American heroes

[naginiF]

CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC clearly spin to their core audience. 

IMHO one puts a spin, one puts a HEAVY lean (but 90%+ based on a factual premise), and one is not just a HEAVY lean (with a % based on factual premise) but also presents opinion pieces as "news".

 

I tend to not believe any news outlet any more.

Totally agree.....EVERY story any of us reads should be cross checked by a number of different sources.  Some sites do this for us, some site sources that post like opinions as sources, and some just speculate.  If your browser history or personal interaction isn't balance between right/left/center/extreme question what you read

[MU82]

Nickname for Star Tribune.

I never worked for the Star Tribune.

[Pakuni]

It always amazes how people who've never likely set foot in a newsroom, much less ever worked in one, know so much about the operations of a newsroom and the internal motivations of those who actually do work there.

[real chili 83]

I never worked for the Star Tribune.

My apologies then. 

[tower912]

he was employed by them,
But he never worked for them.  (Rim shot)

You've been missing a lot of work lately, Peter.

I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob.

[MU82]

he was employed by them,
But he never worked for them.  (Rim shot)

You've been missing a lot of work lately, Peter.

I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob.

But seriously, ladies and germs ...

[MU82]

In the comment stream of an investing-site article, some guy predicted that the NYT would be out of business - not that it would simply stop printing a paper in favor of online only, but that it would be completely "kaput" - in 10 years.

I asked him if he wanted to place a bet ... and he responded that he would bet his bitcoin.

Talk about something that could be kaput in 10 years - or less!

[naginiF]

IMHO one puts a spin, one puts a HEAVY lean (but 90%+ based on a factual premise), and one is not just a HEAVY lean (with a % based on factual premise) but also presents opinion pieces as "news".

To my point.....one of the three news organizations referenced has a primary personality that believes President Obama's official portrait is sexually explicit.

[MU82]

It's a racist network, watched by a bunch of old racists, including the Racist In Chief. The one really pushing the "sexually explicit" talk is the same guy who was calling avowed racist Cliven Bundy an American hero.

So I hope that doesn't surprise you somehow, nagini!

[jesmu84]

More American heroes announced today that Trump's lawyer did pay Stormy Daniels $130k. But out of his own pocket. And won't say what it was for.

[MU82]

Next thing we'll hear is that Rob Porter beat the crap out of Stormy Daniels ... and it will be true!

[naginiF]

It's a racist network, watched by a bunch of old racists, including the Racist In Chief. The one really pushing the "sexually explicit" talk is the same guy who was calling avowed racist Cliven Bundy an American hero.

So I hope that doesn't surprise you somehow, nagini!

Nah, i was 51% purposely not specifying a network to avoid triggering Heisy (therefore locking another thread that may be true but uncomfortable) and 49% truly interested in any position that would try to normalize that networks positioning of this 'news' (outside of Shep).

[TSmith34, Inc.]

To my point.....one of the three news organizations referenced has a primary personality that believes President Obama's official portrait is sexually explicit.

Errrrr.....showing too much ankle??

[Pakuni]

Errrrr.....showing too much ankle??

https://www.avclub.com/sean-hannity-thinks-there-is-secret-sperm-hiding-in-o-1822970779

[MU82]

https://www.avclub.com/sean-hannity-thinks-there-is-secret-sperm-hiding-in-o-1822970779

Only Hannity could spend 98% of his time defending an admitted sexual predator and serial adulterer, and then use the other 2% to attack somebody who had perfect comportment.

[MU82]

Nah, i was 51% purposely not specifying a network to avoid triggering Heisy (therefore locking another thread that may be true but uncomfortable) and 49% truly interested in any position that would try to normalize that networks positioning of this 'news' (outside of Shep).

I like Shep!

[naginiF]

I like Shep!

He does a great job.  I should've added Wallace in there too - he's pretty good.

[dgies9156]

The NY Times and Washington Post have zero journalist standards anymore. They are not worthy of first amendment protection.

You could not be more dead wrong. Herman, you're one of my favorite posters, but c'mon. You really believe this?

I don't like some of the things they say and do either. In fact, the decline of both newspapers from the 1970s and 1980s is frightening. But the First Amendment is for everyone and if you revoke their protections, then how long will it be before someone revokes your's or my protections.

Dr. King was successful in no small part because of the First Amendment and the ability to spread his message openly throughout the land (check out New York Times vs. LB Sullivan 376 U.S. 254 (1964), for the importance of the First Amendment in the civil rights era). So was Woodward and Bernstein. Imagine what Tricky Dick Nixon would have done with a more restricting First Amendment. Hint: Katherine Graham would have been hauling garbage in a Federal Penitentiary somewhere.

[Mutaman]

He does a great job.  I should've added Wallace in there too - he's pretty good.

Shep is great which is why Ailes took away his evening news show. Wallace is a hack who only looks like a newsman in relation to his colleagues like Hannity and O'Reilly.

Isn't Wallace the guy who said if he catches someone in a lie, it's not his job to follow up on it?

 https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-wallace-presidential-debate_us_57ccc67ce4b0a22de0967652

[naginiF]

Shep is great which is why Ailes took away his evening news show. Wallace is a hack who only looks like a newsman in relation to his colleagues like Hannity and O'Reilly.

Isn't Wallace the guy who said if he catches someone in a lie, it's not his job to follow up on it?

 https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-wallace-presidential-debate_us_57ccc67ce4b0a22de0967652

i stand corrected - i either forgot about that or ignored it due to my obvious bias  .  I seriously have no excuse for forgetting that.

also, i did read the T. Carlson article and some of the comments from the other thread and WOW - it's like at Heisy circle jerk

[Mutaman]

i stand corrected - i either forgot about that or ignored it due to my obvious bias  .  I seriously have no excuse for forgetting that.

also, i did read the T. Carlson article and some of the comments from the other thread and WOW - it's like at Heisy circle jerk

I was never a fan of Chris' dad either. Mike really had a thing for Howard Stern and was constantly attacking him. When George Wallace (no relation) died, Mike said that despite the fact that George was a segregationist and what have you, he also had some really good qualities. Upon hearing this, Howard said "I may be a real a-- h---, but I can honestly say I have never stood in front of a schoolhouse door and kept somebody from coming in because of the color of their skin."

[Mutaman]

 Matthew Yglesias‏   Verified account @mattyglesias

"My brave take:

Heavily armed white nationalists encouraged by presidential rhetoric routinely murdering people is a threat to free speech, liberalism, and enlightenment values."


Jeet Heer
‏Verified account @HeerJeet

"Matt's never going to get a New York Times column with this attitude."


Big League Truth
‏ @ScanlanCT

Replying to @HeerJeet

"Maybe if he had worked in the n word. Almost worked for the last contender ...."

[dgies9156]

You folks who complain about bias in the media -- do any of you know anything about the history of the profession?

Bias is to journalism what mother's milk is to nursing. It's been there forever. William Randolph Hearst once upon a time tried  to use his papers to get elected President.

In 1948, a poll of reporters covering the Dewey/Truman race found almost 90 percent of the reporters believed it was a foregone conclusion Dewey would win. And anyone wonders why the Chicago Tribune ran a headline "Dewey Defeats Truman," or Life Magazine ran a cover photo of Tom Dewey that said, "Our Next President."

Any of you guys ever heard of Colonel McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune?

My point is that people are people. They have biases. You get around the biases by being enlightened and opening your mind to perspectives other than your own. Enlightened people know bias and discount it.

A few years back, I was working for a man who was a former Reagan appointee to a federal commission. He was with a fellow conservative partner who chided him for reading the New York Times every day. "I have to understand how the other side thinks," he said.

[tower912]

Bias in the media in America literally goes back to the birth of our nation.    Our founding fathers created or sponsored newspapers whose sole intent was to muckrake against their opponents.     

[MU82]

I actually think reporting is more objective than ever.

Columnists/talking heads, editorial boards and owners of newspapers/broadcast stations are not reporters.

Most reporters are so cognizant of being lumped in with the opinion-givers that they bend over backward to try to be super-objective and extremely detailed in their reporting.

I was discouraged when I heard that WSJ ownership/management was so in bed with The Very Stable Genius, but that turned into me being encouraged when I saw the excellent, objective reporting being done by the staff of one of the world's great newspapers.

I don't always agree with the political leanings of the WSJ, NYT, WaPo, etc, but I recognize how crucial they are to our society. Without those kinds of institutions, our politicians would run roughshod over our republic even more than they already do.