CNN & the Twitterbird

CNN & the Twitterbird January 5, 2012

Back in my reporting days, I convinced the editors to let me write a feature story about bowling from the ball’s perspective — as if I was interviewing the ball.

For the record, I don’t bowl.

I don’t even know how to keep score bowling.

And besides bowling balls don’t talk.

It wasn’t easy trying to get a newspaper editor to let me write what was basically a creative short story. Still, readers loved it and I had fun.

I was reminded of that story this week as I watched the news coverage of the GOP primary in VA. Did you see the CNN staff trying to keep track of all the GOP’s social ranking?

According to CNN Ron Paul leads the Twitter poll. Meaning, I think, that more people talk about Paul than vote for him.

The take away from that I guess is that everyone wants to bowl with Paul but he’s never going to win a presidential election.

Listen, I don’t know how you feel but I don’t care who has the highest social media ranking among the GOP candidates.

That’s like keeping track of who knocks over the most bowling pins. I just want to elect somebody who can keep this country out of the gutters.

Really, CNN?

Social Media Rankings versus Social Issues policymaking?

Way to murk up the waters.

It used to be rare that journalists got the opportunity to exercise their creatives sides. There is a reason they call it the news, after all.

Now it seems like 85 percent of what’s been reported is made-up nonsense.

If this trend continues, we are all doomed for the gutters.

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Paul has been getting a lot of actual votes, too, Karen.

  • Whoa! I just realized the impact of your opening statement: You grew up in a trailer and yet you don’t bowl? That ain’t right!

  • AFRoger

    I recall the story about the group of old guys who told the same jokes every time they got together. To save time and breath, they simply gave all the old jokes a number. After that, they would sit with their coffee and the banter would go like this: Eighteen! (mild chuckles) Thirty four! (laughter) Nine! (a few guffaws and snorts) …Etc.

    How many “debates” already? Over what? The winner of Iowa’s straw poll last August finished sixth in the caucus and quit. The winner of the caucus “won” by eight votes. In a state having one percent of the electorate. And the win does not determine selection of delegates to the party’s August nominating convention, by which time the nominee will already have been determined for months.

    Perhaps a system of speed debating and speed campaigning could complete the whole process nationwide in 24 hours. All the labels and attack ads could be written up beforehand and numbered. Candidates could simply face off numerically:

    Candidate A: Nineteen, my fellow Americans. Nine-TEEN!
    Candidate B: (smirking) Twenty-three, my friend, TWENTY…THREE!
    Candidate A: Uh, sure. Spoken like a true four…or is it seven? I dunno…

    Pundit after the debate: Mr. A’s kicking himself over that response to twenty-three, dontcha think? No passion there at all…really gonna cost him in Florida five minutes from now…

    • Steve T.

      Yeah, Brother, and it all adds up to a big zero. Except, that unfortunately, there is surely a cost.

      • AFRoger

        Oh, a horrible cost, Steve. The more money spent on campaigning, the more we are distracted from the real work of decision making and moving ourselves into a future of our own design and choosing–as opposed to a future that arrives by default. These days, our political “free” speech is the most expensive speech in human history. Yet the benefit is repeatedly inversely proportional to cost. Seen a reset button around here anywhere??? Gotta be one…

  • Sherwood8028

    …”85 percent of what’s been reported is made-up nonsense.”

    I would have said 95%, but then someone might ask, why do “we” read it?

    Therein lies the greater problem.