News media - thriving on bad news, doing its best to kill the movie theater industry

[Mike Blakesley]

Now that it's Monday morning, the first weekend after New York City theaters were allowed to reopen, here comes the news media with these types of headlines:

poster.jpg


Hey, media: Audiences are not "holding back." We were sold out at 3 shows this weekend, considering our limited capacity. We are currently at 50%. We had to turn people away. I'm sure the theaters in New York are the same way but they're operating at 25% capacity, how are they supposed to generate a $100 million gross?

Also, L.A. is still closed, D.C. is still closed, New Mexico is still closed, the entirety of Regal is still closed. Some of this is alluded to in the article but of course THAT information is either incomplete or vague.

The audience is not "holding back," the audience is BEING HELD BACK.

Why don't they make a headline like "Theaters open, audiences begin to return" instead of heaping on the doom-and-gloom?

[Van Dalton]

Ratings. Positive and/or encouraging headlines are a hard sell. Doom and gloom is where the ratings are. Why do you think the human interest stories are usually printed below the fold in the back section/aired in the last 7 minutes? Follow the money.

If lust and hate is the candy
If blood and love tastes so sweet
Then we give em what they want
So their eyes are growing hazy
Cuse they want to turn it on
So their minds are soft and lazy
Then hey, we'll give em what they want
Who do you want to blame?

Subjective fear and propaganda creates audience share which translates to ratings, advertising profit and mass control. It's the same with newspapers and cell phones as it is with television/radio. Brainwash 'em, scare 'em into complacency and turn 'em into good consumers. The American corporate propaganda media are built around making money through spreading sensationalist bullshit, half-truths and blatant lies, not objective truthful reporting. Control and easy money has been the whole point of the over-reporting and media obsession with Woo Flu over the past year-plus. It's about marketing and to shape and condition a braindead, complacent proletarian public, unquestioning of "authority" figures, which will readily accept and comply with the official agenda. The establishment media depend on that to justify their existance. It's a vicious circle.

Never let a good crisis go to waste. And if there is no crisis in progress? Make one up! It's not like anybody could be bothered to fact-check it anyways.

[Leo Enticknap]

The American corporate propaganda media are built around making money through spreading sensationalist bullshit, half-truths and blatant lies, not objective truthful reporting.

Amen!

If proof of that were needed, one need look no further than the Meghan Markle sh!t show. Her supporters and detractors are meowing and hissing at each other on the TV networks and social media. They have to continue ratcheting it up, or else people will develop an immune response and stop clicking (meaning that ad revenue will dry up). Sooner or later that's going to happen anyways. With me it already has: I didn't turn on the radio or look at a news site once yesterday, because I knew that they would be full of her and not much else.

As applied to this story, "Movie theater reopening makes a slow and steady start" won't make for much clickbait. "Movie theater apocalypse" might, hence that's what they print.

[John Eickhof]

yellow journalism and opinion molding in the press is spreading rampantly around the world, unfortunately big money and political ass-kissing is the norm today. common sense and a fair look at reality are gone from our view thus it is the blinded numbers that are trying to make the rules...remember, look at who owns the big commercial media outlets...yes the' film' (i use that term tongue in cheeck) companies ! the companies that would not be here today if it were not for private exhibitors! its sad that its taken a little more than 100 years for them to self destruct...as a theatre owner myself, all the love i had for the business is pretty much gone, i am happy to have lived through some of the later haydays! i started in 1969 as a teenager running projectors in a local small town theatre and it expanded into a life long business for me and treated me well...thanks to all those independants who were there along with me and heaven help you in the future!

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

yellow journalism and opinion molding in the press is spreading rampantly around the world, unfortunately big money and political ass-kissing is the norm today. common sense and a fair look at reality are gone from our view thus it is the blinded numbers that are trying to make the rules...remember, look at who owns the big commercial media outlets...yes the' film' (i use that term tongue in cheeck) companies ! the companies that would not be here today if it were not for private exhibitors! its sad that its taken a little more than 100 years for them to self destruct...as a theatre owner myself, all the love i had for the business is pretty much gone, i am happy to have lived through some of the later haydays! i started in 1969 as a teenager running projectors in a local small town theatre and it expanded into a life long business for me and treated me well...thanks to all those independants who were there along with me and heaven help you in the future!

John, you are somewhat correct., but It's been going on almost since TV news existed.. it also goes on all over the internet. But the good thing about the internet is you can make what ever you want out of it, good or bad! TV has always broadcast what people will watch, and that translates into selling expensive commercial time. Cronkite and Huntley-Brinkley did it too, but in a more eloquent way. I used to work in TV and the fact that I have not owned one in over ten years says what I think about TV. Bring back the FCC Fairness Doctorine and it will fix all of this!!!

And BTW, Megaplex had three of the four highest grossing screens in the country for the new Disney release.... So theaters are not quite dead.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Good news simply doesn't sell copies. We're all a bit guilty. Would you ever buy a newspaper if all that there is in there is good news? Maybe for once, but humans somehow seem to be addicted to drama. That's probably why we also watch movies.

But to be honest, I don't think this kind of "bad news" will really hurt the exhibition industry, maybe even to the contrary. If you read this as a more neutral person, what conclusions would you draw from it? "The theater business is dying! Hell, I'm staying away from there!" Or would it rather be more in line of: "Heck, it really seems like the exhibition industry is going the way of the dinosaur, let's go there before they're finally gone!"

The latter one wouldn't hurt the industry at all, actually, it could give it some artificial boost. People have the tendency to start to miss and care about stuff once they learn it's vanishing...

[Lyle Romer]

John, you are somewhat correct., but It's been going on almost since TV news existed.. it also goes on all over the internet. But the good thing about the internet is you can make what ever you want out of it, good or bad! TV has always broadcast what people will watch, and that translates into selling expensive commercial time. Cronkite and Huntley-Brinkley did it too, but in a more eloquent way. I used to work in TV and the fact that I have not owned one in over ten years says what I think about TV. Bring back the FCC Fairness Doctorine and it will fix all of this!!!

And BTW, Megaplex had three of the four highest grossing screens in the country for the new Disney release.... So theaters are not quite dead.

The fairness doctrine wouldn't accomplish anything at the present time. Less and less "news" content is consumed via broadcast licenses. You'd basically have to regulate/censor the internet which would violate Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press because no public airwaves are used to deliver the content.

Of course you have the other little issue with the fairness doctrine of who would be responsible to determine what is "honest, equitable, and balanced."

[Marcel Birgelen]

The FCC doesn't license the Internet like it licenses the airwaves and as such, any new fairness doctrine wouldn't be applicable to the Internet anyway. Technically, it wasn't even applicable for the Cable News Networks that emerged in the 80s. Even if the U.S. would implement laws or other regulations that would end up in a fairness doctrine for the Internet, it's still a difficult problem. As soon as you host your content in a country where there are no laws or regulations regarding that topic, it will be pretty hard to shut down such a site or make them enforce the rules.

But I don't think we should blame the Internet in general for this. It's primarily companies like Facebook which we have to blame for the current situation. They created the echo chambers for millions on "the left and right" of the aisle, this isn't an U.S.-exclusive problem, it's happening in many other countries too. They did nothing about fake news being spread down the alleys of those echo chambers, because they were only interested in increasing the engagement of their users. More engagement is a stronger platform and more ad revenue.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

The fairness doctrine wouldn't accomplish anything at the present time. Less and less "news" content is consumed via broadcast licenses. You'd basically have to regulate/censor the internet which would violate Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press because no public airwaves are used to deliver the content.

Of course you have the other little issue with the fairness doctrine of who would be responsible to determine what is "honest, equitable, and balanced."

I disagree Lyle, the doctrine can also be amended. Facebook is ALREADY censoring stuff using both people and AI computers. If the internet site is privately owned as many are, then they can censor what ever they want to.

[Leo Enticknap]

Also, a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet would be impossible to enforce, because any content provider that wanted to circumvent it would simply locate their servers outside its jurisdiction. So allhailsaintmeghan.com would set up shop in Russia, while buggeroffmeghan.com would go to India, for example. Conventional broadcasting, both cable and OTA, is regulated at national level, which makes that sort of thing possible. The same thing would likely happen if Section 230 were repealed, too: Facebook and Twitter would simply relocate to a country in which they'd have a lower exposure to the risk of lawsuits. They threatened to pull their physical presence out of Australia completely if Australia didn't water down its news link law, and the threat worked.

[Marcel Birgelen]

I disagree Lyle, the doctrine can also be amended. Facebook is ALREADY censoring stuff using both people and AI computers. If the internet site is privately owned as many are, then they can censor what ever they want to.

Keep in mind that they're only doing this, because they're afraid for Government regulation becoming a matter of fact. While some independent site can move itself easily to any jurisdiction that grants them the freedoms they're looking for, for any behemoth organization like Facebook or Google, the implications could be pretty dire.

[Lyle Romer]

I disagree Lyle, the doctrine can also be amended. Facebook is ALREADY censoring stuff using both people and AI computers. If the internet site is privately owned as many are, then they can censor what ever they want to.

A private company can do whatever they want with respect to censorship, the US Government can not as they have to abide by the constitution. When Facebook and Twitter moved from flagging to outright censoring, I closed my accounts and refuse to visit them because I know there is no chance I am getting "balanced" coverage or discussion of anything.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Well, The Govt doesn't own the internet or most of the sites unless its a gov.com or gov.net site. So all sites can censor as needed. But the FCC could reinstate a modified fairness doctrine and regulate the airwaves... while they still exist...

[Sam Chavez]

Well, Rupert honed all this to a fine sheen and see what that got us, Tabloids in UK and Trump for President, being among the high points.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

I think if the fairness doctrine was reinstated that Faux would be relegated to running Green Acres and The Three Stooges. And honestly I have no problem with that, I enjoy those. Canada has a similar law in effect and Faux can't even broadcast there or be on any cable networks.