|
Post by bswiv on Jul 27, 2024 6:14:41 GMT -5
This'll most likely quickly devolve into Team Play so maybe a hopeless effort......but......as the "press" is so darn important to the functioning of a free and peaceful society which elects those who will decide it is absolutely necessary that the "press" does at least a passable job of informing. So this is really about the "press" and the fact that they have so terribly crossed the line to where we are left questioning EVERYTHING. reason.com/2024/07/25/kamala-harris-border-czar-axios-media-cringe/
|
|
|
Post by throttle on Jul 27, 2024 8:22:27 GMT -5
This'll most likely quickly devolve into Team Play so maybe a hopeless effort......but......as the "press" is so darn important to the functioning of a free and peaceful society which elects those who will decide it is absolutely necessary that the "press" does at least a passable job of informing. So this is really about the "press" and the fact that they have so terribly crossed the line to where we are left questioning EVERYTHING. reason.com/2024/07/25/kamala-harris-border-czar-axios-media-cringe/Media have always been partisan, but never have they had so little respect for the intelligence, and memory, of their audience. And never has leftist media been so dominant that they could deplatform the opposition until recently.
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on Jul 27, 2024 8:35:51 GMT -5
This'll most likely quickly devolve into Team Play so maybe a hopeless effort......but......as the "press" is so darn important to the functioning of a free and peaceful society which elects those who will decide it is absolutely necessary that the "press" does at least a passable job of informing. So this is really about the "press" and the fact that they have so terribly crossed the line to where we are left questioning EVERYTHING. reason.com/2024/07/25/kamala-harris-border-czar-axios-media-cringe/Exactly. To quote the article, which is something I’ve said several times the last few days: “One of Harris' greatest assets, however, will be favorable media coverage; indeed, mainstream reporters are already trying to protect her on one of her most vulnerable issues.“ The problem isn’t that the mainstream press is partisan as much as it is that they pretend not to be. They knowingly want to manipulate the opinions of the public while acting as if they’re neutral conveyors of the news. For decades, Americans didn’t know to put their guards up when consuming the New York Times or ABC Nightly News. So they just absorbed whatever without questioning it. I think people are starting to understand now that broadcast and print news is just as much a partisan hack job as right wing talk radio and has to be filtered accordingly. But that message has to be continued to be hammered home again and again. It is a crying shame that neutral journalism without an agenda is so rare.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jul 27, 2024 8:40:50 GMT -5
This'll most likely quickly devolve into Team Play so maybe a hopeless effort......but......as the "press" is so darn important to the functioning of a free and peaceful society which elects those who will decide it is absolutely necessary that the "press" does at least a passable job of informing. So this is really about the "press" and the fact that they have so terribly crossed the line to where we are left questioning EVERYTHING. reason.com/2024/07/25/kamala-harris-border-czar-axios-media-cringe/Exactly. To quote the article, which is something I’ve said several times the last few days: “One of Harris' greatest assets, however, will be favorable media coverage; indeed, mainstream reporters are already trying to protect her on one of her most vulnerable issues.“ The problem isn’t that the mainstream press is partisan as much as it is that they pretend not to be. They knowingly want to manipulate the opinions of the public while acting as if they’re neutral conveyors of the news. For decades, Americans didn’t know to put their guards up when consuming the New York Times or ABC Nightly News. So they just absorbed whatever without questioning it. I think people are starting to understand now that broadcast and print news is just as much a partisan hack job as right wing talk radio and has to be filtered accordingly. But that message has to be continued to be hammered home again and again. It is a crying shame that neutral journalism without an agenda is so rare. Neutral journalism without an agenda has never existed.
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on Jul 27, 2024 8:56:14 GMT -5
Exactly. To quote the article, which is something I’ve said several times the last few days: “One of Harris' greatest assets, however, will be favorable media coverage; indeed, mainstream reporters are already trying to protect her on one of her most vulnerable issues.“ The problem isn’t that the mainstream press is partisan as much as it is that they pretend not to be. They knowingly want to manipulate the opinions of the public while acting as if they’re neutral conveyors of the news. For decades, Americans didn’t know to put their guards up when consuming the New York Times or ABC Nightly News. So they just absorbed whatever without questioning it. I think people are starting to understand now that broadcast and print news is just as much a partisan hack job as right wing talk radio and has to be filtered accordingly. But that message has to be continued to be hammered home again and again. It is a crying shame that neutral journalism without an agenda is so rare. Neutral journalism without an agenda has never existed. Sure it has. Albeit rarely. Journalism was highly partisan for most of American history. But it was obviously so. It was mostly in print and readers knew what they were getting. What changed is that journalism started to pretend to be something else. Something higher. Almost scientific. Neutral and trustworthy. Something you could drop your filter with.That’s what makes the modern Leftist media so insidious and worthy of scorn.
|
|
|
Post by garycoleco on Jul 27, 2024 9:13:46 GMT -5
All media has heavy bias. All media lies. It's just something we should All keep in mind when drawing chatroom conclusions
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on Jul 27, 2024 9:21:11 GMT -5
Straight unbiased news isn’t a money maker. Echo chambers produce loyal viewers. Consistent viewer numbers equal ad revenue.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jul 27, 2024 10:13:50 GMT -5
Neutral journalism without an agenda has never existed. Sure it has. Albeit rarely. Journalism was highly partisan for most of American history. But it was obviously so. It was mostly in print and readers knew what they were getting. What changed is that journalism started to pretend to be something else. Something higher. Almost scientific. Neutral and trustworthy. Something you could drop your filter with.That’s what makes the modern Leftist media so insidious and worthy of scorn. Nope, never has. It just agreed with you bias at the time which made it appear neutral to you. Sometimes it was pro government, sometimes anti government. It is almost impossible to report news completely neutral. How neutral it is depends on the viewer, listener, or reader.
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on Jul 27, 2024 10:20:32 GMT -5
Neutral journalism without an agenda has never existed. Sure it has. Albeit rarely. Journalism was highly partisan for most of American history. But it was obviously so. It was mostly in print and readers knew what they were getting. What changed is that journalism started to pretend to be something else. Something higher. Almost scientific. Neutral and trustworthy. Something you could drop your filter with.That’s what makes the modern Leftist media so insidious and worthy of scorn. Exactly. It was always biased. You are right that today it is still biased but tries to pretend its some noble source of information.
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on Jul 27, 2024 10:31:24 GMT -5
Sure it has. Albeit rarely. Journalism was highly partisan for most of American history. But it was obviously so. It was mostly in print and readers knew what they were getting. What changed is that journalism started to pretend to be something else. Something higher. Almost scientific. Neutral and trustworthy. Something you could drop your filter with.That’s what makes the modern Leftist media so insidious and worthy of scorn. Nope, never has. It just agreed with you bias at the time which made it appear neutral to you. Sometimes it was pro government, sometimes anti government. It is almost impossible to report news completely neutral. How neutral it is depends on the viewer, listener, or reader. You’re saying there has never, ever, been a journalist in history who did their best to report the news as neutrally as possible. That there’s never been an idealistic, albeit naive, journalist who came into the profession with a notion of journalism being something that should be dispassionate. To say its absolutely never been so is statistically impossible. If there’s ever been journalists who’ve at least sincerely tried, them I am correct and you are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jul 27, 2024 11:52:52 GMT -5
Nope, never has. It just agreed with you bias at the time which made it appear neutral to you. Sometimes it was pro government, sometimes anti government. It is almost impossible to report news completely neutral. How neutral it is depends on the viewer, listener, or reader. You’re saying there has never, ever, been a journalist in history who did their best to report the news as neutrally as possible. That there’s never been an idealistic, albeit naive, journalist who came into the profession with a notion of journalism being something that should be dispassionate. To say its absolutely never been so is statistically impossible. If there’s ever been journalists who’ve at least sincerely tried, them I am correct and you are wrong. There is a difference between A journalist and journalism. But even individual journalist have some bias in their reporting. I don't doubt they came into the profession to be objective as possible, but human nature makes that statistically impossible.
|
|
|
Post by toldya on Jul 27, 2024 12:30:30 GMT -5
You’re saying there has never, ever, been a journalist in history who did their best to report the news as neutrally as possible. That there’s never been an idealistic, albeit naive, journalist who came into the profession with a notion of journalism being something that should be dispassionate. To say its absolutely never been so is statistically impossible. If there’s ever been journalists who’ve at least sincerely tried, them I am correct and you are wrong. There is a difference between A journalist and journalism. But even individual journalist have some bias in their reporting. I don't doubt they came into the profession to be objective as possible, but human nature makes that statistically impossible. Illinois says your moderation is biased . You say it's not. Wouldn't human nature make that statistically impossible ?
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jul 27, 2024 12:44:08 GMT -5
There is a difference between A journalist and journalism. But even individual journalist have some bias in their reporting. I don't doubt they came into the profession to be objective as possible, but human nature makes that statistically impossible. Illinois says your moderation is biased . You say it's not. Wouldn't human nature make that statistically impossible ? My bias would be what I think and say as a person. Due to the relaxed rules of this site, bias toward political views, as Illinois claims, is almost impossible and I have asked him and you to point out examples which you have failed to do. I likely have some bias towards those who insult wives and family members and delete those comments quickly since such behavior is uncalled for. My bias may show toward childish behavior demonstrated by some or attempts to use banned words by misspelling them to get around the censor. Human nature makes it difficult for anyone to be 100% objective.
|
|
|
Post by toldya on Jul 27, 2024 12:58:18 GMT -5
Illinois says your moderation is biased . You say it's not. Wouldn't human nature make that statistically impossible ? My bias would be what I think and say as a person. Due to the relaxed rules of this site, bias toward political views, as Illinois claims, is almost impossible and I have asked him and you to point out examples which you have failed to do. I likely have some bias towards those who insult wives and family members and delete those comments quickly since such behavior is uncalled for. My bias may show toward childish behavior demonstrated by some or attempts to use banned words by misspelling them to get around the censor. Human nature makes it difficult for anyone to be 100% objective. I never claimed you have political bias. Your childish cursing at and name calling while performing your duties is okay with me . I'm use to it. But actions have consequences and.....
|
|
|
Post by garycoleco on Jul 27, 2024 14:47:15 GMT -5
Nope, never has. It just agreed with you bias at the time which made it appear neutral to you. Sometimes it was pro government, sometimes anti government. It is almost impossible to report news completely neutral. How neutral it is depends on the viewer, listener, or reader. You’re saying there has never, ever, been a journalist in history who did their best to report the news as neutrally as possible. That there’s never been an idealistic, albeit naive, journalist who came into the profession with a notion of journalism being something that should be dispassionate. To say its absolutely never been so is statistically impossible. If there’s ever been journalists who’ve at least sincerely tried, them I am correct and you are wrong. Zero. 0.00
|
|