I have wondered this for some time and finally have a group to messageboard this...

!. Each day or time the news does a story of what happened in Washington DC or some popular site, they always show film of the place on the day there were there. 

  Why don' t they just show an old clip on file of the outside of the white house or capitol building?
  It still looks the same!  Or they would say in NY today and show people walking around NY from THAT DAY! Why not show a standard clip(not outdated), whenever they have to do this kind of story.


2. Why when they report an earthquake story in California do they talk about the nearest big city instead of the city it occurs in i.e.  Today an earthquake hit 5 miles south of LA or 20 miles south of Sacramento...well, it had to have hit IN SOME TOWN???  !!!

Glad I'm writing this when I have a lot of time on my hands :)   

I have wondered this for some time and finally have a group to messageboard this...

!. Each day or time the news does a story of what happened in Washington DC or some popular site, they always show film of the place on the day there were there. 

   Why don' t they just show an old clip on file of the outside of the white house or capitol building?
   It still looks the same!  Or they would say in NY today and show people walking around NY from THAT DAY! Why not show a standard clip(not outdated), whenever they have to do this kind of story.


2. Why when they report an earthquake story in California do they talk about the nearest big city instead of the city it occurs in i.e.  Today an earthquake hit 5 miles south of LA or 20 miles south of Sacramento...well, it had to have hit IN SOME TOWN???  !!!

Glad I'm writing this when I have a lot of time on my hands :)     


1. Camera crews get paid to shoot new footage, not recycle old stuff.

2. If an earthquake hit Paradise, CA, would you know where that was? But you do know where LA, San Francisco and Sacramento are, yes? So that's why they use that as a reference point.

1. Camera crews get paid to shoot new footage, not recycle old stuff.

2. If an earthquake hit Paradise, CA, would you know where that was? But you do know where LA, San Francisco and Sacramento are, yes? So that's why they use that as a reference point.
1. Yes. And it would get a bit old seeing an old '80s video of NYC everytime something happens there.  ;)

2. It also helps for those in other countries who get the news feed who would not know where the hell Paradise City, CA is, so it's easier for us to work outr where the earthquake was when they say "20 miles out from San Fransico" or whatever.

I know where Paradise CA, is. But that's just me. :)

I know where Paradise CA, is. But that's just me. :)
OK, my mistake. I though Paradise, CA might've been a small town or somewhere.  ;)

OK, my mistake. I though Paradise, CA might've been a small town or somewhere.  ;)


Isn't that where the grass is green and the girls are pretty?

British news companies must be tight fisted then because they will often show library pictures of an area.  Unless its a major story when they feel the need to send in one of the own correspondents.

I DID say WITHOUT showing too old of footage. HOWEVER I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WASHINGTON DC STORIES and when they show the capitol building or when they talk of the NY subway system they could just show footage of the same train in each story...the stations can cut their costs etc..

as far as mentioning the cities,...Who cares where it's NEAR...the particular city expeienced it give them recognition THEN say where it is near just lie there was an accident JUST OUTSIDE OF NEW JERSEY today wow..that was close-by!

Still wondering if there IS a good reason?

 1: They want to grab your attention

 2: They have their own agenda, media spin

 3: Shock value

 4: Ratings

 5: Ratings

 6: Ratings

 It does seem when a disaster happens outside the country the exact location is named. I reckon the media figures the average slob on the street probably wouldn't know the name of the nearest large city in that instance.

Why is it that during the network newscasts, every commercial is for the latest prescription drug that I need to ask my doctor about? In other words, if I take their little purple pill will I too find myself in the middle of a field on a nice summer day flying a kite with a bunch of happy children or some crap like that?  ???

Why is it that during the network newscasts, every commercial is for the latest prescription drug that I need to ask my doctor about?

Because the people who peddle those pills assume that more people watch the news than any other program in the same timeslot. If you pay attention, most of side effects of those "wonder" drugs are worse than the ailment being treated. Makes me wonder just who's doing/paying for the clinical trials and exactly what role the FDA plays in the approval process these days.

In other words, if I take their little purple pill will I too find myself in the middle of a field on a nice summer day flying a kite with a bunch of happy children or some crap like that?

I suppose if you have a field nearby, fly kites and can round up some happy urchins.(When in a field, try to avoid the crap)  ;D

Because the people who peddle those pills assume that more people watch the news than any other program in the same timeslot. If you pay attention, most of side effects of those "wonder" drugs are worse than the ailment being treated. Makes me wonder just who's doing/paying for the clinical trials and exactly what role the FDA plays in the approval process these days.
I always figured that it was more because the media constanly bombard us with bad news, images of death and destruction, and basically tell us night after night after night that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, but hey, you can take this little pill and you'll feel a whole lot better. Brilliant marketing strategy, if you ask me.

I DID say WITHOUT showing too old of footage. HOWEVER I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WASHINGTON DC STORIES and when they show the capitol building or when they talk of the NY subway system they could just show footage of the same train in each story...the stations can cut their costs etc..

as far as mentioning the cities,...Who cares where it's NEAR...the particular city expeienced it give them recognition THEN say where it is near just lie there was an accident JUST OUTSIDE OF NEW JERSEY today wow..that was close-by!

Still wondering if there IS a good reason?
Peter..those stations have to give their camera crews work...That is what cameramen are trained for and that's why they choose to work at TV stations...plus did it ever occur to you that when you mention subways that many cities have several subway lines/routes? And that they are showing the actual subway train where the news happened? And with Washington DC they don't always just show the Capitol Building or the White House..they show the films when something big happens there, when the people in the shots are part of the news. And as far as NYC..it's never really the same.

Peter..those stations have to give their camera crews work...That is what cameramen are trained for and that's why they choose to work at TV stations...plus did it ever occur to you that when you mention subways that many cities have several subway lines/routes? And that they are showing the actual subway train where the news happened? And with Washington DC they don't always just show the Capitol Building or the White House..they show the films when something big happens there, when the people in the shots are part of the news. And as far as NYC..it's never really the same.
And as mentioned before other countries get the news feeds..and they are not really familiar with America's small towns.

I thought the MOST interested in the quake or event would be THE PEOPLE IN THE TOWN IT HAPPENED IN...??

I watch LOCAL news so that's what brought it up, the locals know pretty much where atheir town is but the announcers can say it happen in Fluflang- 10 miles south of Fresno or whatever.

Camera crews are fine to do interviews or broadcasted events but I have seen the news do a Washington story and just show people walking down the street in DC or like when they do the 'how heavy people are' or ;smoking is bad for the millions that do it' story...theycould just show a clip of people smoking from a shoot they did earlier in the year or the same FAT people walking down the street they showed in the last report.(Plus a lot of the time they only show half the person anyway).

Camerapeople are fine but for getting into the face and lives of the people in the story..inanimate things hardly change unless they PAINTED OVER the White House etc..

I dunno, maybe the camera people belong to a union and the station has to use them. And if there were no live shots the ace reporter Biff Blowhard couldn't show off his perfect hair and gleaming white teeth.
How is your news anyway? All we have are a bunch of talking heads. Sometimes the say some really stupid or just painfully obvious things. I spend more time laughing than listening.

I always figured that it was more because the media constanly bombard us with bad news, images of death and destruction, and basically tell us night after night after night that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, but hey, you can take this little pill and you'll feel a whole lot better. Brilliant marketing strategy, if you ask me.

Hmmm, that's a possibility I hadn't though of.

I dunno, maybe the camera people belong to a union and the station has to use them. And if there were no live shots the ace reporter Biff Blowhard couldn't show off his perfect hair and gleaming white teeth.
How is your news anyway? All we have are a bunch of talking heads. Sometimes the say some really stupid or just painfully obvious things. I spend more time laughing than listening.

Hmmm, that's a possibility I hadn't though of.
I think television camera crews ARE unionized.