Reliable Sources: Difference between revisions

*Reliable Sources*
Reliable Sources
	File:ReliableSources.png
Genre	News media analysis
Presented by	Howard Kurtz
Country of origin	United States
Original language	English
Production
Production location	Washington D.C.
Camera setup	Multi-camera
Running time	One hour (60 minutes)
Original release
Network	CNN
Release	1992
Related
	Fox News Watch

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:41, 23 April 2007

For the Wikipedia guideline, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

Reliable Sources is an American news media analysis talk program on CNN.

Hosted by Howard Kurtz, the program reviews the coverage of the news stories of the past week by the media, in addition to news about the news media behind the scenes, all with a constantly changing group of online, print, and broadcast journalists. The show also features some one-on-one interviews with journalists taking part in a news event or covering a story, such as interviewing Bob Woodruff after his return to ABC News in February 2007 after his severe injuries in Iraq on January 29, 2006.

Broadcasting since 1992, the program was initially formed to cover the media's coverage of the Persian Gulf War, but has since also covered the media's coverage of the Valerie Plame affair, the War in Iraq, the outing of W. Mark Felt as Deep Throat, and many other events and internal media stories.

The same genre as Fox News Watch on Fox News Channel, the show differs in that the discussions on the program are commonly very calm and content, compared to the heated debates that occur between panelists on FNW; in addition, the panel of reporters discussing the stories changes on a regular basis. Restricting the panel to reporters may not be the best of ideas. Reporters are very reluctant to criticize their colleagues, editors or news organizations. This may be because it could jeopardize future job opportunities. Note that Howard Kurtz rarely finds anything wrong with the mainstream media. The show would be better to put on some independent observers, such as social scientists.

This article about a television show originating in the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Revision as of 20:38, 23 April 2007 edit 130.91.92.200 (talk) No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 20:41, 23 April 2007 edit undo 130.91.92.200 (talk) No edit summary Next edit →
Line 28:		Line 28:
	Broadcasting since [[1992]], the program was initially formed to cover the media's coverage of the [[Persian Gulf War]], but has since also covered the media's coverage of the [[Plame affair\|Valerie Plame affair]], the [[War in Iraq]], the outing of [[W. Mark Felt]] as [[Deep Throat]], and many other events and internal media stories.		Broadcasting since [[1992]], the program was initially formed to cover the media's coverage of the [[Persian Gulf War]], but has since also covered the media's coverage of the [[Plame affair\|Valerie Plame affair]], the [[War in Iraq]], the outing of [[W. Mark Felt]] as [[Deep Throat]], and many other events and internal media stories.

	The same genre as ''[[Fox News Watch]]'' on [[Fox News Channel]], the show differs in that the discussions on the program are commonly very calm and content, compared to the heated debates that occur between panelists on FNW; in addition, the panel of reporters discussing the stories changes on a regular basis. Restricting the panel to reporters may not be the best of ideas. Reporters are very reluctant to ~~critize~~ their colleagues, editors or news organizations. This may be because it could ~~jeapordize~~ ~~their~~ job opportunities. Note that Howard Kurtz rarely finds anything wrong with the mainstream media.		The same genre as ''[[Fox News Watch]]'' on [[Fox News Channel]], the show differs in that the discussions on the program are commonly very calm and content, compared to the heated debates that occur between panelists on FNW; in addition, the panel of reporters discussing the stories changes on a regular basis. Restricting the panel to reporters may not be the best of ideas. Reporters are very reluctant to criticize their colleagues, editors or news organizations. This may be because it could jeopardize future job opportunities. Note that Howard Kurtz rarely finds anything wrong with the mainstream media. The show would be better to put on some independent observers, such as social scientists.