Network news is still relevant/Don't confuse News with opinion

The main reason that the three traditional network news programs are still relevant to me is that they have a half hour to present the stories, whereas the cable networks with their all "news" channels are faced with filling 24 hours of ratings driven content.  To me, this means that those networks (and I include MSNBC in this category), by necessity, blur the lines between news and opinion.

 

 

>

 

 

 

 

Call me naive, but people like Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow are probably spinning in their graves when they see what has happened to their profession (yes, I know that O'Reilly isn't a news anchor. If you want, I could put in pictures of Keith Obermann or Megyn Kelly).

 

Restating my point, the cable networks are massively blurring the lines between objective news reporting and I think that too many people are not understanding the difference. Here is a small primer:

 

Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson and Brian Kilmeade of Fox News are primarily personalities and commentators.

 

Likewise for Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz of MSNBC.

 

I do believe that Shepard Smith of FOX and Chuck Todd of MSNBC do strive to be at least somewhat objective, from what I've seen.

 

 



Getting back into shape

I've been a human blob this whole year - in all aspects:

In the 10 months since my last marathon, I've gained about 11 pounds and my longest run has been 8 miles (last night). Lost my mojo - this is a bad thing considering that I didn't start out with much mojo in the first place.  I started trying to get back into shape about a month ago, and am happy to say that I've lost 5 of those pounds - starting to feel better physically and am getting out of the funk that I've been in all year.

I HAVE GOALS!!! More on that another time.