Jump to content
jackmormon

The media is the enemy of the American people?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, easybronc said:

Trump criticizes the media and people act like he is trying to destroy the 1st Amendment.  lol  The hysterical reaction to all things Trump is very entertaining.  

There's a significant difference between "criticizing" the media and calling them the enemy of the American people.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pokebball said:

I'm not sure what in my post drew your "nope, nope, nope".  I never stated that the truth was somewhere in the middle of the fake news sources which you retort.  I didn't say there weren't any credible news sources any longer, but rather that I thought all were getting tugged towards the fake news dynamic, which I do believe is true.  You defend media such as the NYT and to a lesser degree CBS and ABC and most other major newspapers around the country.  Obviously there are extremes at both ends of the "credible" spectrum and I agree with you on that point.  Rather than labeling a news source as credible or not, it might be better for this discussion to label a source as biased or not.

My opinion is that there isn't a piece, nor has there ever been a piece, written without bias.  Some of us have a hard time admitting or accepting this truth.  As a reader, it is our responsibility to know and understand that.  I appreciate biases. I like to be challenged.  I like to consider differing views on issues.  Hearing biases really is a good thing, but dammit, we have to acknowledge and understand them.

Breitbart's and Occupy Democrats' style is different, obviously.  If you understand their approach and style on issues, they aren't necessarily bad reads.  You simply have to understand that their style is reporting with biases on steroids.  This style is intenttional; it's their schtick.  The internet and social media have allowed for a much broader range of news with differing and more extreme bias; not bad in and of itself.  These new sources are drawing audiences and where are they coming from?  They're coming from the historical, traditional sources like the NYT, WSJ, CBS, NBC, etc.

What is disheartening for me is the public's use of these more biased pieces in vitriolic attacks on public figures.  I think most Americans take these extremely biased pieces as facts, not understanding the style being used, and take them word for word, they cut and past them or link them on facebook and most don't understand the style that was used.  This of course then leads to counter charges of alt facts, alt truths, etc. The problem isn't the writer but rather the reader.

My two cents.

I think you need to narrow the scope of this statement. A vast majority of "news" stories are just that. They deal with daily events and simply report what, when, where. I don't don't believe there's any particular bias in that type of reporting. It's the follow up stories in which there's an attempt to explain causation, that bias creeps in.

For example, the recent story about the problems with the Oroville dam. Initially, the stories, both print and broadcast, simply dealt with the events as they were unfolding. Subsequently, stories were written or aired, that tried to explain "why" the dam is failing. I'm sure some of these may have been biased.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, renoskier said:

I think you need to narrow the scope of this statement. A vast majority of "news" stories are just that. They deal with daily events and simply report what, when, where. I don't don't believe there's any particular bias in that type of reporting. It's the follow up stories in which there's an attempt to explain causation, that bias creeps in.

For example, the recent story about the problems with the Oroville dam. Initially, the stories, both print and broadcast, simply dealt with the events as they were unfolding. Subsequently, stories were written or aired, that tried to explain "why" the dam is failing. I'm sure some of these may have been biased.

 

Sure and I agree.  I think we need to be careful though about brushing off bias in reporting.  The possibility is always there and we, as the reader, own the responsibility of vetting our news and sources providing it.  The Oroville Dam story doesn't lend itself to much if any bias; certainly not as much as a political story does.  When the same or similar facts are reported across all media, we can feel fairly certain that we're getting the correct story, right?

When contrasting reports occur our job as the reader gets more complicated, requiring more research, more reading, etc.  We need to better understand the inherent biases that might exist in one source vs. another.  What is being left out of one report or the other and why?  Does this journalist have an agenda and to what degree might it be influencing their piece?  Even in my local newspaper, I look to see who wrote the piece.  I understand the article better because I have an informed view of the writers style and biases.

 

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, pokebball said:

He didn't call the media the enemy though

oh, the details....I didn't read the whole thread but didn't Obama use the DOJ to go after two different journalists?  oh, why, yes he did.  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html?_r=0  Trump is just carrying on the tradition though in a bit more entertaining way.

All things being equal fat people use more soap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bsuhead said:

oh, the details....I didn't read the whole thread but didn't Obama use the DOJ to go after two different journalists?  oh, why, yes he did.  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html?_r=0  Trump is just carrying on the tradition though in a bit more entertaining way.

Not denying the things he's actually done.  He's firing back at the media like no president has.

  • Like 1

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, pokebball said:

Sure and I agree.  I think we need to be careful though about brushing off bias in reporting.  The possibility is always there and we, as the reader, own the responsibility of vetting our news and sources providing it.  The Oroville Dam story doesn't lend itself to much if any bias; certainly not as much as a political story does.  When the same or similar facts are reported across all media, we can feel fairly certain that we're getting the correct story, right?

When contrasting reports occur our job as the reader gets more complicated, requiring more research, more reading, etc.  We need to better understand the inherent biases that might exist in one source vs. another.  What is being left out of one report or the other and why?  Does this journalist have an agenda and to what degree might it be influencing their piece?  Even in my local newspaper, I look to see who wrote the piece.  I understand the article better because I have an informed view of the writers style and biases.

 

I think more importantly, we need to understand the inherent bias that exist in each of us. It's frustrating to me to hear folks say a news source is "biased" because they don't like hearing differing view points, even if the source is attempting to tell both sides of a story. For instance, years ago, I would enjoy watching Hannity and Colmes. Eventually, Colmes was dropped because the majority of viewers didn't want to hear the other side of an argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, youngrebelfan40 said:

What exactly do you find objectionable about it? Don't be like the retards who constantly quote me around here but never get a reply because I don't respond to hopeless stupidity.

The snowflake can dish it out but runs to his safe space when he gets it back. 

What a pussy. 

"Don't underestimate Joe Biden's ability to F@*k things up."

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brain-damaged people apparently don't know what a safe space is. Inbreeding ftw 

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, did I trigger a snaggletoothed Neanderthal hillbilly? :lol: 

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, renoskier said:

I think more importantly, we need to understand the inherent bias that exist in each of us. It's frustrating to me to hear folks say a news source is "biased" because they don't like hearing differing view points, even if the source is attempting to tell both sides of a story. For instance, years ago, I would enjoy watching Hannity and Colmes. Eventually, Colmes was dropped because the majority of viewers didn't want to hear the other side of an argument.

Agree.  It's called confirmation bias.  We only hear the stuff that confirms our positions and ignore the rest of it.  We choose our sources of news that support our leanings.  Dems think the NYT is without bias.  Repubs think the WSJ is without bias.  No matter how slight it may be, both have biases.

As I said a few posts above, it isn't so much about the media, but rather the reader.

  • Like 1

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mysfit said:

Attacking and delegitimizing the press is how dictators get started. Someone knows their history

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/john-mccain-trump-press-235177

McCain did say in the article that he hated the press too, however recognizing a free press as necessary.

Perhaps you should send a contribution to Breibart.  I'll get mine in the mail to Huff Post tomorrow.

 

  • Like 1

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, renoskier said:

I think more importantly, we need to understand the inherent bias that exist in each of us. It's frustrating to me to hear folks say a news source is "biased" because they don't like hearing differing view points, even if the source is attempting to tell both sides of a story. For instance, years ago, I would enjoy watching Hannity and Colmes. Eventually, Colmes was dropped because the majority of viewers didn't want to hear the other side of an argument.

That show wasn't very good, but it was at least watchable at times for the reason you said.  I get irritated within 5 seconds now and can't watch it.  Maher and Hannity are probably the two talk show hosts I am most allergic too.  

i used to really like the Gigot and Shields debates on McNeil Lehrer.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CPslograd said:

That show wasn't very good, but it was at least watchable at times for the reason you said.  I get irritated within 5 seconds now and can't watch it.  Maher and Hannity are probably the two talk show hosts I am most allergic too.  

i used to really like the Gigot and Shields debates on McNeil Lehrer.

 

Colmes didn't really add anything to the show.  He tried but he was just bad.  I don't know what made me watch Hannity & Colmes.  They were the first show of that kind I suppose.  Much better talking heads have followed.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...