Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or do you believe that only a media that says nice things about you and Donald should be allowed and all others who ask inconvenient questions are "enemy of the People?"
That's a loaded question, isn't it? What I expect is the press to be is unbiased, the flip side to your question is a news outlet that has continuous negative reporting. Pew did a study of the reporting on the 2008 election, don;t quote me on this but something like 70% of the reporting for Obama was positive, 20% negative and 10% neutral. For McCain it was completely flipped. Again those numbers are my recollection but they will be close.
I don't expect it to be perfectly even but that's quite a difference don't you think? If you are focusing on positive things about about Democrats and negative things about Republicans that's bias even if the reporting is accurate.
Here is question for you. did you see the NYT front page the day after the election? Go look it up....
Last edited by thecoalman; 11-30-2018 at 10:54 AM..
It's about having a conversation vs squelching the conversation.
And the people who want to squelch the conversation are Trump & Co, who brand every media critic as "enemies of the People," threaten legal action, and ban press reporters who ask hard questions. Thanks for playing.
I wonder if there is any profession in the world that people have less confidence in than the media.
Maybe lawyers, but people generally like their own lawyers, whereas who in the world trusts a journalist?
When people are interviewed, they are scared that the person interviewing them is going to take them out of context and hurt them in an article (or the editor is going to screw them).
And how about the reporters that chase people on the street? They get away with it, but they are stalking, harassing and assaulting people.
I cannot think of a profession that people trust less than the media.
A little history can help here. At the time of the founding fathers, in France before and during their revolution, presses were violently destroyed by the authorities when those publications published issues that were not government approved. Editors and writers would be imprisoned and sometimes executed.
Fast-forward to modern France where a lively free press exists. There are publications across the entire gamut of political affiliations, as well as a few news services which strive for more of a middle ground. No one expects all news outlets to have the same point of view. They all get along relatively peacefully, outside the clearly terrorist attacks which have followed some issues.
I don't understand why people get so outraged about the conservative and liberal biases of the mainstream media. They are a business, just as the newspapers were hundreds of years ago. Having a free press means that the journalists can do their jobs without impediment, and especially without the threat of imprisonment or death for their published works. It does not mean that every publication must tell the same version of events.
Triangulation for the truth is a bit like calculus--the more publications you read and view, the more closely you will approximate the truth. (Loved that term!)
Personally I watch the BBC World Report, the CBS Evening News, the PBS Newshour, Washington Week in Review, and sometimes Firing Line. I rarely watch other networks and I almost never watch the "celebrity journalists." I listen to NPR. My print media includes our local paper ($50! cough!), the New York Times (only $15), the Reuters and AP wire service apps, the BBC, FoxNews and NPR apps and several professional blogs, some with a political bent and some not. I also watch French news on France 24 and AFP regularly, which seem to be unbiased reporting. I don't listen to talk radio or read political blogs.
I am what you would call a news junkie. I'm also a confirmed independent, so I steer away from news media with an extreme bent like ABC, NBC, and Fox news networks. CBS is barely tolerable. It helps that I rarely get emotional about what is going on in the news. I can criticize anyone I chose because I'm not invested in a particular view of things. It's liberating.
Reading this comment is for me something like looking in the mirror, from top to bottom!
Or do you believe that only a media that says nice things about you and Donald should be allowed and all others who ask inconvenient questions are "enemy of the People?"
Good questions are perfectly fine.
It is the opinionated grandstanding in long drawn out statements fille with half truths, speculations and sometimes blatant lies and then ask a question about the statement the just blurted out, that makes the media, the news story.
The Media should never be the news.
And what is "it's" bias? Any bias that isn't the same as yours?
Here's a thought for you conservatives so worked up about the media: if you don't like it, form your own media outlets.
You already have FOX, Breitbart, Infowars. What percentage of the public do you make up? Quite a damn lot. So there should be enough for people to vote with their ears / pocketbooks and create more outlets with your viewpoints instead of trying to limit other existing ones you don't like.
I tend to encourage the opposite to avoid the serious problem of letting confirmation bias overwhelm our thinking and perspective. We don't learn anything worthwhile by listening to what we want to hear. We learn from listening to what we don't seem to well understand, alternative opinion, what doesn't necessarily jive with our own way of thinking...
This is why I follow Fox News every morning along with the rest on my list even though I don't have conservative leanings. It's also very interesting if not educational to see what the various news sites report and how they report what they do, the same as others and/or different from others. Thought provoking in any case, but of course for all too many of us, considering alternative points of view is not possible.
...so I steer away from news media with an extreme bent like ABC, NBC, and Fox news networks.
I used to switch between Fox and CNN, you'd usually get the whole story and both points of view however I gave up on CNN. It was a few months after the election and there was three important news stories that day. CNN had nearly solid half hour on The Morning Joe controversy, certainly newsworthy but not for the entire time. Really haven't watched it since.
First of all, the question is asked only of conservatives, so the OP is trolling.
Not sure I follow or agree with this. I've seen many similar accusations about trolling before that I don't quite understand, but I suspect this thread would have been ended by the moderators by now if it were trolling. Right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
