Men: Do you really prefer the hot young women news anchors over seasoned old men?

yes, because im not gay.

well… after reading all of it, im still not sure if you mean old men or old women. im not gay so that answers that part of it. as for older women, hell yea.

but really, old or young, they both have their own different appeal.

I like hot young women, but I prefer the older seasoned men as news anchors. I also think it is utterly idiotic to have a hot young babe “seriously” doing onfield reporting in professional sports, especially NFL

I don’t really give a shit if the women reporting the news is hot or not.

Why else would I watch the news?

Seriously, why can’t the sexiest little piece on two stilts have the intelligence to keep me going on two levels???

Since they can… And worse!!!! Of course networks should put the most attractive person who can successfully do the job up there live! Leave Quasimodo @ Notre Dame.

well duh…. that answer should be obvious… they all just read from a teleprompter so PLEASE give me something nice to look at.

Depends on the cleavage factor.

LOL

@XOIIO Well yeah, it does, doesnt it?

Oh of course. Some days I just can’t stop watching the news :)

All other things being equal?

Yes, I would rather look at someone to whom I am attracted.

Honestly, it doesn’t take experience or skill to read text to a screen.

@plethora “I also think it is utterly idiotic to have a hot young babe “seriously” doing onfield reporting in professional sports, especially NFL”

I have to say I’m in complete agreement—never thought I’d say that to you lol.

I get most of my news from The News Hour. Ditsy blonds and Sarah Palin shoud stay on Fox News.

They’re all annoying.

I would rather your mom do the news :)

The best situation is when you have the wise old anchorman paired up with a hot young anchorwoman.

[mod says] NSFW link removed. Because it had no warning in front of it.

I prefer news that is accurate. I could care less if I can see who is reporting it.

No. I abhor watching people who got their position by seducing the producers.

Appearance is not important for the delivery of the news only for the attraction of viewers. If there is discussion or commentary involved, I like to hear that from someone who has some intelligence and an understanding of the subject and can coherently string more than a two words together…..gender and appearance are not considerations and are of no concern, in that case. See ya…..Gary/wtf

Breaking news; of course!

When it comes to news reading the main thing I’m interest in is the ability to read clearly, having a pleasing voice is a bonus, & if all this is wrapped up in a hot body…. well thats just super!

In the dark ages there used to be people called “reporters” from whom one got news. I think that it would be good for everyone if we got people like that back: Charles Kuralt, Walter Cronkite, Jessica Savitch, David R. Murrow. But I am old, and in the way.

@plethora some very amusing questions asked…...so many questions really show a lack of knowledge of the game. But, having said that, have seen some men ask some amusing questions also.

@helloeveryone Since when is it “gay” to prefer watching an experienced, wiser, older man reading the news instead of a young woman? Believe it or not there are reasons in life to not give attention to women all the time. And surprise, surprise it doesn’t make you gay. Unless of course you are so scared of losing your masculinity you simply must draw attention to anything female or remotely sexual…

There is nothing seasoned about reading a teleprompter….give me the eye candy! Woof!

I don’t really like either type the way television news is presented today. They’re putting on a show rather than simply reporting the news. Where are the Cronkites and Murrows?

When the “News” is worthless and only for entertainment, e.g. FOX, I’ll take the hottie.

When I want serious news or information, e.g. PBS, I prefer someone serious. – Gwen Ifill is perfect.
No serious, reliable information is broadcast from FOX. They know this. That’s why their newcasters are anchored down with more makeup than a Mary Kay saleswoman.

Erin Andrews. Amazonian goddess, knows her isht. And if you find her vid, you can see that she constantly shakes her ass and checks herself in the mirror as she gets ready…naked. Clothes must be the very last step for her : )

So some good looking women that understand sports can’t report about it on the sidelines?

sigh

@jonsblond No more ludicrous than sending a man back to interview the bridesmaids as they are getting ready for a wedding

@plethora So you’re saying women don’t enjoy and understand sports? I guess I’ll get my hair and nails done instead of watching football. ~

sigh again

Being female and good looking doesn’t mean you are stupid or a bad reporter.

On the other hand, doing television news pretty much guarantees that you don’t know what you’re doing, or, if you do know, that you’ve been told to do something other than good reporting.

I miss journalism!

My husband says it doesn’t matter.

I enjoy the mix of both.

If the anchors were actually journalists, then I would prefer whoever was the best, most seasoned journalist, male, female, giant wart on the nose, or whatever. If there were an Edward R. Murrow anchoring a news show, I’d prefer him over anyone on the news now. I prefer Bill Moyers over any current news anchor, but he doesn’t anchor a news program, much as I wish he did.

But, since all the anchors are merely news readers and not one is a real journalist, well if someone is going to read the news to me I’d rather look at an attractive woman doing it as long as she can read well.

Boobs…

are what I think of as I listen to NPR and BBC radio, really not a fan of televised news these days. It’s too slanted (in either direction).

@drClaw I think “boobs” too, but probably not in the way you mean.

A lot of people are mentioning the Teleprompter. Before the swimsuit models started getting hired, it was actually the job of the anchor to write his teleprompt himself. Those words were not only read by him, but were written by him probably 30 minutes before airtime.

Okay, @Kraigmo, ordinarily you and I are on the same page, my friend, but this particular question (maybe you’re tired) really isn’t on par with your usual intellectual faculty. Do you really think that what you wrote in your detail section isn’t full of sexist assumptions. Let’s put aside whether or not news these days are even worthy of being called journalism and let’s put aside that anchors don’t write their teleprompter anymore. Let’s just talk about the mutual exclusitivity implied in your question between brainless babes and wise old men. First off you want to gawk at a someone young and pretty, which is already an issue (why would you give two shits if what you really wanted was good reporting). Secondly, why ask this only of men (I know you qualified that as a sexuality thing but I disagree it’s about that)? Do only men watch and care for the news? Is the infusion of young women in the media for your sake only? Please, that assumption alone shows what you think of women. Our society is becoming increasingly obcessed with youth and beauty, that’s why news anchors are under pressure to look beautiful – the female anchors are more under pressure because our society is also sexist and puts more value on a woman’s physical attributes (‘cause clearly as you see by some of the responses, what else do they have to offer?). And by all means, let’s have the anchors write their own stuff – and men and women can do just a good a job on that.

What is the difference you see between hot young women news anchors and seasoned old men?

@liminal Well, isn’t it obvious? The latter can be treated as human beings with brains and the former can be utilized for sexual pleasure. Duh. Like, hello.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I’m just hoping it isn’t what he means, but it certainly is sounding that way.

@Kraigmo Do you really think it has anything to do with sex/gender? The men with distinguished grey hair and perfect teeth are just as likely to be empty headed fools who read someone else’s words as a bikini model. They are chosen to look distinguished and reliable as much as the young women are chosen to look sexy. No more or less weight is given to either’s journalistic chops over their appearance.

Yes, if the volume is off. If I want to hear the story, I’ll take the seasoned journalist with the deeper voice.

I would rather someone who doesn’t sound like a douche bigalow when he/she is reading. I hate the “news voice”.

I suppose if you really expect to be “informed” by what you see on television (really? does anyone?) then it might help that delusion if the “reporter” seemed to be “wise”, “seasoned”, “experienced” and otherwise “old and non-hot”.

But I like babes of all ages, so… bring ‘em. (Also, I seldom watch television. I get more “news” from Doyle Redland of Onion Radio News.)

What would happen if the situation was switched and we only had either old, not particularly attractive, women or young, good looking men? Hmm…

@Kraigmo
”...Do you really prefer the hot young women news anchors…”

I hope you are not referring to Katie Couric….

The question “do you really prefer…“A lot of people can be easily fooled into working against their own and society’s best interest. So what does the preference prove?

@jfos Yes, you put it into words, and both men and women do it, especially the younger they are. The “news voice”. I can’t stand it either. And it becomes so obvious when they actually do have a bit of banter between themselves, which sounds natural…...and then launch back into the “news voice”. So fake.

@jonsblond

I ask men if you prefer the hot young girl news anchors, as is the trend today?
Just wanted to come back to this for a moment. The question is about preference, not who is qualified. I’m not even commenting on whether a woman is qualified to report the news or to report from the sidelines of an NFL game.

As for the news, I don’t care. Both women and men, for the most part, are equally bad. @jfos mentioned the “news voice” and both genders use it and it is annoying to me. Therefore, I don’t watch TV news. I can read a lot faster than either male or female can talk.

As for NFL football, for instance, qualification isn’t an issue. He asked about preference. My first preference is that the networks would axe any sideline reporting. I think it’s ridiculous to be interviewing the players while they are playing.

But here’s the key, when I am watching NFL football, since it is a totally male activity, it looks odd to me, perhaps because of the way I get mentally involved in the game as a male, to see the cute little girl reporter trying to ask meaningful questions on the sidelines. She may be totally knowledgable about the game, but it makes no more sense to me than sending some hulking NFL player to interview the bridesmaids…..or any other totally female activity. He’s out of place, even if he is qualified.

@gorillapaws Well thanks…..gotta be somewhere we agree…:)

@plethora @jonsblond And really every time I watch ‘qualified’ men broadcasting sports commentary, I want to shoot myself in the head for how f-ing dumb they sound – my god, it’s better to watch baseball without sound on, sometimes – unless it’s the YES network. (and one of their journalists is a woman – she speaks to all the players after each game and does a damn good job)

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I’d buy that. I think they are trained to sound stupid. They are also, apparently, trained to hype everything they say, which also sounds idiotic.

@plethora My first preference is that the networks would axe any sideline reporting

I completely agree with that statement. Just curious though, would you prefer Andy Dick over a female reporter on the sidelines, just because Andy is male?

(I set someone up for a joke. who’s going to take it?) :P

@jonsblond but I don’t wannaaaaaaa

I should have put @Kraigmo in my posting above. I hope you respond.

@jonsblond Nahhhh….I don’t think so…:) If they’re gonna have sideline reporting, I’d like to see a man’s man do the job.

@plethora well since I don’t take those categories like ‘man’s man’ seriously, please watch my favorite commercial here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QChi_AOtSOo

@Simone_De_Beauvoir mmmmm….Simone, doesnt really matter whether you take it seriously. It’s a meaningful term to me. Peyton Manning, in my book, is a man’s man. Cute YouTube commercial though..:)

Not trying to convince you. Just answering a preference question. Your take on it is fine.

Hi @Simone_De_Beauvoir

You are right that I narrowed my question down to a dichotomy, but I only did that to key in on what I was wondering about. I didn’t include other facets, only for the sake of simplicity. One other facet for example, is that the trend is to hire young men and young women to replace the old anchors. And since the old anchors all came from a time when sexism prevented female anchors… most of the seasoned anchors are men, if you include national and local. There’s lots of exceptions of course, including Diane Sawyer, Jessica Savitch, and a host of others.

But I narrowed it down because producers obviously feel that young men and sexy women are better than the wise old guys.

And when I watch the news, and see how so many beautiful models have replaced meteorologists in the weather, and other sexy looking women have replaced other intellectual type anchors… it makes me realize that the TV stations are trying to please male viewers with the sexy women. And I’d rather have the crusty wise old ones, rather than than the young ones. And I was wondering if the TV stations are just stupid in their assumptions, or if they are accurate, as far as gaining more viewers goes for the news shows.

I could have widened the discussion to include the general trend of young anchors vs. older, wiser anchors.

But since I know the TV producers are totally wrong in their assumptions about me the viewer, I figured I’d ask all others who are in my situation… that being a male who watches the news. Not that I don’t want you or others to widen the discussion as you did.

“If all things are equal, then of course, let’s have the hot young babes.” it is right there in the original posting, the first line in the “detail” section.