Anchorwoman

I have been fascinated by some of the reaction to this show. It is still not clear to me if it is a mocumentary, reality show, or sitcom. I have seen claims for all three...including on the official show website. Actually, since they advertise it as reality show we will go with that..which kind of demonstrates the UNREALITY that a subset of national media...yes, and the local tv news too...is living in.





Regardless, a LOT of the talk about the show centers on journalistic credibility, the credentials of Lauren Jones to be there, and how insulting this show is or isn't to the news people.





Uh, yeah...journalistic credibility, standards, and needs...give it up people. As many, many people have already pointed out...one of the people cracking on Lauren's credibility...on the show...is the woman responsible for discovering, researching, and producing a segment on potholes.





Not a typo. Potholes.





And that is one of the things that gets me to laughing at the earnest producer. You see, if it is a real, functioning news show going on, the pothole story is believable.And that makes me sad. When I was watching the show, I did not know it was a reality show. I thought it was a scripted sitcom like the office. I actually thought it was referencing The Office. And I thought it was hilarious that they were mocking some of the stupid stuff presented as "news" when they were doing the bit on potholes. Then it turned out...that was a REAL "news" story, not a parody! It suddenly wasn't as funny. I stopped watching the news a long time ago because there was so little actual news and so many stupid-smurf pieces on crap such as that. It is completely believable they would have a segment on potholes. And it is probably followed up by a piece on the seniors complaining because they are no longer allowed day old donuts at the senior center (yes, that is a genuine story currently in the "news".) More hard hitting news to follow...what, the possible addition to the McDonalds menu of curly fries? Some nut job downtown trying to sell tin foil hats? What other must know information do you have for me that will help me live my life in a way that improves it?





The television news is nothing but an exercise in time waste. People revere crap-sacks like Brokaw, Jennings, and...uh...well, okay, so I actually can't name any more than that but I am willing to bet a lot of you can.



News flash; someone like Lauren Jones who at least looks good while wasting our time with pieces on the birth of a zoo animal...yes, that is also a legit news piece, unlike the curly fries/tin foil hat ones I made up above...but they fit in....has more value to the evening news than every "legitimate" "news" "reporter" as news anchor. Check out the Simpson's riff on news anchors, Kent Brockman. I am never sure which is sadder...the ridiculous, cynical stuff they show...or that I believe it could show up on a genuine network "news" broadcast. Like, you know, a serious piece on potholes.





It is ironic that this should come up at the same time that blowhard journalism professor Skube is attacking bloggers as not worthy of being considered reporters because they don't do the work...ironically, in this same article, he himself did not do the work, citing as an example of bloggers who do no "real reporting with fact-checking" the man responsible for breaking a lot of important news stories recently...





For one powerful rebuttal to Skube, check this out. The point here is NOT that bloggers are worthy of consideration as legit news reporters...I would not argue that they are. Nor is it easy to define credibility. Then again...the same holds true for the major news...remember the retractions 20/20 routinely does? And that recent report on how many retractions and corrections papers DON'T do, even when they are repeatedly asked?



The point is...the show Anchorwoman COULD be a sitcom pointing out all the problems with the current news...credibility, ridiculous stories, the idea who relates the news is tied to who researches it...how stupid do they think we are, anyway? Are we supposed to believe the reporter doing the "remote" at the Portland airport flew to Denver to check out the conditions there she is reporting on from here in Portland? (Yes, that is an actual event...the Denver airport was snowed in so they did a remote from the Portland airport to report it...uh, okay, it improves the story how? Idiots.)

The credibility does not come from the anchor doing their own research. It comes from presenting relevant, accurate stories regardless of WHO researched them. The Valerie Plame story was important not because it was broken by some major news source...it wasn't, it was broken by a blogger...but because it was well-researched and presented to the community by people they found credible due to the traceable research.

Enough already of "an unnamed source", also known as "We the public believe you made it up but believe so strongly that you are accurate that you need a credible witness."

News flash; if you were, say, a notary, for a witness to be credible, you yourself have to know them. How many of us know these tv news reporters? Hint; very, very few.

It is really sad because a credible, informative news team is a valuable asset to the nation. Unfortunately....we have news broadcasts so ridiculous (too many examples to point to any specific one) and filled with lies (the big-time news anchors "reporting" on Bush's service record, for instance) and editorial...every newscast out there...that they seem to be more fictional than a Kent Brockman broadcast.

No doubt Anchorwoman won't be with us for long. There is no way the news telecasts can allow someone who didn't "pay their dues" actually have a chance to gain ratings. Meanwhile...it is a pretty funny show that parodies news...err, shows how far news shows have descended. Although it is a local broadcast...the same thing holds true for ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, etc and their "National News" broadcasts...they are to news what Paris Hilton is to intelligent actions.