spend wading through the net, the more I appreciate the extra time I spend checking the source of what I'm reading. I usually check not only the writer, but who published the piece. Each is equally important in knowing where to place the piece in the grand scheme of things. Fox, CNN, BBC, Pravda, Al Jazeera, local papers and television news sites all the way down to individual journalists, etc. can each have a completely different take on the same topic. There is another thing I picked up along the way: "Follow the money". This will likely come up again in another post on studies (and polls, for that matter) done of about anything.

Much of mainstream media in the U.S. seems to compete for ratings WAY more than they compete for scooping other outlets...or even checking their sources. This isn't unique to the States, but they are a shining example. Maybe it used to be the norm that "scooping" others on hard-hitting, accurate, real-issue stories was the case, but I just don't see it in modern mainstream journalism anymore. "Selling" a piece and the planning for a piece to sell seems more the norm than investigative reorting on major issues these days. Do a comparison of the volume of reports on say the Michael Jackson trial, the Run-Away Bride (sounds like a movie title, doesn't it?) and say, the death-toll in Iraq sometime. Some of the examples are a little dated maybe, but you get the idea, right?

When taking in the news from varied sources you quickly find that they not only report on things differently, they report on different items altogether. What country something is published in makes a huge difference. I read (and watch) news from such diverse areas as Japan, Russia, Briton, China, Syria, Australia, Canada, Israel, South Africa...the list goes on. The point is that I like to read them all and try to sort out what's happening in the world from compiling what I've read. It's too easy to watch or read the news you expect to see. You don't really learn much at all. In some countries (and I'm mostly referring to the States), the news seems to be as much about talking points, catch phrases and selling points as it does about the news being covered. When the key point shifts from hard news reporting and investigative journalism to ratings, things really change.

I really enjoy getting my information from as many sources as possible. I even get a kick out of the differences I find. I don't know how closely what I get relates to the actual facts (although I suspect I get closer than some), but it sure is interesting. Talking about it (or more accurately writing about it) has made me friends and it's gotten me threats.

In a casual conversation (esp. after a few drinks with someone that seems interested), I'll throw out bits of this and that. I'm much more careful when I write. I wasn't kidding before when I said that I was considering a blog just on news issues. This blog started as a lark to give my family and friends no longer in Japan an easy way to get a little extra on my day-to-day life. It has changed somewhat to become a test of sorts. I throw a bunch of stuff out and see what reaction I get. Doing a real news/opinion site would require creating an original site, sponsors and the like. I'm not sure I'm up to all that just now...the variety is kind of fun too!

My response to this site so far has been as varied as the posts. I don't get as many responses from comments on the food I cook as the news I choose to care about. Go figure! I can say that the intensity and volume of comments tends to relate to the importance of what I wrote about. I think that's a good thing. I'll still be writing about the idiot answering cell phone e-mail while riding his bike...in my warped view of Life, that's a form of news too. :-) Bigger issues will also be fair game. Be warned that the current U.S. administration is just begging me to put up a few posts..by their actions, not at their request ;-)

As always, keep the comments coming. Be amused, be angry, think, read, research and refute, just kill time. It's all good!