Just a non-newsworthy rant
I don't know how many people read CNN.com, but I do. I read it because it has the layout of the old ABCNEWS.com, with easy to read headlines followed by more targeted categorical headlines below. ABCNEWS.com is now a shit hole of a website, so over-burdened with news quips and video links it makes my eyes hurt. Both CNN.com and ABCNEWS.com post headlines that are really links to video broadcasts, which sucks because if you just want to read the story, you can't. However, CNN.com suffers less from this stupid idea to get us all hooked on webcasted news. The whole reason I go online for news is to get away from the celebutants reading from a teleprompter. Thanks, but I can read on my own, without stuttering.
CNN.com and ABCNEWS.com also use the occasional banner bulletin when important breaking news happens. Taking a page from those newspapers of old, when words like WAR and TITANIC SINKS and VICTORY were the only thing above the fold, both sites flash colored banners above the less-important headlines. Props to the intern who thought it up, but boo-hiss to the executive editors at CNN.com who have ruined it already.
The banners on CNN.com are in different colors - sometimes red, sometimes yellow. Why exactly? Is red more important than yellow news? Does a red banner mean the news relates to blood shed? Or is a yellow banner just a ripened form of a red banner, signifying breaking news an hour ago? I remember when CNN made a good living deriding the Homeland Security color-coded alert scheme. At least that scheme was explained to me.
Did you hear yesterday that prosecutors decided not to charge Rush Limbaugh with a violation of his probation for possessing viagra? I heard about it, because it was a fucking red breaking news banner on CNN.com. If that is the kind of thing that makes a banner headline, then who does CNN.com think are its readers? They might as well start putting up banner headlines every hour on the hour that George Bush is still president, because the same group of people who thought the headline about Rush was a huge news-worthy shock and dissapointment will be waiting and willing to suffer the same dissappointment 24 times a day. The entire Rush Limbaugh non-event could have just as easily been a link under the U.S. News or Politics category. The whole thing makes me think that CNN.com has a pre-made purple banner headline with confetti animation for the day that Rush dies.
It's all very sad really . . . when a news organization, or at least the techie in charge of the banner headlines, telegraphs its ridiculous hatred for one individual so blatantly. And don't think for a moment that CNN.com was celebrating the fact that Rush was not going to be prosecuted further. If that was the case, the banner would have read "CNN.com has been purchased by FoxNews".
CNN.com and ABCNEWS.com also use the occasional banner bulletin when important breaking news happens. Taking a page from those newspapers of old, when words like WAR and TITANIC SINKS and VICTORY were the only thing above the fold, both sites flash colored banners above the less-important headlines. Props to the intern who thought it up, but boo-hiss to the executive editors at CNN.com who have ruined it already.
The banners on CNN.com are in different colors - sometimes red, sometimes yellow. Why exactly? Is red more important than yellow news? Does a red banner mean the news relates to blood shed? Or is a yellow banner just a ripened form of a red banner, signifying breaking news an hour ago? I remember when CNN made a good living deriding the Homeland Security color-coded alert scheme. At least that scheme was explained to me.
Did you hear yesterday that prosecutors decided not to charge Rush Limbaugh with a violation of his probation for possessing viagra? I heard about it, because it was a fucking red breaking news banner on CNN.com. If that is the kind of thing that makes a banner headline, then who does CNN.com think are its readers? They might as well start putting up banner headlines every hour on the hour that George Bush is still president, because the same group of people who thought the headline about Rush was a huge news-worthy shock and dissapointment will be waiting and willing to suffer the same dissappointment 24 times a day. The entire Rush Limbaugh non-event could have just as easily been a link under the U.S. News or Politics category. The whole thing makes me think that CNN.com has a pre-made purple banner headline with confetti animation for the day that Rush dies.
It's all very sad really . . . when a news organization, or at least the techie in charge of the banner headlines, telegraphs its ridiculous hatred for one individual so blatantly. And don't think for a moment that CNN.com was celebrating the fact that Rush was not going to be prosecuted further. If that was the case, the banner would have read "CNN.com has been purchased by FoxNews".
Labels: Politics and such
posted by J.r.n at 4:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home