the media
dubist
Posts: 279 Member
0
Replies
-
Nope. They just stir up *kitten*.
The media is there to report the news, not create it and/or get involved in it.
If they didn't take every single thing that happened and spin it to make it newsworthy, we wouldn't be having some of the issues we are having.0 -
I don't think so. I used to watch the news constantly and they are by far the worst. I honestly don't really like MSNBC either, for a variety of reasons. (I do like Maddow though, I never liked Olbermann)0
-
I totally have a crush on Maddow. What do you call it when a straight man has a crush on a lesbian anyway?0
-
Public policy scholars call it the fourth branch of government. I most assuredly agree!0
-
I totally have a crush on Maddow. What do you call it when a straight man has a crush on a lesbian anyway?
unrequited? hopeless?
LOL0 -
i would take MSNBC over FOX every day. We have fox on every TV in Eastman! .All the time !!!! It drives me crazy. i just turn the TV off in my office. It is all we get ..so its it, or nothing.. i can live with nothing. If i need to see whats going on in the world i look at google news( fewtimes a day when im not on here
). If i want to hear bullshi7 i turn fox back on. 0 -
The problem is that you have all these shows like Maddow, BIll O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, etc posing as news. It's not news. It's commentary. It's not the same, and the fact that they're spouting off BS under the disguised of NEWS is NOT journalism and NOT what journalism students learn when they're in school for their degrees.0
-
i would take MSNBC over FOX every day. We have fox on every TV in Eastman! .All the time !!!! It drives me crazy. i just turn the TV off in my office. It is all we get ..so its it, or nothing.. i can live with nothing. If i need to see whats going on in the world i look at google news( fewtimes a day when im not on here ). If i want to hear bullshi7 i turn fox back on.
You only get FOX in your town??0 -
i would take MSNBC over FOX every day. We have fox on every TV in Eastman! .All the time !!!! It drives me crazy. i just turn the TV off in my office. It is all we get ..so its it, or nothing.. i can live with nothing. If i need to see whats going on in the world i look at google news( fewtimes a day when im not on here ). If i want to hear bullshi7 i turn fox back on.
You only get FOX in your town??
lol no.. thats the only thing they have on our TV at work. they won the bid to pump it in for free i guess. It was that ... or the weather channel.0 -
ohhh lol funny!i would take MSNBC over FOX every day. We have fox on every TV in Eastman! .All the time !!!! It drives me crazy. i just turn the TV off in my office. It is all we get ..so its it, or nothing.. i can live with nothing. If i need to see whats going on in the world i look at google news( fewtimes a day when im not on here ). If i want to hear bullshi7 i turn fox back on.
You only get FOX in your town??
lol no.. thats the only thing they have on our TV at work. they won the bid to pump it in for free i guess. It was that ... or the weather channel.0 -
The problem is that you have all these shows like Maddow, BIll O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, etc posing as news. It's not news. It's commentary. It's not the same, and the fact that they're spouting off BS under the disguised of NEWS is NOT journalism and NOT what journalism students learn when they're in school for their degrees.
Can't say about Cooper, but the others are NOT news shows, nor do they pretend to be. They are political commentary and, as such, are blends of opinion and fact. If one is not smart enough to tell one from the other, then they should probably stick to USA Today or My Weekly Reader (not sure there is any difference).0 -
Your link leads to a political opinion show, not a news channel. Are you not able to tell the difference?
If so, what question are you asking? If not, what question are you asking?0 -
The problem is that you have all these shows like Maddow, BIll O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, etc posing as news. It's not news. It's commentary. It's not the same, and the fact that they're spouting off BS under the disguised of NEWS is NOT journalism and NOT what journalism students learn when they're in school for their degrees.
They don't "disguise" anything. If you can't tell the difference between a news show and a show dedicated to political commentary, or the difference between fact and opinion, or even the ability to extract an objective view of an issue from a number of differing opinions, then I think that is your responsibility, not the networks presenting the programs.0 -
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.0
-
No, absolutely not. The "truth" is created and distributed as those in power see fit.0
-
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.
Knowing the truth is "ignorant and pointless"?.... Let me take a shot in the dark..Likes FOX 0 -
The problem is that you have all these shows like Maddow, BIll O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, etc posing as news. It's not news. It's commentary. It's not the same, and the fact that they're spouting off BS under the disguised of NEWS is NOT journalism and NOT what journalism students learn when they're in school for their degrees.
They don't "disguise" anything. If you can't tell the difference between a news show and a show dedicated to political commentary, or the difference between fact and opinion, or even the ability to extract an objective view of an issue from a number of differing opinions, then I think that is your responsibility, not the networks presenting the programs.
They “disguise “ EVERYTHING!
Many journalists (everyone I’ve seen on FOX) pick and choose which controversies to play up and which to play down depending on their agenda . Fear is what they sell now. The networks( FOX anyway) does not care about you..They are more concerned with their own ratings and that Obama’s presidency is at risk , and they need you scared! Fear is the best motivation. It blinds the masses, and creates hate for no other reason than misinformation and propaganda becoming the assumed truth.
Through fear, the news creates their own ratings. They report how they want you to see it, and they choose how you should feel about issues. They fail to draw the line between opinion and news. . It's not news. It IS “’commentary disguised as news”. It is opinion.
I don’t want your opinion. Ill make that for myself. Your opinion is not news. You don’t have to tell me what I am looking at..( we are now seeing the horrifying ,shocking, disturbing, upsetting ..bla bla bla bla bal.... ) I have eyes and can see for myself and make my OWN decision on what I am seeing after I process the facts that you tel me . I dont need your help or influence. Most people that tune in to see whats going on, have an IQ over room temperature.. they can decide for themselves what is important and relevant.
Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart has said that the news is a “relentless agenda-driven 24 hour news opinion propaganda delivery system” . Should you believe a comedian? No you shouldn’t. You should believe someone who checks facts. ( I trust Stewart over about all of them)0 -
Please don't watch Fox.0
-
Please don't watch Fox.
agreed 0 -
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.
Knowing the truth is "ignorant and pointless"?.... Let me take a shot in the dark..Likes FOX
Ironically enough, we are more in agreement than disagreement. However your "emotional outrage: facts" ratio kind of supports my original point.
IMO, media debates tend to be more like Rorschach tests -- they are more about projections of a person's ideological slant than anything else. People throw out conspiracy theories, assign "strategic intent" and political agendas when there are none, rarely use actual facts to support their opinions, etc, etc.
Your diatribe against Fox (which I agree with for the most part, although IMO you haven't presented it particularly well) in most public forums will result in equally emotional (and subjective) rants against MSNBC, CNN, etc. The arguments will become mired in superficial exchanges of comparative trivialization, and almost none of the arguments will be supported by actual facts. This is one of those issues that is almost religious in nature, meaning that people start out with fixed opinions and filter and distort all facts to meet those preconceived opinions.
I have responded as I have so far because the OP posed the question, and insinuated a lack of "fairness and balance" in the media using as an example a show (Rachel Maddow) that is clearly a political opinion program, not a "news" show. Other commenters followed in that same vein, using O'Reilly as another example.
To me, if people cannot even make the basic distinction between an ostensible news show and one that is completely devoted to political commentary, it's hard to even get started on the more subtle topic of how bias, ideological slants, etc, influence the overall media. It's like the old joke: if a person doesn't know the difference between dog poop and a chocolate bar, I am not sending them out to buy Halloween candy.
It's not that I disagree with your opinion of Fox, and I can appreciate your passion. I just know from having these discussions in the past that just saying "Fox Sucks" causes the discussion to devolve into an "Oh yeah....your mother wears army socks" debate.
Which turns the discussion into something.....dare I say it......."ignorant and pointless".0 -
My problem is when they take facts and twist them or turn them into outright lies. It's "news" but it's manipulated. Fox has shown scandals involving Republicans and listed them as Democrats numerous times (I run a debate site and this was posted on there complete with screen shots of them doing so.) They've shown pictures of the support at TEA rallies and claimed that there were hundreds of thousands of people but the picture they showed was of a completely different event. They've criticized OWS for the exact same things they've priased the TEA party for. They criticized Obama for appointing Czars like it was new but they have been in every administration since Reagan and George W had more than anyone, including Obama.
Watch these they are almost funny in their distortion: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html?slidenumber=0#slide_image (Yes, it's a biased site but they aren't giving their opinions. They are showing actual clips from FOX "news" (I always put that in quotes after Fox because of things like this. They aren't real news. Even their "news" shows are right wing propaganda and stuffed full of lies and misinformation)0 -
Cable news, especially in prime time, is nothing more than a slighly more intelligent version of the Jerry Springer show. All prime time is anymore is opinion. I watched it constantly for years until I finally just realized, I don't care what these A-holes opinions are. Besides, I hate the fact that I have to watch CNN, MSNBC, and FOX all together to hear all the sides of the same story to glean what actually happened.0
-
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.
Knowing the truth is "ignorant and pointless"?.... Let me take a shot in the dark..Likes FOX
Ironically enough, we are more in agreement than disagreement. However your "emotional outrage: facts" ratio kind of supports my original point.
Azdak FTW.0 -
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.
Knowing the truth is "ignorant and pointless"?.... Let me take a shot in the dark..Likes FOX
Ironically enough, we are more in agreement than disagreement. However your "emotional outrage: facts" ratio kind of supports my original point.
IMO, media debates tend to be more like Rorschach tests -- they are more about projections of a person's ideological slant than anything else. People throw out conspiracy theories, assign "strategic intent" and political agendas when there are none, rarely use actual facts to support their opinions, etc, etc.
Your diatribe against Fox (which I agree with for the most part, although IMO you haven't presented it particularly well) in most public forums will result in equally emotional (and subjective) rants against MSNBC, CNN, etc. The arguments will become mired in superficial exchanges of comparative trivialization, and almost none of the arguments will be supported by actual facts. This is one of those issues that is almost religious in nature, meaning that people start out with fixed opinions and filter and distort all facts to meet those preconceived opinions.
I have responded as I have so far because the OP posed the question, and insinuated a lack of "fairness and balance" in the media using as an example a show (Rachel Maddow) that is clearly a political opinion program, not a "news" show. Other commenters followed in that same vein, using O'Reilly as another example.
To me, if people cannot even make the basic distinction between an ostensible news show and one that is completely devoted to political commentary, it's hard to even get started on the more subtle topic of how bias, ideological slants, etc, influence the overall media. It's like the old joke: if a person doesn't know the difference between dog poop and a chocolate bar, I am not sending them out to buy Halloween candy.
It's not that I disagree with your opinion of Fox, and I can appreciate your passion. I just know from having these discussions in the past that just saying "Fox Sucks" causes the discussion to devolve into an "Oh yeah....your mother wears army socks" debate.
Which turns the discussion into something.....dare I say it......."ignorant and pointless".
I had to read your reply twice just to make sure I understood it all.Still not sure.. Ill have to be a bit finickier on who I argue with next time ( had to look up ostensible)
I agree that many discussions of this nature end in ‘’ Fox Sucks..…"Oh yeah....and your mother wears combat boots". Are not most passionate debates (abortion/ religion) influenced by someone’s inflexible opinions? Facts can always be presented on both sides of a discussion leaning in favor of their ethical views. Should the dread of not finding a resolution to an argument be a reason to ignore it and not discuss it? I don’t feel that we should all just straddle the fence..right or wrong.. pick a side. IMO
I have little doubt that the OP, and most people, are able to distinguish easily between a political show (Maddow) and the Evening News. My tirade, geared mostly toward FOX obviously, however poorly presented, was that many of their shows are offered as news. Are they news?.. no. Should we be able to tell the difference..yes . But I think that many underestimate the power of enough voices beating something in our heads. One person says something and its brushed off .. 5 people say the same thing and people start to listen.. when someone takes the time to write it down and publish it in a book or waste money to display it on TV it…to many it becomes fact. I feel it IS the responsibility of networks not to spread misinformation. Is it not still wrong to yell FIRE while in a crowded ,free of danger movie theater,.... if but 30 minutes before you said quietly, that the next thing you SCREAM over and over may be a lie? I lean toward it is.
My brain hurts..i haven’t thought this hard since college.0 -
Of all the arguments we have in our society, I find the ones about "media bias" to be among the more ignorant and pointless.
Knowing the truth is "ignorant and pointless"?.... Let me take a shot in the dark..Likes FOX
Ironically enough, we are more in agreement than disagreement. However your "emotional outrage: facts" ratio kind of supports my original point.
Azdak FTW.
Lol..
Ouch..
Great debater,unfortunately, will probably not be engraved on my epitaph. Better not quit my day job0 -
The problem is that you have all these shows like Maddow, BIll O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, etc posing as news. It's not news. It's commentary. It's not the same, and the fact that they're spouting off BS under the disguised of NEWS is NOT journalism and NOT what journalism students learn when they're in school for their degrees.
Can't say about Cooper, but the others are NOT news shows, nor do they pretend to be. They are political commentary and, as such, are blends of opinion and fact. If one is not smart enough to tell one from the other, then they should probably stick to USA Today or My Weekly Reader (not sure there is any difference).
But the issue is that many many many people look to these shows for unbiased news.0
This discussion has been closed.