Talk:Channel One News

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anchor Sections[edit]

Are the Anchors, Current Anchors, Past Anchors, and especially Guest Anchors sections needed? Focusing on the Guest Anchor section, if you look at all other TV News articles on Wikipedia, there aren't such sections. In my opinion they take up a massive amount of space for no real purpose. The list hasn't even been kept track of in 2005 and 2006. For the moment I am going to remove the Guest Anchor section and merge the other anchor sections together. Since this is a fairly large change, if anyone feels that section is totally necessary, leave a message here. Pop Up Ads 22:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Idea. So far, the section has also been abused. 24.144.40.41 15:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


If we are going to keep this section, can we atleast update it? From what I've seen the program has all new anchors this year, but I haven't paid attention enough to know their names. Straightxedger 18:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

I think that there should be a section added including criticism of Channel One. I mention this because if you google up Channel One, the first few pages are devoted to criticizing the company and its affects on children in school. Heck in 1999 there were congressional hearings devoted to discussing the issue of commercialism in schools and how Channel One specifically contributes to that. I think some mention of those aspects as well as why Channel One is criticized is sorely needed in this article rather than giving a brief summary of the program.

I saw this program from 1992-99. In fact, in 1993 or 1994 they actually visited our school! At that time I actually thought the program was okay (their Somalia coverage in the early 90s and Clinton impeachment coverage was actually not bad). But by the late 1990s they really began to jump the shark. In particular the Pop Quizzes became far too easy and I was also turned off by the fact that the day after Mark McGwire's breaking of the single season HR record, I expected them to do some kind of special edition of something. But their main news topic? The Russian economy! Now how many middle/high school students even care about our economic issues, much less those from another country? It's a shame really. The show had potential but the commercialism is what's doing it in.76.182.144.118 (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


It's funny that the only thing we watched on those TVs was Channel One. And the only reason we had Channel One was to keep the TVs! That's some circular logic if I've ever seen it. --BennyD 07:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We had Channel One at my high school... I'm pretty sure the part about the TV's having a chip in them that restricted TV use during Channel One time isn't true - we frequently didn't watch it at all, or would find something else more interesting to watch (my high school had limited cable for "educational" purposes)...

My high school had Channel One, and I thought it was okay. The TVs turned themselves on and to channel 3, which the news was broadcasted on. Some of the TVs weren't connected to the network, so they weren't affected. They actually came to my school and filmed it there once in spring 2005, while I was a local (school) news anchor. --Jnelson09 04:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I worked as technical director in a fairly well-equipped and active public high school TV studio for the last several years and can clear up some of the technical ponderings on this talk page. 1.) The leased TVs (which have been the same model for at least 6 years) have absolutely no technical restriction against showing other signals at any time. 2.) Channel One (at least until 2007) provided a front-end box for participating schools. It has one VHS player that is NOT user-accessible that automatically records their live broadcast, one accessible VHS player, and takes a set of standard RCA inputs. The school decides when to play Channel One and is able to "ping" the Channel One TVs with a poweron signal. Recently, they are distributing digital DVRs which provide the same functions (minus all the VHS players) plus a limited selection of On-Demand programming.

Channel One is a reasonable solution for a struggling school (free TVs and use the RCA inputs to wire a camera for announcements), but my school has recently turned away. In the last two years, construction disrupted TV service and we could not have possibly even broadcast Channel One news for 90% of the year. The school also bought 12 new 24-27" LCD TVs and seems to gradually abandon Channel One because of the commercialism/quality issues. Sorry for the long post, but I like to clear things up concerning this unusual service. (By the way, no one in my homerooms ever paid any attention to their programming) Freedomlinux (talk) 04:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing that really gets me is how it's forced on children, sure there may be some "news" and short pop quizzes, but it provides a great audience for advertisers. Here is a quote of the ex-president of channel one,

"...We are forcing kids to watch two minutes of commercials . . . The advertiser gets a group of kids who cannot go to the bathroom, who cannot change the station, who cannot listen to their mother yell in the background, who cannot be playing Nintendo, who cannot have their headsets on."

Sometimes Channel One can show some things that are offensive, like certain music, or clips of King's "The Shining ". Of course, children must watch the whole broadcast. Sometimes they have a totally one-sided view of things, specifically, the issue of immigration. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1275 maybe we can add this picture to give some more light on this issue.... http://www.ibiblio.org/commercialfree/assets/images/CH112min.jpg

Category[edit]

I've created a category for schools that subscribe to CON. It's called Schools that Subscribe to Channel One News. If there is a school on WikiPedia that has CON, add it to this list.--D-Day 19:48, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My school, but it's not on Wikipedia.--(Marudita didn't log on.)

Transmission Facts?[edit]

It would be nice if someone knows what satellite and transponder Channel One is broadcast on to post it in this article. I haven't been able to locate that information yet. 24.21.178.58 23:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In 1998, they were on the sattelite that was lost due to a programming glitch (Galaxy 4), but couldn't tell you the transponder. I'm not sure what one they are on today, but, based on the fact that I think all of their receiver horns are fixed to that slot in the sky, I'd look in the direction of G4 or whatever replaced it. IanWilson0414 10:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?[edit]

I find the critism section somewhat biased and problematic. For example, the sentence "It is also known to show incorrect and biased news information, and is largely uncredible." Largely uncredible? Is there any source that shows this? I think (at least) this sentence should be deleted unless some sources are added. clm17 16:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the following sentences due to bias: "It is also known to show incorrect and biased news information, and is largely uncredible. Many of the segments aired in Channel One are also thought to be childish and unnecessary (such as the Pop Quiz and the One Step to a Better Me)." I also deleted the following line which referenced Obligation.org as a source of information on Channel One, as Obligation.org is itself a controversial and (supposedly) biased website. clm17 9:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

In the criticism section language appears that implies a criticism is not merely the lobbied complaint. The bit about "liberal posturing" maybe be a complaint, but the way it's written it seems like the article presupposes that there is absolutely a liberal posturing. And the article merely reports the (uncited) complaints about the liberal posturing.

I am upset[edit]

On the 14th of March 2007 channel one had interviews with people saying that Wikipedia was "unreliable" >:( Sodaplayer talk contributions ^_^ 22:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know! I saw that, too. It was on the first day we watched it. Oh, and for you people who hate the commercials, WE DON'T HAVE ANY! Yup, our teacher has a connection from her TV to her computer. We just watch LiveWire and she beams it to the TV.FrogTape 01:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipediaon Channel One[edit]

On March 14th, 2007, the news was that Wikipedia is an nonreliable source, and 1 high school talking about the "horrors" of Wikipedia. I belive that this is incorrect, and I am very angry about the Network 68.230.216.103 23:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The students and teachers seemed that they didn't use Wikipedia much. They were probably naive about how Wikipedia states about its sources states that if the sources aren't cited or correct. Sodaplayer talk contributions ^_^ 23:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like they did it again today.--63.3.8.129 (talk) 04:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another Previous Anchor?[edit]

I seem to recall AJ Hammer (host of CNN Headline News' Showbiz Tonight) being an anchor when I watched Channel One in 1994-1995. Am I dreaming?Amazonflowerchild 19:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki's New Page[edit]

On the Channel One episode where they discussed Wikipedia one of the anchors, I believe it was Jessica Kumari, typed in "Channel One News" and was directed to a page on it. I typed it in before when I started highschool, I couldn't find it. Was this page recently made, if so, thats freakin hilarious.--D3t3ctiv3 (talk) 20:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please: Do Not Abuse The Talk Page[edit]

I have noticed that this page is uncontrollable. If this keeps happening I will be forced to warn users and request semi protection here. Please remeber this isn't a Forum. Irunongames • play 22:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DVRs and Head-End Equipment are the same thing now???[edit]

Last I checked (and I work in the industry), DVRs and Head-End equipment are two entirely different things. The way the article is worded (lease DVRs (Head-end equipment)) it makes them sound like they are one and the same. They are not. DVRs record shows for playback later, Headend equipment obtains shows from a sat, iptv, or other type of feed, and broadcast it across a cable, iptv, or other network, usually after encrypting it to prevent theft of services. You can have a DVR in a central location without having a head-end. Simply press play at a certain time and have all the teachers turn on their TVs. In this way it is a cheap imitation of a Head-end or head-end equipment, but is in no way shape or form either. Not to mention, head-end equipment is MUCH more expensive. 75.208.8.166 (talk) 15:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Republican front[edit]

The Article fails to mention that Channel One News is a front for the Republican Party's control of public schooling and the consequent arch-right bias in curriculum. My suggestion, naturally, is to mention this in the Article.

I should point out that although the show apparently still exists, it saw the height of its popularity during the Bush-era No Child Left Behind/Send-everyone-to-Charter-Schools-and-dismantle-public-education craze. I could name several school districts that dropped withdrew their Channel One contracts or let them expire either after Obama's election or during the latter part of Bush's 2nd term when more people realized that his policies were (for the most part) bad ideas. (I am, in fact, an Alumnus of a district that did so during Bush's waning 2nd term.)

I should also point out that Channel One said for sure that we had found WMDs in Iraq even after other news media began to report doubts and later conclusive proof that we hadn't found any. The show also claimed that Sadam Hussein had a part in 9/11 (he was an evil tyrant, yes, but involved in 9/11 he was not), etc.

I will continue looking for source documents, but as soon as I find them let's expand the Criticism Section to include this. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 15:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you find sources that contain this criticism. Finding sources that simply confirm they did all that you claim does not permit you to criticise them. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality[edit]

The intro to this article reads like a press release, and other than that, there is nothing critical of the organization to be found. See the Talk:Channel One News#Criticism section above. I think something like this should at least be mentioned in a neutral article: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/11/nonprofit-group-calls-for-schools-across-country-to-ban-channel-one-newscast/

Attys (talk) 17:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obligation Comment[edit]

Removed everything involving this organization for this article and it should not be re-added in any way; they've continued to agitate against any effort outside of 'newspapers for kids' to give children current events education, and going through the blog's history, there are way too many vicious personal attacks on the network's former personnel which completely cancel out any good points they've made on their platform. Nate • (chatter) 02:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Channel_One_News&oldid=1206619095"