Are American's ready to acknowledge that we cannot trust MSM?

[grip]

You can't expect any news network to literally address the issues in a bipartisan manner because they're too invested in 'shock.' Twisting info out of context in order to mislead the content is what sells, and we all know a lie has already traveled halfway around the world before the truth has even laced up its shoes.

 

[j brown's body]

I had my students read and compare coverage of the 1894 Pullman strike from the Chicago Times and the Chicago Tribune, and it could have been Fox News and CNN coverage of last year's BLM demonstrations. This is nothing new.

But to suggest that mainstream media is unreliable because they do fact-checking might be the most absurd assertion I have ever seen on a political forum.

I was reading Anti-social, a fascinating book about social media and the alt-right, perhaps the biggest attackers of MSM. So these guys loath the MSM. One group thought they had a pretty hot story about Clinton corruption. It seemed too good to be true. They were rush to push it on social media until one of then says, "Stop, let's be sure its true. See if the Washington Post covered it. We don't want to hurt our credibility."

Non-mainstream media, even up to the slick Fox News, are basically parasites living off of MSM. Stories they and their viewers get all up in high dungeon over, and there are many, originate in MSM.

Imagine if the Washington Post wasn't around for the likes of Fox News to report is a hypocrite because it admitted error? Sure, the logic of such a story is absurd, but since when did its viewers care about logic?

 

[SmartCat]

Probably because raving mobs tend to draw attention and are part of a national political movement to resist racial integration..

Last summer we heard much about "the mainly peaceful protests against racial injustice" that followed the death of George Floyd. There was little mention of the two billion dollars in damage caused by the black ghetto riots that often followed these "peaceful protests."

 

[roguenuke]

I can see your perspective on this, and find myself more in agreement than not.
This brings this issue even more so into prominence:

​

Bombshell Correction Sums Up the Political Media’s Corruption​

As long as liberal subscribers value partisan porn over accuracy, this woeful trend won’t change.​

By DAVID HARSANYI,March 16, 2021​

Bombshell Correction Sums Up the Political Media’s Corruption | National Review

As long as liberal subscribers value partisan porn over accuracy, this woeful trend won’t change.

www.nationalreview.com

​

To be even handed about this, there are right leaning who mirror much the same, but perhaps to a lesser extent of 'partisan porn over accuracy'.

Same around here. Local papers are dying on the vine. But in the days where the local paper was prominent it was a far less 'connected' world. You read the local paper to find out what was going on on the other side of town, now, there's a community web site / forum which is publishing it and with which you can interact with (post comments on) - two way communication. Isn't the local paper (heck any paper) more so a one-way communication medium?

The continued reductions in staff continues narrow the true 'diversity' of views in the reporting to be found in the newspapers. We can see this clearly in the NYT, where 'woke' has displaced any non-woke views, for example. The internet published reporting is exploding, but suffers from the same narrowing of views, at least from what I've seen / read. The same trend is occuring in the broadcast media with the cable stations and 'news' / political opinion / political activism programs (pretending to be news).

Changing industry / viewer / reader landscape enabled by communications technologies.

Those "right wing media" sources are far worse and do not provide any sort of corrections at all when shown to be wrong (unless maybe they are being threatened with a lawsuit). They have consistently lied and called the phone calls something close to "perfect", not at all about fraud or him trying to steal the election, when that is not true. The first call we got a transcript of showed that Trump absolutely was trying to pressure the SoS into changing the results for him, throwing out ballots/votes for his rival based on nothing but faulty numbers, that Trump kept insisting were correct. He was requesting information that no candidate is entitled to, privacy information about voters. Those are facts, yet the right wing media sources basically said "well they lied" or "no, he didn't ask specifically for more votes", trying to downplay severely what went on in that call.

 

[Ringo Stalin]

Of course we can not trust them. Here's the proof:

 

[roguenuke]

Of course we can not trust them. Here's the proof:

You mean the optical illusion that people don't understand so "must be fake!" becomes the cry?

 

[Vadinho]

Didn't they correct themselves? Editors are human beings too.

 

[Ringo Stalin]

You mean the optical illusion that people don't understand so "must be fake!" becomes the cry?

Yes, some said that the nazi gas chambers were just false propaganda. You, ,missis, with your "optical illusion", have joined their ranks

 

[roguenuke]

Yes, some said that the nazi gas chambers were just false propaganda. You, ,missis, with your "optical illusion", have joined their ranks

No. This has absolutely been explained and there is plenty of evidence that the "hysteria" about this is all hype, no substance.

Fact Check: Was Joe Biden Video Filmed in Front of a Green Screen?

Joe Biden briefly met with reporters on Tuesday as he was leaving the White House and the clip sparked green-screen speculation over the president's sleeve and a boom microphone.

www.newsweek.com

It is obvious that this is an optical illusion when you get shots from other angles, other perspectives of the event.

Video of Biden with reporters was not digitally altered

CLAIM: Video of President Joe Biden was digitally altered to make it appear that he spoke to the press on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington on March 16, and a blurry microphone in the shot proves the video was manipulated...

apnews.com

You are spreading a conspiracy theory based on flawed observations and refusal to accept evidence that contradicts what you believe or have been told.

 

[Ringo Stalin]

No. This has absolutely been explained and there is plenty of evidence that the "hysteria" about this is all hype, no substance.

The people who claimed that the Nazi gas chambers were red propaganda also had their own explanations and proofs. Do you think they were just saying that? The main thing is that there are idiots who will believe it

 

[roguenuke]

The people who claimed that the Nazi gas chambers were red propaganda also had their own explanations and proofs. Do you think they were just saying that? The main thing is that there are idiots who will believe it

I think you are wrongly trying to equate an optical illusion, that has been scientifically proven to be just that, that has evidence to show you are the one in the wrong, to an atrocity that people simply ignored the evidence that they didn't want to accept. You are gaslighting because there is plenty to show you are wrong and in denial about that.

 

[Lucky 1]

I have not trusted them for years!!!

Latest example ............The border crisis which is not so much a crisis as it is a ****ing disaster ............Go to the CNN website....NOTHING about it....NOT A WORD anywhere on the main page!

Why....because the border disaster makes Dementia Joe look like the disaster he is and they are covering for him...that's why!

 

[Ringo Stalin]

 

[trouble13]

Didn't they correct themselves? Editors are human beings too.

Have you noticed how they never make an innocent mistake that is favorable to the conservative position. A weird coincidence, huh...

 

[Monica33]

When the Covid Planscamdemic details emerge , plus the depth of the Election fraud with its linked outside interference , the legacy media as you know it will disappear forever .

New media outfits will be created and new information sourcing paradigms will be created .

 

[Vadinho]

Have you noticed how they never make an innocent mistake that is favorable to the conservative position. A weird coincidence, huh...

They did for five years in regards to Trump and for 8 years in regards to the tea party.

 

[Paradoxical]

Who's keeping track?

Trump - 25,000+ misstatements, lies and errors
Wapo - 1

That Trump lied is itself a MSM lie.

 

[TheParser]

Americans already know what the media are.

The so-called "mainstream" media are cheerleaders for the Democratic Party.

The so-called "conservative" media are cheerleaders for the Republican Party.

Everyone knows that both are full of lies, rumors, gossip, and accusations.

"Journalists" are now held in lower esteem than salespeople of previously owned cars.

 

[j brown's body]

Have you noticed how they never make an innocent mistake that is favorable to the conservative position. A weird coincidence, huh...

A conspiracy so immense...

 

[bongsaway]

There is a recent story where the Washington Post admitted they "erroneously reported" (misquoted) what President Trump said during a phone call to the Georgia AG.

What has not been discussed is how many other news agencies "confirmed" this story:

Audio shows the media got the Trump-Georgia story all wrong (washingtonexaminer.com)

That was FIVE major news agencies ALL reporting "confirmation" of that story...all clearly failing to "fact check" correctly (if not out-right lying).

This all from the WaPo who was also responsible for "tracking" all Trump's "thousands of lies," the vast majority of which have been debunked as puffery, exaggeration, and simple mistakes of memory.

Meanwhile, how many times have we seen these same "trusted sources" (NY Times, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.) misrepresent, exaggerate, misreport, and outright lie over and over again?

Covington kids, Trump's "Nazis/white supremacists very fine people," Covid-19 "facts," "Mostly Peaceful Protests," on and on to push agendas instead of reporting the news?

Are people willing to put less belief into what the Media are telling you? More willing to look for the facts (often found hidden at the end of a story) instead of the Headlines and lead paragraphs?

That is the question.

We all heard the tape where he is asking georgia officials to find him eleven thousand votes. I'll wait for the decision by the georgia courts.

 

[bongsaway]

There is a recent story where the Washington Post admitted they "erroneously reported" (misquoted) what President Trump said during a phone call to the Georgia AG.

What has not been discussed is how many other news agencies "confirmed" this story:

Audio shows the media got the Trump-Georgia story all wrong (washingtonexaminer.com)

That was FIVE major news agencies ALL reporting "confirmation" of that story...all clearly failing to "fact check" correctly (if not out-right lying).

This all from the WaPo who was also responsible for "tracking" all Trump's "thousands of lies," the vast majority of which have been debunked as puffery, exaggeration, and simple mistakes of memory.

Meanwhile, how many times have we seen these same "trusted sources" (NY Times, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.) misrepresent, exaggerate, misreport, and outright lie over and over again?

Covington kids, Trump's "Nazis/white supremacists very fine people," Covid-19 "facts," "Mostly Peaceful Protests," on and on to push agendas instead of reporting the news?

Are people willing to put less belief into what the Media are telling you? More willing to look for the facts (often found hidden at the end of a story) instead of the Headlines and lead paragraphs?

That is the question.

Another thread of don't trust anything, unless of course it comes out of the pathological liars mouth.

 

[j brown's body]

Americans already know what the media are.

The so-called "mainstream" media are cheerleaders for the Democratic Party.

The so-called "conservative" media are cheerleaders for the Republican Party.

Everyone knows that both are full of lies, rumors, gossip, and accusations.

"Journalists" are now held in lower esteem than salespeople of previously owned cars.

Yet, the argument right-wingers make is that the criterion for being untrustworthy is that the media acknowledges making an arrow and makes a correction. Something we only see in the MSM. They have fact checkers!

This argument is utterly illogical and downright bizarre. It simply makes no sense.

 

[Paradoxical]

I had my students read and compare coverage of the 1894 Pullman strike from the Chicago Times and the Chicago Tribune, and it could have been Fox News and CNN coverage of last year's BLM demonstrations. This is nothing new.

But to suggest that mainstream media is unreliable because they do fact-checking might be the most absurd assertion I have ever seen on a political forum.

I was reading Anti-social, a fascinating book about social media and the alt-right, perhaps the biggest attackers of MSM. So these guys loath the MSM. One group thought they had a pretty hot story about Clinton corruption. It seemed too good to be true. They were rush to push it on social media until one of then says, "Stop, let's be sure its true. See if the Washington Post covered it. We don't want to hurt our credibility."

Non-mainstream media, even up to the slick Fox News, are basically parasites living off of MSM. Stories they and their viewers get all up in high dungeon over, and there are many, originate in MSM.

Imagine if the Washington Post wasn't around for the likes of Fox News to report is a hypocrite because it admitted error? Sure, the logic of such a story is absurd, but since when did its viewers care about logic?

A judge disagrees vehemently with you, teacher.

Federal judge warns 'dangerous' media has 'very close to one-party control' in blistering libel case dissent

A federal appeals court judge has offered a blistering dissent in an obscure libel case that takes the measure of the mainstream media's bias.

www.foxnews.com

I think it's even worse than what the judge says. MSM today are in daily contact with the leaders f the Democratic party and collude on how to spin the stories and how best to ruin any conservative. It was a daily and even hourly hate fest against Trump. Now it is their silence about the frail Biden and his ruinous policies. MSM are enemies of America.

 

[Vadinho]

A judge disagrees vehemently with you, teacher.

Federal judge warns 'dangerous' media has 'very close to one-party control' in blistering libel case dissent

A federal appeals court judge has offered a blistering dissent in an obscure libel case that takes the measure of the mainstream media's bias.

www.foxnews.com

I think it's even worse than what the judge says. MSM today are in daily contact with the leaders f the Democratic party and collude on how to spin the stories and how best to ruin any conservative. It was a daily and even hourly hate fest against Trump. Now it is their silence about the frail Biden and his ruinous policies. MSM are enemies of America.

Funny who that judge is....

"Silberman's sojourn in the world of political scandal began during the run-up to the 1980 presidential election when, as a member of Ronald Reagan's campaign staff, he, along with Robert C. McFarlane, a former staff member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Richard V. Allen, Reagan's chief foreign policy representative, met with a man claiming to be an Iranian government emissary. The Iranian offered to delay the release of the 52 American hostages being held in Tehran until after the election — thus contributing to Carter's defeat — in exchange for arms. A controversy continues to rage over whether the Reagan team made a bargain with the Iranians, as alleged by Gary Sick, a former National Security Council aide in the Ford, Carter and Reagan administrations who now teaches at Columbia University. Yet no one denies that the meeting Silberman was at took place, and although Silberman has said the Iranian's offer was immediately rejected, none of the three Reagan operatives ever told the Carter administration what had happened. McFarlane, Allen and Silberman have all since insisted that they don't know the name of the Iranian man they met with."

A Federal Judge Went Full Hannity. Never Go Full Hannity.

Apparently, everyone but Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page is in the tank for Democrats, so the whole press freedom thing is overrated.

www.esquire.com

So a political hack becomes judge and now he rails against MSM for not being parrots of conservative thought. Does this judge want Bill Oreilly or Sean Hannity to anchor the news? Well, both did or still do.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Our media is not mistaken. They are reporting exactly what the rich and powerful tell their media to report. The rich and powerful are using their media to keep us doing what they want even when it comes to electing our leaders.