Let's Talk About Media

Jaw said:
Like I said, the bias can be obvious without ever making a false statement. The old "Person X denies beating his wife" still works, as does having your investigative staff take 8 years at a time off from investigating the Presidency if it belongs to the party your network is friendly with. I used to recognize MSNBC and Fox as political shills and had respect for NYT, WSJ, and CNN. Now they've all shown that they are no better. To be fair, that's the free market at work. It's more important for corporations to be profitable than ethical.
Click to expand...

I think you’re right about the for-profit media landscape being corrosive to good reporting.

I’m not really sure what the NYT has done on the news side to get that label, though. They’ve enthusiastically pursued stories that are damaging to Trump, but let’s be real—Trump has given them, as nsacpi is fond of saying, a target-rich environment. I think they write too many WH palace-intrigue stories, but, again, they’re being written because people on the inside are willing to talk to them. As much as anything else, those stories reflect the dysfunction inside the White House, because staffers are happy to use the NYT to shiv each other.
 
RT is Russia Today. Probably the Fox News equivalent of Russia.

Only time I've used them is when they post interviews of Putin and Assad.
 
sturg33 said:
Reason is very good.

RT is pretty good.

I like Bloomberg and MSNBC for financials
Click to expand...

I read Reason fairly often and find that it can be a valuable outlet. There’s a lot of thought-provoking content (and a lot of dreck) and it’s a good insight into the libertarian mindset. But it’s hardly “covering the news without bias or sensationalism.”

RT covers some issues which fall into the cracks and provides some international coverage that most US outlets are horrible at. Let’s not be coy about what it is, though.
 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...nalism-media-bias-quit-job-column/1142355002/

I simply could not return to the White House press corps upon the completion of my leave. Instead of reporting on the story, the press corps had become the story; taking on a life of their own, with an “us versus them” mentality that felt inappropriate, excessive and charged with bias. I wanted to report on history in the making, never make myself a part of the story.

However you feel about the current administration, remember this: The people who are reporting on it are just that — people. There is no official test of morals, integrity, or neutrality to get a seat in that room. The appeal of fame, the power of ego and the allure of celebrity can affect any one of us, even those of the fourth estate.
 
mqt said:
It’s a singer’s funeral. If David Duke showed up at a funeral for a random singer, I also wouldn’t care, and would be perfectly content to see the media ignore him.
Click to expand...

I thought Julio maybe would comment on the ridiculousness of not discussing the racist that those folks stood with...

But I am disappointed, once again

I forgot that racist Farrakhan is fine in leftists books because we agree with the overall politics.
 
sturg33 said:
I thought Julio maybe would comment on the ridiculousness of not discussing the racist that those folks stood with...

But I am disappointed, once again

I forgot that racist Farrakhan is fine in leftists books because we agree with the overall politics.
Click to expand...

Because an AP photo cropped to avoid him is not evidence of Farrakhan’s being ignored in a larger sense. I saw widespread comment about it from across the political spectrum, all of it negative. So not discussing the racist those folks stood with isn’t really a thing.
 
Dont sleep on RT because its government affiliated. All news is propaganda in a sense. Watch and tell me how long before you get to anything biased.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Dont sleep on RT because its government affiliated. All news is propaganda in a sense. Watch and tell me how long before you get to anything biased.
Click to expand...

I just took a look at their website. The top 4 stories are:

1) Erdogan calling for global trading partners to "smash" the U.S. dollar's monopoly

2) The Czech PM blasting EU immigration policy

3) Anti-immigration sentiment gripping Sweden

4) Israeli broadcaster having to apologize for playing Wagner

No agenda there. I am sure those stories deserve to be the top 4 and are only there after a fair evaluation by an unbiased editorial staff. Fair and balanced as they say.

Ah and it looks like an editorial or column titled "McCain's funeral was a disgusting exercise in historical revisionism."

Good to know what passes for "best practices" in journalism among some of the posters around here.
 
Last edited:
A comparison of Top 4 stories on some websites I go to for my news:

Wall Street Journal:
1) Role of Twitter CEO in efforts to police bad actors
2) Stock market volatility in autumn
3) Unfinished 747s piling up on Boeing factory floor
4) Reuters reporters get 7 years in Myanmar

Washington Post
1) Turkey's debt woes
2) Trump criticizes Trumka (that's my summation, I give them demerit points for missing the opportunity for the alliteration)
3) Chinese billionaire leaves US after arrest on sexual assault charges
4) Democrats views of Kavanaugh shaped by 2004 confirmation hearings

NY Times
1) Kavanaugh hearings
2) Immigration restrictions hurting business
3) Houston recovery after Harvey
4) Trump vs civil service unions

A few observations. I think the Turkey story (both its financial and political aspects) is a big one and likely to reverberate quite a bit over the next few months. I give RT some credit for leading with that story. But the angle it pursues is really tangential to the main aspects of the story and going with those quotes from Erdogan is pretty simplistic and even propagandistic in terms of suiting the views and interests of the Russian state.
 
Last edited:
The story that got my attention this morning I had to dig a little deeper into the WSJ website for. It was in their Markets section and had to do with the fiscal and economic policies being pursued by the new Italian government. Put that together with what is going on to Turkey and market turbulence seems likely this fall. This is not necessarily bad for U.S. markets. The Treasury market certainly will benefit from the safe haven effect and the stock market might as well.

Its possible that both Turkey and Italy get frozen out of credit markets over the next few months. Who will bail them out? What happens in a world where no one is willing to take on the role of lender of last resort? Can the IMF and other multilateral institutions do this without leadership from the key countries.

This has the potential to be a re-make of a movie we've seen before. For an account of the original I recommend The World in Depression, 1929-1939 by Charles Kindleberger. It is a great book. The particulars of the current situation are very different. But the one common theme is inability or unwillingness on the part of key countries to play the traditional role of lender of last resort. Btw this book inspired the development of what's now referred to as Hegemonic Stability Theory of international relations.
 
RT is most fun to read when Assad gassed some civilians or Russia tries to kill someone with a nerve agent.
 
DmOVxUQXgAEZed9.jpg:large
 
sturg33 said:
[TW]1036825694200885248[/TW]
Click to expand...

CATO Institute ---- in other threads you talk about a skewed the media and something something PC because Bannon disinvited .

what 12,000 people and which 14 countries?
and what is the economic status of these 12,000 ?
where in the economic strata are the 14 countries CATO references.

You see, this -------------------- ah forget it
 
57Brave said:
CATO Institute ---- in other threads you talk about a skewed the media and something something PC because Bannon disinvited .

what 12,000 people and which 14 countries?
and what is the economic status of these 12,000 ?
where in the economic strata are the 14 countries CATO references.

You see, this -------------------- ah forget it
Click to expand...

Man you are dumb.

The 14 countries are listed right there.

You can read more into the survey. I'm certain you didn't.

The funny thing is, the study is about great news around the world... But you have a problem with that finding... I wonder why that is?
 
sturg33 said:
Man you are dumb.

The 14 countries are listed right there.
Click to expand...

yup.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

As you rail against biased news you post findings of CATO Institute
Gotcha

I don't dispute their numbers or find it particularly good or bad.
Point being, I understand when I read a report from CATO I know what axe they have to grind. They are making an argument (as we all do)
and putting up numbers and instances to support that argument.

We all have an axe to grind, CATO,NYT,FOX , you,me etc etc etc

If we are so inclined we can find fault with any and all publications. Be they right or wrong
I honestly (dumb) overlooked the list of countries. Just like you honestly didnt read the caption stating AL,Jesse and Bill were speakers at Aretha's funeral . The picture was of the speakers. Do you know who made the seating chart ? Guessing here the family wanted Minister Farrakhan on the dais with the speakers.
How that pertains to Left politics or manipulative media is beyond me
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top