Dumbing down of the English language

Doesn't make much sense especially when you are comparing ITN news with Fox. If you compared ITN news 17 years ago and now it would make more sense. The format is basically the same for the 10 o'clock news on ITN.

 

There's a fantastic documentary on Celebrity culture and how it has influenced the way we think about ourselves and the world. In particular how it's the ex-celebrity gossip columnists -like Piers Morgan- who now edit and produce the major news outlets and these standards have corrupted our other media outlets.

It's a little Off-topic, but I think you might like it.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LW7b7N8N1xA"]The film that Max Clifford didn't want you to see- Starsuckers DVD trailer dir: Chris Atkins - YouTube[/ame]

 

Sorry, couldn't help myself

But otherwise, I fully agree.
I can't stand watching the 6pm news - it's like watching a cheesy daytime soap-opera sometimes, the way the presenters try and banter with each other and force some sort of 'relationship' on screen. Just because younger people are more likely to be watching at that time, the news casters need to try and make everything more attractive.

Something that also bugs me, though maybe I'm wrong;

After a serious/tragic news story, where the presenters have been somber and respectful, if the next story is more light-hearted, they just seem to perk right up and be ready to host cbeebies. Is it just me, or in 'the old days', did the serious stories come on first, then the weather, then the sport, then the 'funny' stories? Now everything is mashed together, and it seems a tad harsh to people who may have been affected by story A when the news-casters jump straight into story B and flick their emotions like a switch.

 

Language is there for communicating. If you can understand what is being said, anything more is just pomp.

I don't long for the days when you couldn't get a broadcasting job if you had a regional accent that originated north of the Watford gap.

 

When I want news I go to Columbia Broadcasting (CBS) and Public Broadcasting (PBS) here in the States. I'm also a huge fan of BBC and Al Jazeera.

Here in the States there is a growing attention to Social Media and posting information on YOU TUBE and I am not sure that the veracity is there. I miss the sound Journalism of Edward R Murrow, Walter Cronkite and the rest but maybe my goals are different from others. For instance, I have NO interest in Sports, Entertainment and Media. Instead, I want to know what is happening on the local, national and international news. IMHO these are areas that deserve a lot more consideration than just talking heads and sound bits. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

Problem 1: You're comparing British TV to American TV. British-English and American-English, from basic spelling to the culture they produce, are two very different creatures. I'd go so far as to say different languages altogether, as much as Spanish and Portuguese.

Problem 2: Languages evolve over time. The British-English used in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s is very different to that used in the 1830s, 1840s and 1850s. Ask anyone from the 19th Century what they think of the language circa mid-20th century and they'd likely say it was dumbed down. You say dumbed down, I say evolved.

Don't be a lingua-snob. This is a battle you can't win.

 

I tend to hold with Mark Twain.

"The difference between "the right word" and "almost the right word" is the
difference between lightning and a lightning bug."

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

I don't watch the news anymore. I have reached a point where I don't care. There is always going to be selfless people being heroic, criminals doing bad things, politicians with agendas, kittens being cute, people abusing their power and so on and so forth. The only that changes are the details.

I do watch the weather and science shows because they provide useful or educational information.

Of course that is just my opinion.

 

I could pick up a few more bits, but this will do.

I listen to some of the guys in the office. If their speech were written it would look apalling.

It may be that you're watching the wrong news programs. Personally I try not to watch the news at all - I'll generally listen to Radio 4 news instead.

 

I'm a lingua-snob, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone who talks for a living to do it properly. I don't expect everyone to be as anal about the English language as I am, but I do expect it from journalists. It's their job.

I also think you're exaggerating the differences between British and American English. I spent a week in England when I was in college and had no trouble with anything other than a few bits of local slang. Hell, one of the most popular late night talk show hosts in America is Craig Ferguson, a Scotsman. Grammar, punctuation, syntax, etc. are all exactly the same.

 

I agree gents.

I think if we look back we can see when this all started.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSdqhm_Lqe8&feature=youtube_gdata_player"]Tiswas - Pulsebeat with Trevor Mc Doughnut - Uploaded 27/11/11 - YouTube[/ame]

 

Yep.

This annoys the hell out of me.

 

No their job is to report the news. If this means "dumbing down" the language to make it more appeasing to the general public and to inform a larger audience then all the better. Why should they adhere to outdated standards only to please a few "lingua-snobs"?

Chaucer/Shakespeare were famous for inventing their own slang and phrases, much of what was frowned upon by lingua-snobs during Shakespeare's day are now completely different. The word "villain" for example was at first just a word for a farmer. Now it is associated with the bad guy, thanks to Shakespearean slang.


Times change, so do languages and how people talk, who speaks English like it was spoken during Pride and Prejudice? No one.

 

Practice what you preach.

 

You guys are throwing around the word lingua-snob pretty fast and loose. I don't think that's what Simon was getting at.

@ CrowZero - I don't think dumbing down anything in order to report it is a good idea. In fact it's not only a very poor idea... it's very poor journalism. With language as a tool surely there is a way to to get the information and facts across without pandering to the lowest common denominator.

While it's obvious that language is dynamic and not static... I think most would agree that .05 seconds watching the idiots on FoxNews would be enough to drive anyone mad. That's not being a lingua-snob that's just the reality of the way news has been redirected as some form of entertainment. Nothing positive about that in any respect.

 

I used the words "dumbing down" in context to the original post, not exactly what I meant, but in reference to Simon's explanation of opinions and the old very stiff style as shown by the first video Simon posted of Sir Trevor McDonald. What I meant was a lot of news stations were noticing fewer viewers over the years. I think it was the BBC in the UK who first started using presenters who didn't speak in an RP tone to attract more regional listeners. It alienates certain segments of the demographic. Some of the younger generation may not wish to watch something as "boring" as the news at 10. Making the news a little more sensational, changing formats to attract more people works. It attracts a larger audience. It's sad to say for me that the Sun is the UK's most read paper, but we have that demographic who it appeals to. Same with the news.

I like Newsnight and Hardtalk when I'm in the mood for something a little more serious, but I think if all news went back to the old RP accents, and old style of news reporting it would put off a lot of people. At the end of the day it's about getting the news across. No offence to Americans but I don't believe we have any major channels like Fox or CNN, who sensationalize as much as they do.

When I do watch daily news it's the Channel 4 news at 7, I'm a big fan of their format and Jon Snow, I also like Russia Today.