[Infowarrior] - TV news observation...and a question

[Richard Forno]

(x-posted to a few places)

Granted, most cable news has become sensational to the point of absurdity in
recent years, but has anyone else noticed that most of the cable networks --
particularly CNN -- seem to be abusing the "Breaking News" moniker since the
Lebanon situation broke nearly two weeks ago?

While a major event -- such as a full-scale Israeli invasion of Lebanon or a
series of dramatic Hez attacks - would be significant from the norm of the
generally-known situation in the region right now, why is a two-week-old
story still promoted as "breaking"?  Short of major new developments in the
situation, should there still be a "breaking news" graphic on the screen?

This leads me to wonder, aside from using the term as a magnet for channel
surfers to attract eyeballs to support understandable business goals of the
news networks, what *should* constitute the use of the "breaking" news
graphic? And, does anyone think this practice is being abused by the news
channels simply to attract more viewers?

-rick
Infowarrior.org