Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
More media denigration for no reason. Why would we sensationalize this? It's a pretty sensational story to begin with and doesn't need any embelishment. After all, if it's possible in mice, it's probably eventually possible in humans which leads to incredible medical opportunities down the road. What exactly could we "sensationalize" that would make it a more exciting story?
|
Oh, just to name a few things I can see:
* "Work is soon to be underway to find out if this can be applied to humans" - untrue.
* "This could be the solution to cancer, heart disease, et cetera." - possibly true, but unsubstantiated for humans
Realistically I take most of what I hear on the news with a grain of salt. A good example of sensationalization is the annual outbreak of what affects our children. Some years you hear nothing but tragedy in the news about kids drowning in their own pools. Statistically, this number doesn't change much, but some summers you hear about it like every other child on your block is going to drown. Some years it's kids left in cars. Some years it's poison in Halloween candy. Realistically, no year has much of an identifiable spike in these activities, but the news media needs to keep their ratings up, so when the summer gets to boring, they search for one or two stories that'll make people tune in. It's bullshit for the most part, and best case scenario, over sensationalizing things. Sure wish we had good news program managers like Fred Friendly instead of the boneheads we have now. News should be about news, not about ratings. Man, I almost sound like a republican *shiver*