Shouldn't we all be concerned about the perception of media integrity?

[Boomboom521]

Right or Left, isn't this a very scary notion, that there is no unbiased sources of news in the mainstream? I know how to research an issue, but the general population doesn't for the most part. Misinformation, propaganda, and manipulation can dominate the public sphere due to the internet and lack of a check through a balanced, reputable news source.

Am I seeing this as a bigger issue than it really is?
If not, what's the answer?

 

[WVPATX]

The media brought this on themselves. I used to believe the main stream media was simply biased. No more. I think they are corrupt. Slanting news to fit their agenda. This is true from the NY Times, Wash Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN. I am talking about hard news coverage, not the opinion analysts.

As a result of their unfair and slanted coverage, talk radio emerged with Rush Limbaugh. It gave the heartland a voice with which they agreed. And then Roger Ailes saw an opportunity to develop a network that sought to go after the roughly 50% of the country that felt ignored by the main stream media. Soon thereafter, we got MSNBC. No wonder Fox is by far the largest cable network in the country. 50% of the country is a lot of people.

The coverage as only gotten more slanted since that time. We now have hard news reporters claiming they should insert their own views (they call them facts) into their stories (e.g. Christiane Amanpour). And she is not alone. From Brexit to the U.S. election, the media showed their true colors and the people rejected them.

A media study showed that 91% of Trump coverage was negative. That was not by accident. This has forced people to recede to their favorite news sources that confirm preexisting beliefs and opinions. It has lead to an explosion of online news/blogs. It has lead to a much more divided country. And there is no one more to blame than the main stream media.

An amazing fact is that the NY Times editor actually said recently, we don't understand religion. How can that be possible for the newspaper of record? Stunning admission.

 

[bornaneer]

Right or Left, isn't this a very scary notion, that there is no unbiased sources of news in the mainstream? I know how to research an issue, but the general population doesn't for the most part. Misinformation, propaganda, and manipulation can dominate the public sphere due to the internet and lack of a check through a balanced, reputable news source.

Am I seeing this as a bigger issue than it really is?
If not, what's the answer?

The answer is for you to believe media information based on your beliefs unless the reports cannot be proven true. I am getting to the point where I cannot believe in these so called "fact check" sites. I usually can find the fact check site that give me the answer I'm looking for........sad but true.

 

[WVPATX]

The answer is for you to believe media information based on you beliefs unless the reports cannot be proven true. I am getting to the point where I cannot believe in these so called "fact check" sites. I usually can find the fact check site that give me the answer I'm looking for........sad but true.

These "fact check" sites are bogus too. They slant their facts to suit their preferred narrative. I think there are a few honest hard news reporters out there. But not many. I think Tapper is fair. I think Chris Wallace is fair. But they are few and far between.

 

[countryroads89]

Right or Left, isn't this a very scary notion, that there is no unbiased sources of news in the mainstream? I know how to research an issue, but the general population doesn't for the most part. Misinformation, propaganda, and manipulation can dominate the public sphere due to the internet and lack of a check through a balanced, reputable news source.

Am I seeing this as a bigger issue than it really is?
If not, what's the answer?

I don't see bias in ABC, CBS, NBC. CNN does occasionally. Fox shouldn't even be allowed to title themselves as news.

And to the defense of CNN, occasionally on the 9pm hour, they put some idiotic young blonde right winger on there and I can only stand to watch about 5 minutes of it.

 

[Boomboom521]

How do we establish credibility again? Would less editorial and opinion pieces help? Diversification of ownership?

 

[Boomboom521]

I don't see bias in ABC, CBS, NBC. CNN does occasionally. Fox shouldn't even be allowed to title themselves as news.

And to the defense of CNN, occasionally on the 9pm hour, they put some idiotic young blonde right winger on there and I can only stand to watch about 5 minutes of it.

I agree with this, but I'm also pretty liberal in my ideology.

 

[Boomboom521]

How do we establish credibility again? Would less editorial and opinion pieces help? Diversification of ownership?

Maybe legislation that requires a clearer identification of who owns and operates websites / publications?

 

[countryroads89]

Maybe legislation that requires a clearer identification of who owns and operates websites / publications?

Yes, and more litigation and punitive damages for reporting false information.

 

[TarHeelEer]

I don't see bias in ABC, CBS, NBC.

Of course you don't. We know where you stand.

 

[Boomboom521]

Of course you don't. We know where you stand.

You saw this bias PRIOR to the past election cycle?

 

[countryroads89]

Of course you don't. We know where you stand.

And of course you do. It's "main stream".
There are more liberal leaning sites than the above mentioned.

Just a sanity check for right wingers; if you think main stream media is biased to the left, you are probably really biased your self to the right and only hear what you want to hear.

 

[TarHeelEer]

You saw this bias PRIOR to the past election cycle?

Somewhat, but not as yuge and frequent as this cycle. CNN is a different story, they've taken it to a whole new level. I think they want to compete with MSNBC.

 

[TarHeelEer]

And of course you do. It's "main stream".
There are more liberal leaning sites than the above mentioned.

Just a sanity check for right wingers; if you think main stream media is biased to the left, you are probably really biased your self to the right and only hear what you want to hear.

You're providing the sanity check? No thanks.

 

[Boomboom521]

Somewhat, but not as yuge and frequent as this cycle. CNN is a different story, they've taken it to a whole new level. I think they want to compete with MSNBC.

I am upset with the direction CNN is taking. MSNBC has equaled FOX (almost). I think there was bias against Trump from some of the big networks, but not an overall bias.

 

[countryroads89]

Somewhat, but not as yuge and frequent as this cycle. CNN is a different story, they've taken it to a whole new level. I think they want to compete with MSNBC.

You do know MSNBC has Morning Joe, he leans to the right.

 

[CAJUNEER]

You do know MSNBC has Morning Joe, he leans to the right.

Joe is a moderate in the sense he waits to see which way the political winds are blowing to decide where he is on an issue. Sometimes the winds blow left, sometimes right. Point is Joe blows.

 

[countryroads89]

Joe is a moderate in the sense he waits to see which way the political winders are blowing to decide where he is on an issue. Sometimes the winds blow left, sometimes right. Point is Joe blows.

Joe is a Republican and leans right, no doubt about it. He isn't a hard line right winger out there on the fringe, but there is no mistaking about it, he leans right.

 

[CAJUNEER]

Joe is a Republican and leans right, no doubt about it. He isn't a hard line right winger out there on the fringe, but there is no mistaking about it, he leans right.

I don't disagree. I mostly just had what I thought was a funny line I wanted to use.

 

[countryroads89]

Somewhat, but not as yuge and frequent as this cycle. CNN is a different story, they've taken it to a whole new level. I think they want to compete with MSNBC.

I think you are confusing media bias with simply reporting the ridiculousness of Trump.

It was every single day that he was saying something stupid. Even the "traditional" Republicans weren't backing Trump. Even they realized what a buffoon Trump is. Just because Trump supplied everyone with news every single day, don't confuse that with media bias. They didn't create the news, Trump did and they reported it.

 

[WVPATX]

I don't see bias in ABC, CBS, NBC. CNN does occasionally. Fox shouldn't even be allowed to title themselves as news.

And to the defense of CNN, occasionally on the 9pm hour, they put some idiotic young blonde right winger on there and I can only stand to watch about 5 minutes of it.

Even the head of CNN Jeff Zucker admitted they are too far to the left.

 

[WVPATX]

Maybe legislation that requires a clearer identification of who owns and operates websites / publications?

Government is not the solution. There is something called the First Amendment. The marketplace will decide. It would be who've ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post amongst many to simply become much more fair and the reporting of hard news. That may reduce the number of clicks on various blogs and potentially put them out of business. However, I am not holding my breath.

 

[WVPATX]

Yes, and more litigation and punitive damages for reporting false information.

So you agree with trump that he wants to liberalize slander and libel laws? The left-wing media went apoplectic when he suggested that.

 

[WVPATX]

You saw this bias PRIOR to the past election cycle?

You're a liberal so you may not even recognize the slanted news coverage. That was on the conservative side sure do.

91% of the mainstream news coverage which was negative toward Trump is not by accident, my friend.

 

[WVPATX]

I think you are confusing media bias with simply reporting the ridiculousness of Trump.

It was every single day that he was saying something stupid. Even the "traditional" Republicans weren't backing Trump. Even they realized what a buffoon Trump is. Just because Trump supplied everyone with news every single day, don't confuse that with media bias. They didn't create the news, Trump did and they reported it.

Trump is an idiot. But so is Hillary Clinton. But your bias and liberalism won't allow you to see that. 91% negative coverage of Trump during the general election. During the primary season the networks couldn't wait to get him on and the coverage was much more favorable.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Right or Left, isn't this a very scary notion, that there is no unbiased sources of news in the mainstream? I know how to research an issue, but the general population doesn't for the most part. Misinformation, propaganda, and manipulation can dominate the public sphere due to the internet and lack of a check through a balanced, reputable news source.

Am I seeing this as a bigger issue than it really is?
If not, what's the answer?

Anti/Trump bias aside, I think they by and large lean left to a degree, some a little, some a lot.

The issue with this perception is largely due to where the MSM is located. The MSM is out of touch with middle America. By that, I mean the emphasis placed on many ideas in large cultural centers are lost in the heartland because those aren't the issues they can relate to. Instead of educating and informing, the MSM took the approach of shaming and ostracizing the less cultured. They chose to not make it relatable or even make an attempt.

Take the medias approach towards firearms as an example. By and large, most of us grow up owning, using, purchasing, and hunting with them. We are raised to respect and understand their lethality as most of us have killed something by puberty. Then the MSM comes along and tries to tell us all the problems with them and shame us into submission when we don't have a problem. The inner cities do.

You can extrapolate that example across a variety of issues, causes, and sacred cows of large cultural centers. The telling thing for me was the self reflection articles following the election by the MSM with many acknowledging they didn't even try to understand let alone visit the heartland. If the MSM wants credibility back, it's easy, go out and connect, not just study and ostracize us like some tribe of backwards Neanderthals.

 

[Boomboom521]

Anti/Trump bias aside, I think they by and large lean left to a degree, some a little, some a lot.

The issue with this perception is largely due to where the MSM is located. The MSM is out of touch with middle America. By that, I mean the emphasis placed on many ideas in large cultural centers are lost in the heartland because those aren't the issues they can relate to. Instead of educating and informing, the MSM took the approach of shaming and ostracizing the less cultured. They chose to not make it relatable or even make an attempt.

Take the medias approach towards firearms as an example. By and large, most of us grow up owning, using, purchasing, and hunting with them. We are raised to respect and understand their lethality as most of us have killed something by puberty. Then the MSM comes along and tries to tell us all the problems with them and shame us into submission when we don't have a problem. The inner cities do.

You can extrapolate that example across a variety of issues, causes, and sacred cows of large cultural centers. The telling thing for me was the self reflection articles following the election by the MSM with many acknowledging they didn't even try to understand let alone visit the heartland. If the MSM wants credibility back, it's easy, go out and connect, not just study and ostracize us like some tribe of backwards Neanderthals.

I think that's spot on!