The father of television news

The Columbia Broadcast System, also known as CBS, would not be where it is today without some of its long lasting journalistic heroes. Edward Murrow. Walter Cronkite. Dan Rather. Katie Couric. Scott Pelley. 

But none of these would be where they are today if it was not for Don Hewitt. 

Hewitt was born in New York City, New York, on Dec. 14, 1922. He attended New York University for one year before dropping out and starting work as a copy boy for the New York Herald Tribune. 

When World War II began, Hewitt turned his attention to the war effort, but not as a soldier. He wrote about the merchant marines in the military newspaper "Stars and Stripes"  until 1945 before going back to the New York Harald Tribune.

After a while, he worked for the Associated Press in Memphis before transitioning to CBS News in 1948. At the time, CBS was mainly just radio broadcasting, but was starting to make the transition to television. Hewitt was put in charge of some of the company's television operations. 

He looked up to the famous Edward Murrow, but while he looked up to Murrow, he knew he wanted to do his own thing. 

Hewitt directed the network's first television newscast on May 3, 1948 that featured Douglas Edwards. Hewitt appreciated and valued the journalistic side of things, but his passion was for the production such as the lights and cameras. That is where he made some of his biggest contributions. 

Hewitt made many of these long lasting changes after becoming the executive producer of "CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite."

The first was changing the show's duration from 15 minutes to 30 minutes, which is still common today for national and local news broadcasts. This provides more of an ability for news to go into households creating a more informed public. 

He is also credited for being the first to put text on the bottom half of the screen, which are now commonly called supers or lower thirds. These are usually used to show a person's name, title or location. 

Additionally, he had the idea to use cue cards for anchors (a term he came up with) as an early version of a teleprompter. 

Another new method he designed and utilized was using film "doubles" and multiple cameras for news productions. This is used today so a viewer does not get bored from looking at a single talking head.

Hewitt is also known as being the first to televise political events and discourse starting in 1960. During that year, he directed the first televised presidential debate between Richard Nixon and John Kennedy for all three networks. It is believed the debate being televised hurt Nixon because of his appearance that lead to Kennedy's victory. 

But all of this does not even account for his proudest accomplishment. 

After being forced out of his role as executive producer for "CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite" by Fred Friendly, Hewitt moved onto a different project. One that he said would be modeled as a television version of Life magazine.

"60 Minutes" was born. 

The show started in 1968, and "60 Minutes" is still shown every Sunday night on CBS. The idea is to have long form visual stories that covers both hard and soft news in the same broadcast. The show has remained successful and popular throughout its entire tenure. It has won Peabody and Emmy awards while consistently being in Nielsen's top 10. 

The show is known for and is likable because of its in-depth reporting and hard hitting questions. Many well-respected reporters have had stints on the program such as Mike Wallace, Dan Rather, Ed Bradley, Lesley Stahl,  Scott Pelley and Anderson Cooper.

Hewitt stayed in charge of "60 Minutes" until 2004 and afterwards he was a consultant for CBS until 2007. On August 19, 2009, Hewitt died at 86. 

Hewitt was fundamental in changing how we take in our news and raised our expectations for the quality of content and production that we receive, but he opened a can of worms when it comes to news broadcasting. His changes led to the cable news boom that spread and promoted false information, which then influenced the social media news age. 

Either way, we can deem Don Hewitt to be a true trailblazer and pioneer when discussing the evolution of television news broadcasting. 

Suppression in the media

The media and press have always been under pressure from the government to promote the content that it sees fit. Today, we see this with the Ukraine-Russia War and the Nord Stream gas pipeline's explosion. 

The government pushes the narrative that it was Russia, but there is evidence that the U.S. may have had a hand in it. If the U.S. government wants something to look a certain way, then by golly that is how it is going to be. 

Unless, journalists do their job.

A historical example of pressure and suppression of the media was portrayed in the "Good Night, and Good Luck" move. The movie was made in 2005, edited into black and white, and had numerous A-list actors. 

It showed the fallout of McCarthyism thanks to CBS journalists. 

The movie tells the story of how early television broadcaster and journalist Edward Murrow exposed Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1954 on his television show "See It Now". This was tough for Murrow to accomplish because all the news outlets were pushing McCarthy's and the U.S. government's rhetoric leading to a sort of media blackout on truth about communism's influence in America.

While exposing McCarthy and the U.S. government, Murrow received pushback from both the government and his own superiors at CBS.

Some of this pushback from the government included using the chilling effect and stonewalling. 

Stonewalling was present when the government refused to comment or answer questions of Murrow's when he was digging for information on the dishonorably discharged soldier. 

The government then took it a step further and tried to intimidate Murrow by using the chilling effect by having two soldiers threatening him to not broadcast the story. 

But Murrow still decided to publish the truth. He knew the proper roles of the media when it comes to its governmental interactions. He knew the press should be an independent entity that acts as a watchdog. The media should be a sort of check and balance on the government just like each branch has on the others.

He showed that McCarthy's efforts to stoke fear into American hearts about the presence of Soviet spies and communism in America was fake and inaccurate during the episode titled "Report on Senator Joseph R. McCarthy."

Murrow was successful during his time, but who will step up now? We are still struggling with these issues. 

A media blackout is occurring when it comes to reporting on the non-Ukrainian side of the Russia-Ukraine War and specifically the Nord Stream gas pipeline explosion. This is because even though some reporters have written about U.S. involvement, the major media networks stay silent. 

An example of stonewalling in current times is when Iowa moved the press from the floor of its state senate to the upper gallery. This makes it difficult to consult with legislators like they used to, which prohibits their ability to tell the accurate truth and news. 

Also, there is still a chance of chilling effects on reporters. Just ask Judith Miller. The government threatened and punished her for not giving up a source and their conversations together. The government will sometimes do this like a warning shot across the bow (while not initiating prior restraint because the courts look down upon that), but they could use subsequent punishments. 

This is not to mention the influence peddling that we never hear about. This is when there is a quid pro quo agreement between a reporter and usually the government, but could be any source. The interaction would go along the lines of "if you do not publish this story then I will give you an exclusive interview on something else."

Whether you are evaluating McCarthyism, the Russia-Ukraine conflict or even the motivation behind the Iraq War, the movie "Good Night, and Good Luck" perfectly illustrates the impact and influence that the U.S. government used and still attempts to assert over the media. 

But how?

Much of government influence or oversight occurs through social media. This is why I would call today the "connectivity era" because there are so many new ways to stay connected and influence others or be influenced. 

For example, I have somewhere around 13 different ways that I stay connected with society though either social media, email or regular calling/texting. This is the same for many people in the United States as 72% of Americans have a social media account. 

And with new media technologies, it is much easier for the government to disseminate information and sway public opinion as it is a much more centralized medium and way to reach people. 

War propoganda

One constant throughout human existence has been war. But what has become a relatively new is the use of propaganda during war. 

Propaganda is sharing ideas with the goal of hurting a cause or person. The first well-known use of propaganda was with the Catholic Church in 1622 with the "Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith" where the church sent missionaries to the New World to convert the indigenous people to Christianity. 

War propaganda is a bit different though because it is the action of working to change peoples' attitudes about a war. 

 

In America, war propaganda really originated in the Spanish-American War with the sinking of the Maine. In this instance, Hearst influenced media coverage by blaming the Spanish for the sinking and was known to say, "You furnish the pictures, I'll provide the war." This is a great example of how flashy reporting and yellow journalism can affect interpretation.

 

Shortly after the Spanish-American War ended, the United States was entangled in World War I. The U.S. government utilized war propaganda through the famous Uncle Sam Wants You poster. This poster was affective and persuasive in recruiting soldiers through being convincing and personable. 

And transitioning into World War II, the U.S. then used the Rosie the Riveter poster. This was a form of war propaganda to get women into the workforce and factories to make war equipment. It worked. As the percentage of woman working outside of the home skyrocketed, and the U.S. won WWII. 

 

The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics says that journalists should seek to provide the unbiased truth. This should still be the case no matter what, so journalists should be aware of their impact upon the course of history with their reporting. 

Anonymous sources, journalism

Journalism is about telling the unbiased truth and holding those in power accountable for their actions. Many times, this is easy enough because you can reach out to any official to get comments. 

But what about when the source does not want to be identified? That gets tricky because anonymous sources can be valuable or detrimental to a publication. The Society of Professional Journalists has some basic guidelines for dealing with anonymous sources:

1. When at all possible, identify a source by name and title.
2. Question the reasoning behind a source wanting anonymity. 
3. Clarify if there are any strings attached to any information revealed.
4. Keep all promises. 

The commonality of using anonymous sources in the media has waxed and waned over time with there currently being more hesitancy. This is mainly because readers might lose trust in the organization if they are too prominent. 

    

The most widely-acclaimed and successful use of an anonymous source was the Watergate scandal. 

    

In 1972, the Washington Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein worked with a source dubbed as "Deep Throat" to break the story of the Nixon Administration's role in the Watergate complex break-in. 

    

"Deep Throat" was self-identified as the then-assistant director of the FBI Mark Felt. This came after he denied being "Deep Throat" multiple times and the reporters not revealing his name for over 30 years. 

    

In this situation, Felt would only confirm or deny information and would meet Woodward and Bernstein in a parking garage in the middle of the night to keep his identity secret.

    

While the Watergate scandal's use of anonymous sources was a success, there are instances where anonymous sources can be harmful. This was the case when it came to the O.J Simpson murder trial. 

The Simpson case had captured the attention of the whole nation as there were cameras in the courtroom to watch the proceedings. The media's influence is exemplified by over 2,000 reporters covering the case and 80 miles of cables used that led to over 142 million viewers across the United States watching the final verdict be announced. 

So it makes sense that news organizations would want to get the best scoop, and that led the local station KNBC to report that blood and DNA on a sock found matched the late Nicole Simpson's. 

How did they come across that information? You guessed it. An anonymous source. 

    

With the high media attention, it was obvious that this could influence the final decision, and that determination led the presiding judge, Lance Ito, to close the courtroom from cameras. KNBC later admitted the information could have been false. 

In both of those situations, the reporters got away with having anonymous sources, but others have dealt with pressure and backlash to reveal a source's identity. 

Just ask Judith Miller.

During the United States's war on terror in the early 2000's, the U.S. falsely claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Former ambassador Joseph Wilson wrote an OpEd in the New York Times saying that he found nothing of the sort while on the ground. 

Shortly thereafter, his wife, Valeria Plame, was revealed as a CIA agent by writer Robert Novack. Many believe the leak was the White House's doing because they believed Plame had something to with Wilson being sent to the country. 

The Bush administration held a grand jury investigation into the matter. Miller was involved because it was believed (and was true) that she met then-Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff Scooter Libby in the days around the release of Novack's article and had more information.

Miller refused to discuss any sources or possible meetings with sources by declaring reporters' privilege, but that was not upheld. She was held in jail for 85 days for not revealing the information. She only left after Libby told her by phone that it was OK to reveal their meetings and information discussed to the grand jury. 

This shows just how tricky the issue of anonymous sources can be, but it has led to some states to implement shield laws to provide total or partial protection of journalists and their sources in court, with some variations and exceptions between states. 

And so this leads to the discussion of what constitutes an anonymous source? Someone whose name and specific title is not revealed. So, it is important to touch on the different levels of attribution journalists use. 

On the record means that a reporter is allowed to use any information or direct quotes from a source while also identifying the source by both name and title. 

On background or also known as not for attribution means that reporter can use a source's information and direct quotes, but cannot identify them by name. Instead, a general title is usually used such as "a source in the mayor's office..." 

On deep background means that the reporter can use the information from the source, but cannot quote them or identify them in any way. This could be used by saying "a knowledgeable source described..."

Off the record means that reporter cannot use any information from a source and cannot identify them, but the information obtained can be used to find other sources or information. This often can get confused by unknowledgeable people for on background. 

It is important to take all of this into account when thinking about anonymous sources. When possible, journalists should not use anonymous sources because it can hurt the news' credibility, but there are times when exceptions are necessary to fulfill a journalists main responsibilities. 

Foundational female reporters

Like many things in the nineteenth century and before, the workforce was very male dominant. As the nineteenth century ended and we into the twentieth century, the tide of equality became a reality. 

This was also true with journalism.  

In the late 1800's, there were a group of female newspaper reporters who went undercover to uncover horrible working conditions and urban illnesses. 

They were considered by many to be yellow journalists because of their covered topics and perception as females, which ended up hurting their reputation at the time. Now, we recognize and value their commitment and work to tell the truth.

One of the most well-known of these reporters was Nellie Bly who is also known as her birth name Elizabeth Cochran(e). Bly got her first journalistic job at the Pittsburgh Dispatch after the editor was impressed by her angry letter in response to a piece they ran titled "What Girls Are Good For." 

Bly received very little education, but still made an impact through her undercover reporting. Her piece called "Ten Days in a Madhouse" where she feigned insanity to be admitted into an insane asylum. She uncovered the treatment of patients that led to investigations of medical treatment.

Another one of these female reporters was Eva McDonald or also known as her writing name Eva Gay. McDonald typically wrote for the St. Paul Globe discussing labor conditions, especially those for women. 

She would go undercover into mills and factories as a ragged worker. This enabled her to fit in and relate to real people to see how they actually are. Some of the things she brought to light were crowded working environments, long hours, little light/ventilation, dangerous chemicals/machinery and sexual harassment. 

One of McDonald's first pieces was "The Toiling Women" that highlighted these issues at the Shotwell, Cherihew and Lothmann garment factory. The piece resulted in a strike by women workers shortly after its release. 

These female reporters, along with the muckrakers, were the beginnings of modern in-depth and investigative journalism that today's journalists should aspire to be. 

The Muckrakers

Journalism is viewed by much of the general public to be untrustworthy, deceitful and treacherous. That is because journalists are becoming lazy and more driven by advertising money than telling the accurate truth.  

This was not always the case. 

At one time, reporters were inspired and strived to tell the truth and hold leaders accountable. The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics says that journalists should be watchdogs for the government and those in power. 

That is where the long lasting and well-known impact muckrakers come into play. 

The muckrakers were a group of progressive writers from late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. There were focused on exposés and detailing accounts of political and economic corruption, much of which was talking about and criticizing monopolies and their influence. 

The muckrakers had their roots from yellow journalism from the late nineteenth century.  This was the beginning of investigative journalism. 

Some of the prominent muckrakers include Lincoln Steffens, Ida Tarbell, Upton Sinclair and Ray Stannard Baker. All three of them worked together in the 1890's at McClure's magazine. 

Steffens was most well known for his piece called "The Shame of the Cities" that is collection of all his articles from his time at McClure's magazine. It outlines the many ways that urban governments are corrupt. It was an appeal to emotion with the hope that they would be outraged and shamed. 

Tarbell was well known for her piece called "The History of Standard Oil". This shed light on Standard Oil's monopolistic activities and eventually led to it being broken up by violating the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Sinclair got his feet wet with journalism when discussing socialist ideals. Writing about these led him to write "The Jungle" that meant to expose bad working conditions in the meatpacking industry. But the piece actually did more to change the meat and food industry instead of working condition. 

Baker was also a journalist for McClure's. His most popular piece is called "Following the Color Line" where he portrayed the differences between a black and white person in the American democracy. 

All three of them decided to leave McClure's magazine in 1906 to form the American Magazine where they continued to write stories that held people accountable and told the truth. 

Their writings influenced major policy changes and decisions. 

The first one was when "The Jungle" led to the Food Inspection Act and Pure Food and Drug Act. Both dealt with banning the production of adulterated, misbranded, deleterious or poisonous food. 

Shortly thereafter, the seventeenth amendment was also passed that decides that two senators are elected from each state by popular vote. Previously, the senators were decided by each state's legislators. This change was the result of Treason of the Senate articles written by another muckraker David Phillips with the hope to end the corruption by stemming the influence of large corporations on policymaking. 

The muckrakers were the perfect example of how journalists can make a difference, whether it is for the good or bad of society. 

Trial by media

Usually when charged with a crime, a suspect will be put on trial in a courtroom with either a jury, judge(s) or both. This has been a staple of the United States' justice system since the beginning and is prevalent in other countries. 

But with technological media advancements, a new type of trial has arisen: trial by media. Trial by media is when media affects the public's perception of someone being guilty or innocent regardless of the verdict. 

This was exemplified in the 1937 movie "They Won't Forget". In this movie, the media impacts the results of a trial multiple times. 

Toward the beginning, the reporter and district attorney strike an exclusive deal. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but they ended up working together so much to skew it to what they wanted the result to b that it came to fruition. 

A short time later, the reporter broke the law by basically breaking in and stealing from the Hale's house and unethically interviewing and using Hale's information. Then as the case drew national attention, large news companies pushed a north v. south narrative that made people feel a certain way before Hale was given a fair trial. 

In the end, this media narrative combined with the reporter and DA deal led to Hale being convicted by public opinion before being given a chance to have his fair day in court. 

A real life case that depicts trial by media is the O.J. Simpson court case. This case created a national stir as he was a prominent celebrity and camera were in the courtroom. This access to the media let th e media skew their coverage however they wanted.

This led to those believing he was innocent or guilty being divided by race because there were racial tensions in California at the time, but also they emphasized how one of the officers was racist. 

The media coverage skewed the publics opinion and this in turn trickled to the jury's decision to acquit him even though there was much evidence to convict him. 

In conclusion, the media's role is to hold those in power accountable and report the unbiased facts, but this is becoming less so with people looking for popularity and ratings. 

Why I chose journalism

Holding power accountable. Telling the truth. Informing and to an extent captivating an audience. These are motivations for me getting into journalism and broadcast news. 

I grew up in Roanoke, Virginia; and the three main news stations were WDBJ7, WSLS10 and WSET13. Almost every night, my father and I would watch the news together, usually on WDBJ7.  I believe that really set the foundation for me working in television news, but I was fascinated in television before that. 

My initial dream jobs were to be an ice road trucker or a Nascar crew chief. Neither one of these were real possibilities, but they both involved television and entertainment. 

But, after watching more news, I became interested in helping to inform the public about their environment and wanted to become a meteorologist. Needless to say, that dream did not last long because that takes knowing science, which I am bad at. 

So, at the time I settled for television news as a last result, but my opinions on it changed as I aged. I have learned and realized that telling truthful news is critical for a free and competent society. 

My end goal is to be a television news producer for a nightly newscast. 

I realize that I will have to work my way up the ladder starting at smaller markets then up to larger ones before even considering jumping to one of the networks. And I would prefer a nightly newscast because that tends to be more hard news and straight to the point instead of soft news. 

So, I would love to start in Roanoke and if possible move my way up to CBS News, but that is not necessarily a priority. If I find a good place to settle down, then maybe that'll be the end of the journey. 

Another dream would be to be a producer for 60 Minutes. For a long time and even nowadays, 60 Minutes has long been considered the cream of the crop when it comes to storytelling and journalism. I would love to tell captivating, truthful and informative stories through that platform. 

I like producing because you are basically in control of everything in a broadcast. You write scripts, plan shots, put in graphics, order the show, organize field work and much more. This way I can have control over a newscast in order to fulfill journalism's goals of telling the truth, holding people accountable and being transparent. 

Growing up, I would not say there was a particular journalist that I followed vigorously, but in the last year or so I have come to like Scott Pelley of CBS News and 60 Minutes.

He has had a long career covering many events such as the Oklahoma City Bombing, Bill Clinton scandal, 9/11, Iraq War, Afghanistan War and many others. He hosted CBS Evening News for a while and then transitioned to working for 60 Minutes. 

I have read his book; and I admire his desire for accuracy and truth above all else. He has been calm voice and reporter through numerous turbulent times, which has made him so successful and respected. 

In conclusion, journalism is a tough business that many "regular people" do not respect or like because they feel journalists are out to screw them over. Maybe I am crazy for wanting to enter the field, but I feel it is necessary for the success of human society because journalism's whole goal is informing the people about the truth and checking power. 

Entertaining and Informative?

    

In the past, and even now, many people say that journalism and news is boring. William Randolph Hearst tried to change that. 

At one point he owned both the San Francisco Examiner and New York Journal, which were both influential in keeping the news relevant and entertaining. 

Initially, Hearst got his father to sell him the San Francisco Examiner. Previously, the paper had been anti-Lincoln and pro-slavery. 

After the takeover, the paper took on a more provocative side on everything and attacked everyone. Its rhetoric even ended up pushing the United States into the Spanish-American War. 

After a bad earthquake, the the San Francisco Examiner worked together with the San Francisco Chronicle to continue producing papers with one doing the morning edition and one doing the evening. This partnership lasted for over 30 years. 

Hearst then purchased the New York Daily Journal. The paper was also controversial as it accelerated the rise of yellow journalism and included pictures and cartoons. 

The idea behind the paper was that is was something that the middle class family could afford and would want to buy. 

The paper competed with Pulitzer's New York World. This battle of papers is similar to the feud between today's New York Times and New York Post. 

Today, the Hearst Corporation still does own numerous television, radio and newspaper companies. The company's namesake was the entrepreneur that made yellow journalism and provocative news popular. That change led journalism into a new age that led to where we are today. 

The wire news serivce

When thinking of the definition of a wire news service, thoughts will immediately gravitate towards the telegraph. It is true that wire news organizations did use the telegraph and send news over the wire, but that is obviously not the case now due to technological advancements.    

Wire news services became prominent during that era and have evolved over the years. Two of the main wire services are the Associated Press and Reuters. 

The beginnings of the Associated Press were formed in 1846 when five New York newspapers formed a cooperative to collaborate on some stories. The papers realized that it would cheaper and more effective on all of them to put their resources together for stories on the Civil War and Mexican-American War. 

Their partnership was called the New York Associated Press. They also created another organization called the Harbor News Association to collectively receive news from overseas and Europe. Eventually, those two merged. Later, the New York Associated Press merged with the Associated Press, formerly known as the Western Associated Press. The conjunction resulted in the current Associated Press. 

The Associated Press is also known for writing AP Style Books for proper journalism writing. The first one was released in 1951 as a short handbook for all AP writers and eventually expanded to widespread use as the journalists' language. 

Nowadays, the Associated Press has deals with thousands of print, television and radio news stations to share their news stories. 

Since the Associated Press has so many reporters, the organization covers a wide variety of topics that it is useful for smaller market news groups to use their stories. AP was become well-known for its short prose and sentences that get straight to the point. 

While the Associated Press bases most of its efforts in the United States and some parts of North America, Reuters puts most of its effort toward Britain and the commonwealth. 

Reuters was founded in Britain in 1851 as a news service that relied upon telegraphs and the occasional carrier pigeon. This came around the time of the successful submarine telegraph that would help transmit news across long distances. 

In the 1800's, Reuters had expanded to South America and Far East Asia. Then in 1865, Reuters became the first European news organization to announce the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. 

By the 1960's and 1970's, Reuters was widely acclaimed for its financial and stock coverage. 

During the 1980's the company became publicly traded, but as a safety net to ensure unbiased news they implemented a maximum of 15% control in its constitution. In the 2000's, Reuters merged with Thomson Group PLC to become Thomson Reuters. 

In conclusion, the main wire service organizations are still critical in the news reporting industry. While they may not use telegraphs as a way to spread their information, they use television, print and radio. 

The Associated Press and Reuters both have large databases of video, news coverage and photos for their partners to use to enhance unbiased news coverage. 

The goal of both organizations is to stay unbiased when reporting the news, which is critical to the ability of informed debate and for people to make up their minds on an issue to enhance the marketplace of ideas.

My top 5 news sources

 

 To Begin

There are many options for staying up to date with the news. News sources usually cater towards a specific age, gender, political belief, etc. in order to have a solid base and consistent viewership. Growing up, I had parents and family members who were set in conservative political beliefs and that initially influenced my decisions on where to read my news. As I have aged though, I have widened my net of news sources.

AP

   

My first go-to for news is AP or the Associated Press. I use this outlet because it usually gives unbiased news on a wide range of topics that is solely the true facts. Also, the majority of print, television and radio stations  will use some stories and information from the Associated Press, so ultimately I choose to go directly to the source. Additionally, the stories are usually relatively short and to the point, which is convenient for on-the-go. 

BBC

The BBC or British Broadcasting Corporation is based in the United Kingdom which can be effective for reading the news. The BBC is normally my go to for international news because in my experience U.S. news organizations focus more on internal news and information, while the BBC seems to have a more worldly approach. Also, the BBC provides an outsider's look into U.S. politics, policy issues, and news which can help me to see through the internal bias in the prominent U.S. news organizations. Lastly, the BBC helps give me insight into another country's (the United Kingdom's) news and issues.

ESPN

ESPN or Entertainment and Sports Programming Network reports on the latest sports news. I typically keep up with ESPN because I am an avid sports fan. ESPN is in my opinion the most in depth and up to date when it comes to the analyzation of sports. Also, ESPN contains the best database for finding out all of your sports needs as they report on almost all relevant sports, even some international sports. In addition, ESPN+, which is an add on to ESPN, further improves my sports news needs with more articles and analysis while also providing documentaries. 

WSLS 10

WSLS10 is my favorite local, hometown news television station in Roanoke, Virginia that is in association with NBC. On WSLS10, I can easily find some of the biggest international and national stories that are also found on FOX News and CNN. But the main purpose of using WSLS10 is to learn about my state and local news as they have a large presence in the area and can easily report all of the needed local relevant information.  In addition to regular news, you can easily find out the local collegiate and high school sports updates and weather updates. 

FOX NEWS

I grew up in a relatively conservative household, so we watched a lot of FOX News and that has trickled down to my tastes in where I get my news. FOX News is great for continual news coverage as it is constantly on air 24/7 to provide any news or updates. On the other hand, FOX News typically only reports news in a way that aligns with their right wing point of view as it is its demographic that continues to watch and support the network.