|
| AUTHOR |
MESSAGE |
|
User no longer registered.
|
You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
I have a hd plasma and two hd lcd flat screen tvs in my home and I have to say that this relatively new high definition broadcasting is not being kind to any of the older newscasters and in particular, the mature ladies ie: Katie Couric and Meridith Viera. These ladies might look presentable in analog broadcasts on a pre-high definition tv but on an hd set? Forget about it! Every wrinkle and crows foot is highlighted in all it's splendor. 
Back in the day, studio technicians could add a slight soft focus to the picture to erase most imperfections on the talent's face. But with hd, that cannot be done. What you see is what you get! 
If you'll notice, Fox News does not parade any older females in front of their cameras.....and they aren't even broadcasting in hd yet. When they do begin hd broadcasting, their female on camera talent will, at least to these eyes, look presentable ie: no wrinkles or crows feet to distract the viewer eyes and attention.
Has anyone else noticed this phenomena? If so, what's your take in this? 
|
| January 31, 2008, 07:52 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
Fox is full of crap...Personally I want intelligence, poise, credibility, experience ...not a magazine cover girl face giving me news and not even knowing what the hell they are reporting.
And for the record, crows feet ARE fabulous!!!
|
| January 31, 2008, 08:42 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ January 31, 2008, 08:42)Fox is full of crap...Personally I want intelligence, poise, credibility, experience ...not a magazine cover girl face giving me news and not even knowing what the hell they are reporting.
And for the record, crows feet ARE fabulous!!!
Sorry Chazzy but tv is a visual media and in hd format, it's a very, very visual medium. Possibly the above named ladies might be better served by changing over to radio news broadcasters. That way, you could get their supposed brilliance without the "visual distractions". jmo
I personally like Fox News and it's general presentation of the news. Yes, they favor the right but they still give a balanced news presentation. 
|
| January 31, 2008, 08:52 |
|
pookhabear
75 / male
port st lucie, Florida, US
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ January 31, 2008, 08:42)Fox is full of crap...Personally I want intelligence, poise, credibility, experience ...not a magazine cover girl face giving me news and not even knowing what the hell they are reporting.
And for the record, crows feet ARE fabulous!!!
 Chazzy, you are my IDOL, tooooo much emphasis on age and looks, give me maturity anyday
|
| January 31, 2008, 08:54 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
OOps sorry, didn't mean to sound like a harsh slam against Fox news...I was just commenting on your comment about their policy of putting the young smooth baby butt skinned people in front of the camera.
Is Greta still with Fox? She was on CNN prior to her face reconstruction/Fox news era...I miss her on CNN (I don't get Fox News on my cable)
|
| January 31, 2008, 08:56 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ January 31, 2008, 08:56)Oops sorry, didn't mean to sound like a harsh slam against Fox news...I was just commenting on your comment about their policy of putting the young smooth baby butt skinned people in front of the camera.
Is Greta still with Fox? She was on CNN prior to her face reconstruction/Fox news era...I miss her on CNN (I don't get Fox News on my cable)
Yeh, Greta is on at night. If she hadn't had the surgery, no way she would be on Fox. She's is not a raving beauty with the surgery but she's "handsome". 
No need to apologize for anything. You lashed out at my initial assertion about looks as it pertains to the anchor ladies. I know the male anchor's looks are never brought into question but that's just the way it is!!
|
| January 31, 2008, 09:03 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
I do sometimes humanly wonder about people that make a living with their face full in a camera, like news anchors...with the money the make, and the benefits they get...why don't they get their teeth fixed?
The crooked dark teeth thing seems to be a male anchor oversight...
|
| January 31, 2008, 09:06 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ January 31, 2008, 09:06)I do sometimes humanly wonder about people that make a living with their face full in a camera, like news anchors...with the money the make, and the benefits they get...why don't they get their teeth fixed?
The crooked dark teeth thing seems to be a male anchor oversight...
Yeh, that seems to be regular visual for me. Management should demand that the male anchors get their choppers fixed. That seems to be a problem with CBS, NBC and ABC. Why is that?
|
| January 31, 2008, 09:16 |
|
Liberalwife
47 / female
north, England, UK
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally ageing??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
|
| February 1, 2008, 04:23 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally ageing??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
Liberalwife--- 
Voyeurbill; Sure, it's good to see a nice looking person reporting. It's NOT the real point however. If you're watching news for the reporters/anchors appearance, then maybe you should just not watch it. There's a news report online where the women strip during the broacast. Perhaps that's more what you're looking for.
|
| February 1, 2008, 07:29 |
|
funlovingpair
59 / couple
Frozen Tundra, Minnesota, US
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
Well since I don't get any cable stations, I have no idea what's on the other news broadcasts. However, I have no problem with the current anchors. They are very pleasing to eye and can deliver the news with conviction. I don't watch the news just to see some hot model chic read the teleprompter.
|
| February 1, 2008, 08:18 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally aging??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
First off, I just passed on what I observed on tv. HD television is not kind to the aging female commentators and anchors. HD just seems to amplify what might not be noticed in person.
Is there sexism in the media? Yeh!! duh
Sorry if these facts hits too close to home for some.
|
| February 1, 2008, 10:08 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 1, 2008, 10:08) QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally aging??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
First off, I just passed on what I observed on tv. HD television is not kind to the aging female commentators and anchors. HD just seems to amplify what might not be noticed in person.
Is there sexism in the media? Yeh!! duh
Sorry if these facts hits too close to home for some.
So, how is it you haven't noticed the mens ageing? This from a person that won't put a photo on here.
|
| February 1, 2008, 13:22 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
The best way to watch the news is to listen to the news on a radio, you get the news without the show. AND it doesn't matter what the anchorperson looks like as long as their voice is clear and generic.
|
| February 2, 2008, 04:51 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (JCSOS @ February 1, 2008, 07:29) QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally aging??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
[/quote
Liberalwife---
Voyeurbill; Sure, it's good to see a nice looking person reporting. It's NOT the real point however. If you're watching news for the reporters/anchors appearance, then maybe you should just not watch it. There's a news report online where the women strip during the broadcast. Perhaps that's more what you're looking for.
Nah, not me! I prefer to have my women and news anchors, suggestively dressed. It lends to the mystery. 
|
| February 2, 2008, 10:12 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (JCSOS @ February 1, 2008, 13:22) QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 1, 2008, 10:08) QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally aging??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
First off, I just passed on what I observed on tv. HD television is not kind to the aging female commentators and anchors. HD just seems to amplify what might not be noticed in person.
Is there sexism in the media? Yeh!! duh
Sorry if these facts hits too close to home for some.
So, how is it you haven't noticed the mens aging? This from a person that won't put a photo on here.
What me post my photo? Are you nuts? It would be considered a freak show! And besides, I don't claim to be "attractive" and certainly people would gladly pay me not to show my picture! 
|
| February 2, 2008, 10:16 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 2, 2008, 10:16) QUOTE (JCSOS @ February 1, 2008, 13:22) QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 1, 2008, 10:08) QUOTE (Liberalwife @ February 1, 2008, 04:23)I think your being way too harsh here VB. Whaatt?? Replace presenters with younger, flawless models, just because they happen to be naturally aging??? Pffft! Poppycock!
Interesting that you mention male looks are never brought into this question.....Hmmmm, kinda sexist don't ya think?
First off, I just passed on what I observed on tv. HD television is not kind to the aging female commentators and anchors. HD just seems to amplify what might not be noticed in person.
Is there sexism in the media? Yeh!! duh
Sorry if these facts hits too close to home for some.
So, how is it you haven't noticed the mens aging? This from a person that won't put a photo on here.
What me post my photo? Are you nuts? It would be considered a freak show! And besides, I don't claim to be "attractive" and certainly people would gladly pay me not to show my picture!
----but you sit in judgement of others? My how very hipocritical.
|
| February 3, 2008, 18:49 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (voyeurbill @ January 31, 2008, 07:52)...Back in the day, studio technicians could add a slight soft focus to the picture to erase most imperfections on the talent's face...
That is true...I believe Doris Day (God luv her, I'm a big fan)on any of her very old TV shows they always used a fuzzy soft focus on her, and remember a show with Cybil Shepard "Moonlighting" I think it was called? They used the same technique on her.
I think this old school of thought should be dumped, and we can freely admire the older woman with crows feet and all, a few wrinkles doesn't make them any less beautiful!
|
| February 3, 2008, 20:31 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ February 3, 2008, 20:31) QUOTE (voyeurbill @ January 31, 2008, 07:52)...Back in the day, studio technicians could add a slight soft focus to the picture to erase most imperfections on the talent's face...
That is true...I believe Doris Day (God luv her, I'm a big fan)on any of her very old TV shows they always used a fuzzy soft focus on her, and remember a show with Cybil Shepard "Moonlighting" I think it was called? They used the same technique on her.
I think this old school of thought should be dumped, and we can freely admire the older woman with crows feet and all, a few wrinkles doesn't make them any less beautiful!
Crows feet shows they have a sense of humour and fun with life rather than an old cow who never smiles at anything. Give me the crows feet on a woman and the fun personality that goes with it, anytime, all the time.
|
| February 4, 2008, 04:13 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
I don't have HD TV, but I have heard that the clarity can be distracting.
I don't think it will ruin any careers of older people, I think it's high time and we are quite ready to see movie stars and celebraties as real life people, not as fantasy perfection.
|
| February 4, 2008, 06:44 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (Chazzy @ February 4, 2008, 06:44)I don't have HD TV, but I have heard that the clarity can be distracting.
I don't think it will ruin any careers of older people, I think it's high time and we are quite ready to see movie stars and celebrates as real life people, not as fantasy perfection.
In theory, yes! But that's not what is in actuality, fact! Television is a visual medium and what you see is what you have to judge. Unfairly? Certainly.
My original observation was just that. HD television is no friend of the aging news anchors or personalities. Fact!!!
If you think I'm being overly cruel, wait 'til you see what I see!
|
| February 4, 2008, 07:55 |
|
wandering5tar
53 / male
London, England, UK
|
Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 4, 2008, 07:55) QUOTE (Chazzy @ February 4, 2008, 06:44)I don't have HD TV, but I have heard that the clarity can be distracting.
I don't think it will ruin any careers of older people, I think it's high time and we are quite ready to see movie stars and celebrates as real life people, not as fantasy perfection.
In theory, yes! But that's not what is in actuality, fact! Television is a visual medium and what you see is what you have to judge. Unfairly? Certainly.
My original observation was just that. HD television is no friend of the aging news anchors or personalities. Fact!!!
If you think I'm being overly cruel, wait 'til you see what I see!
I think everyone is missing the point here: What channel are the stripping newsreaders on?
|
| February 4, 2008, 10:18 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: You look fabulous......N-O-T!!!!!!
QUOTE (wandering5tar @ February 4, 2008, 10:18) QUOTE (voyeurbill @ February 4, 2008, 07:55) QUOTE (Chazzy @ February 4, 2008, 06:44)I don't have HD TV, but I have heard that the clarity can be distracting.
I don't think it will ruin any careers of older people, I think it's high time and we are quite ready to see movie stars and celebrates as real life people, not as fantasy perfection.
In theory, yes! But that's not what is in actuality, fact! Television is a visual medium and what you see is what you have to judge. Unfairly? Certainly.
My original observation was just that. HD television is no friend of the aging news anchors or personalities. Fact!!!
If you think I'm being overly cruel, wait 'til you see what I see!
I think everyone is missing the point here: What channel are the stripping newsreaders on?
They're online. No sure what the site is.
|
| February 5, 2008, 17:17 |
|
|
