The net. And I often imagine forced viewing of HDnews over and over and over all day something satan might use in hell to torture sinners.andrzej said:
Is HD news on the way out?
- Thread starter pmalve
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 46
- Views 6K
I tune into HDNEWS for about 10 mins a day...after that I cant watch it. They show the same stuff over and over. But the picture looks great...better than any other news cast out there. But you really have to ask yourself a question...do you want content on your news...or a nice picture.
It wouldnt be as cruel then. Perfect picture but no content.DarrellP said:It could be worse, they could turn down the bitrate to 5 Mbps.
CNN? No, Thanks
CNN? Ah, no. Not me. (And I'm not even a VOOMer yet.)
While CNN started off great, nowadays if I want no-spin news, I watch MSNBC. If I want *reverse-spun* news (anti-CNN-spin) I watch FOX News Channel. The *only* CNN programming I find watchable is Lou Dobbs (and his show has almost no spin).
However, HDNews, while done on the cheap, demonstrates that even news done on-the-cheap need not be Mickey Mouse. (In fact, that was the ORIGINAL point behind CNN.)
If anything, I would like to see an HD version of CNBC *in addition* to a wider-distributed HDNews.
That would be one way for RMH to bring in additional revenues: negotiate carriage agreements for HDNews with other DBS and even cable companies (especially those losing CNNfn) and use the additional money to improve HDNews (or defray VOOM losses). HDNews is a CNN for the 21st century (the original CNN, as opposed to the CNN of today).
CNBC-HD? Yes. Reason One: All of CNBC's programming, except for certain *spot coverage* is studio-based (and the spots can be done the way HDNews does their spots today; in fact, they could even have HDNews do them). Reason Two: CNBC doesn't use any of the facilities in New York City that NBC itself does; it instead operates out of Fort Lee, NJ (in space shared with MSNBC). Reason Three: As opposed to MSNBC, CNBC uses very little outside footage.
And because of Reasons One, Two, and Three, CNBC-HD could become a new model on how NBC covers, edits, and shows news bandwidth is the least of your worries.
dnyce said:HD News is not there for news it's eye candy. If anyone really wants to know what is going on in the world they turn to CNN.
But I love it! I use it every time I have new guests over and they say... Oh you have Voom, is their a big difference? Then I turn it on CNN and say how does that look, they say it looks fine. Then with a smirk I turn to 100. And watch their jaws drop. WOW, so that is High definition! Gets them every time
Now I know how people showed off when TV remote's first came out.
The channel just changed by itself! How did you do that? :haha
CNN? Ah, no. Not me. (And I'm not even a VOOMer yet.)
While CNN started off great, nowadays if I want no-spin news, I watch MSNBC. If I want *reverse-spun* news (anti-CNN-spin) I watch FOX News Channel. The *only* CNN programming I find watchable is Lou Dobbs (and his show has almost no spin).
However, HDNews, while done on the cheap, demonstrates that even news done on-the-cheap need not be Mickey Mouse. (In fact, that was the ORIGINAL point behind CNN.)
If anything, I would like to see an HD version of CNBC *in addition* to a wider-distributed HDNews.
That would be one way for RMH to bring in additional revenues: negotiate carriage agreements for HDNews with other DBS and even cable companies (especially those losing CNNfn) and use the additional money to improve HDNews (or defray VOOM losses). HDNews is a CNN for the 21st century (the original CNN, as opposed to the CNN of today).
CNBC-HD? Yes. Reason One: All of CNBC's programming, except for certain *spot coverage* is studio-based (and the spots can be done the way HDNews does their spots today; in fact, they could even have HDNews do them). Reason Two: CNBC doesn't use any of the facilities in New York City that NBC itself does; it instead operates out of Fort Lee, NJ (in space shared with MSNBC). Reason Three: As opposed to MSNBC, CNBC uses very little outside footage.
And because of Reasons One, Two, and Three, CNBC-HD could become a new model on how NBC covers, edits, and shows news bandwidth is the least of your worries.
What about Headline News?
Ever heard of Headline News?
Headline News (CNN's *sister station*) started not long after CNN itself, and is a rolling thirty-minute *wheel* (with spot updates) that runs 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. Only *some* of it's thirty-minute wheel is updated, and it's become *ubiquitous*. Not only does darn near every cable and DBS provider carry it (as basic programming!), there are *radio* stations that subsist *entirely* on Headline News and local commercials for *all* their content. (No, I am NOT kidding, so get your jaw off the floor.)
HDNews, however, doesn't make the mistake Headline News has by adding *fluff* content and *commentary-disguised-as-news* just to fill in the thirty minutes.
vurbano said:
Ever heard of Headline News?
Headline News (CNN's *sister station*) started not long after CNN itself, and is a rolling thirty-minute *wheel* (with spot updates) that runs 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. Only *some* of it's thirty-minute wheel is updated, and it's become *ubiquitous*. Not only does darn near every cable and DBS provider carry it (as basic programming!), there are *radio* stations that subsist *entirely* on Headline News and local commercials for *all* their content. (No, I am NOT kidding, so get your jaw off the floor.)
HDNews, however, doesn't make the mistake Headline News has by adding *fluff* content and *commentary-disguised-as-news* just to fill in the thirty minutes.
Similar threads
