Are News Networks News Or Entertainment

[donhughesmusic]

I'll give you an example:

Trump hammers at false claims of voter fraud in return to Michigan​

​

Trump hammers at false claims of voter fraud in return to Michigan

The former president spoke in Washington Township in support of candidates for attorney general, secretary of state.

news.yahoo.com

​

The "fact" in that headline is that Trump said something about voter fraud, etc. The "nonsense"...the "propaganda"...is the bias-generated modifier, "false". If Yahoo News is just reporting facts, then they don't need to add their bias.​

​

So...in this headline, alone, I have to filter out the nonsense and decide if I'm interested in what Trump was saying at his rally. In this case, I'll likely just pass this news story by because it's certain the report, itself, will be chock full of nonsense and I don't want to go through the effort to wade through it all just to find the facts.​

​

Again, this is just one example. All of the news organizations...hell, all of the sources of news large or small...add their bias...their nonsense. I don't want to hear their opinion. I just want the facts.​

The thing is, using your example, there are plenty of people who do believe that the claims are false, therefore the word "false" in the headline is not misleading propaganda, it is true, therefore actual news.

There are plenty of people out there who instead of looking for the news, look for "propaganda" that "proves" their own biases and thoughts. Both sides are guilty of that.

I've tried to find the kernels of truth by listening to both sides, then try to find where the truth is. I listen to Young Turks as much as I listen to FOX Radio. I watch CNN the same way I listen to FOX News. Are there any similarities in the reports?

Another issue is that we all have lives to live. We don't have time to spend an hour or two "researching the news" to see what is "legit" and what is "propaganda". Using your news report as an example, when you say that the word "false" is misleading, yet it was also reported that the courts continuously threw out the administration's lawsuits and challenges to the vote counting, one can reasonably assume that the "false" word is not misleading or propaganda.

Now, if the Trump Administration released that so-called "ironclad" evidence they kept saying they had to the public, then maybe, just maybe the public can make a more informed decision. You can day that it won't change the public's thinking, so why release it, but the real truth is that you simply don't know until you do it.

Who do you trust more than others in reporting the news?

 

[Lucky 1]

Fox does not do news at all, they do propaganda. They also distinguish themselves by selling sex with the propaganda.

Foxnew's actual "news programming' as apposed to there political opinion shows like Tucker and Hannity is as good as it gets!!! Real news...fair and balanced as they say.

Outfits like CNN and MSNBC on the other hand do not distinguish between there political opinion programming and there news programming ....making them the ones that are all propaganda all the time.....

 

[Lucky 1]

In your reality.

In anyone's realty who bothers to watch it.

 

[Lucky 1]

Again, I don't completely disagree with Mycroft. In a time of Covid, Ukraine invasion, hyper partisans, I can't disagree that news networks have become their own echo chambers.

Mycroft, anyone else,, a very serious question, no smart comments from me. How do you filter out the nonsense? What constitutes nonsense to you?

In my case I stick to watching pure news programming and avoid the political opinion shows like Hannity on fox or Maddow on MSNBC since I just want the news and don't care what some talking head thinks about things....I can make up my own mind about what I hear.

I will say that Foxnews does a very good job of keeping separate there actual news programming from there opinion programming. Networks like CNN and MSNBC on the other hand tend to run news and opinion all together making them a mouth piece for whoever they ideologically support politically rather then "just news"

I also find that Fox will report on ALL the news whereas other networks tend to avoid talking about things that don't support there ideology or make "there guys" look bad.

Case's in point.........If you watched Foxnews you knew about how bad the disaster was at our southern border many many months ago.......CNN and MSNBC....not a peep till recently and they still down play it....same goes with the Biden Crime Families Laptop problem.

Don't get me wrong, Fox's political opinion shows clearly have a political leaning....but they do a good job of keeping that out of there actual news programming, fair and balanced as they say.... which is why I like them best.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I wish I was more in agreement with you on this.

Example :
Superficial bullshit intended to reinforce official conclusions. Four weeknights of "primetime content" attractive for advertising "reach".

CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report | Dan Rather

danratherjournalist.org

"..The idea of doing a long-format show about the Warren Report had been discussed between producer Leslie Midgley, CBS News division president Richard Salant, and reporter Daniel Schorr. The original idea was to put the Warren Report on trial, but the project evolved over several months into its final format. ...
The series was an enormous success, reaching more than 55 million U.S. homes, with an average rating for the four nights of 17.8, and more than 21 million people were estimated to have watched each night of the first two nights. The first and second nights had an average of 18.4 ratings and 39 shares. As with all shows dealing with the assassination of President Kennedy, it also received its fair share of letters disagreeing with the conclusion of the show.

The press was a bit more reserved, with Variety complaining the show was not unique, only routine coverage between soap, tobacco, and mouthwash spots, and bemoaning that CBS had not covered fresh turf. It praised, however, CBS’s tests and experiments but was disappointed by the conclusions drawn. The Los Angeles Times had similar complaints, noting that the apparent goal of the show—to assuage critics of the Warren Report—was not successful."

Amazon.com

www.amazon.com

Should We Now Believe the Warren Report?​

books.google.com › books
Stephen White · 1968 · ‎Snippet view
A collection of material unearthed during the CBS investigation of events surrounding President Kennedy's assassination.

That falls into the category sometimes known as "investigative reporting" and it's a long form program.
I am talking about nightly news reporting and the 24 hour cable news cycle in particular.
News organizations around the world have been producing long-form investigative programming for decades, but that's a whole different animal than the 24 hour news cycle.

And when you take a landmark event like the assassination of President Kennedy and try to make it a boilerplate that is used to compare ALL news, you've basically made an attempt
to describe all motor vehicles as having four wheels. Sorry, many have eighteen.

What I was getting at is the fact that each news network now HAS a declared political slant.
Fox News IS the Right Wing mouthpiece and always was. One could declare that MSNBC is left oriented, at least left leaning, and certainly not middle of the road.
Cable news IS the dominant member here, the 800 pound gorilla.

And there is a reason why a Fox News or similar RW outlet insists that Russia's view is the correct one: Trumpers love Putin and if Putin says that the Bucha dead were all crisis actors and
that the atrocities were staged by Ukraine, "then goddammit that's what Fox better say" or else massive numbers of viewers will turn off Fox...and that impacts the bottom line.
Fox News Channel cannot exist solely on cable news carriage fees...they can try but it won't be sustainable, otherwise there'd be no need for Mike Lindell's pillow ads.

I don't say or imply that news networks weren't engaged in manufacturing consent to some degree prior to Murdoch's fast tracked citizenship in America,
I'm saying that market pressures to produce a staggering profit did not exist quite as much because prior to the 1990's most American news department budgets were underwritten by prime time programming...that's a fact. The exodus from loss leader news departments BEGAN in the 1980's and by 1996 the process of transformation was virtually complete.

 

[Kreton]

So if Trump had said the earth was flat, the reporter would report that as a fact?

The claim is proven false so therefore it is included in a headline. It is just as true as Trump saying it. You not liking something or your inability to understand the difference between facts and lies doesn't change that it is a fact.

You are dismissed.

 

[Mycroft]

The thing is, using your example, there are plenty of people who do believe that the claims are false, therefore the word "false" in the headline is not misleading propaganda, it is true, therefore actual news.

It's fine if "people" want to believe that. They aren't reporters. Reporters who make these claims are not reporters, they are propagandists.

There are plenty of people out there who instead of looking for the news, look for "propaganda" that "proves" their own biases and thoughts. Both sides are guilty of that.

News organizations shouldn't be spreading propaganda just because that's what people want to hear. When they do, they aren't news organizations anymore...they are propagandists.

And of course, both sides do it.

I've tried to find the kernels of truth by listening to both sides, then try to find where the truth is. I listen to Young Turks as much as I listen to FOX Radio. I watch CNN the same way I listen to FOX News. Are there any similarities in the reports?

I don't know. I tend to stay away from propaganda.

Another issue is that we all have lives to live. We don't have time to spend an hour or two "researching the news" to see what is "legit" and what is "propaganda". Using your news report as an example, when you say that the word "false" is misleading, yet it was also reported that the courts continuously threw out the administration's lawsuits and challenges to the vote counting, one can reasonably assume that the "false" word is not misleading or propaganda.

Just because the courts threw out a bunch of cases on technicalities, that doesn't make claims of election fraud false.

But it doesn't matter, from a news organization perspective. They can report what the courts did AND report what people claim. They can also report on evidence when it is revealed. Propaganda news does none of that without injecting their bias into the reporting.

Now, if the Trump Administration released that so-called "ironclad" evidence they kept saying they had to the public, then maybe, just maybe the public can make a more informed decision. You can day that it won't change the public's thinking, so why release it, but the real truth is that you simply don't know until you do it.

There is no "Trump Administration". There are Trump supporters.

Evidence of election fraud has constantly been presented. If you haven't seen it, then you are getting your news from propagandists.

Who do you trust more than others in reporting the news?

Nobody.

 

[donhughesmusic]

In my case I stick to watching pure news programming and avoid the political opinion shows like Hannity on fox or Maddow on MSNBC since I just want the news and don't care what some talking head thinks about things....I can make up my own mind about what I hear.

I will say that Foxnews does a very good job of keeping separate there actual news programming from there opinion programming. Networks like CNN and MSNBC on the other hand tend to run news and opinion all together making them a mouth piece for whoever they ideologically support politically rather then "just news"

I also find that Fox will report on ALL the news whereas other networks tend to avoid talking about things that don't support there ideology or make "there guys" look bad.

Case's in point.........If you watched Foxnews you knew about how bad the disaster was at our southern border many many months ago.......CNN and MSNBC....not a peep till recently and they still down play it....same goes with the Biden Crime Families Laptop problem.

Don't get me wrong, Fox's political opinion shows clearly have a political leaning....but they do a good job of keeping that out of there actual news programming, fair and balanced as they say.... which is why I like them best.

What would examples be of "pure news programming" on these networks? Just an observation, but there are very few of them anymore.

 

[donhughesmusic]

Nobody.

...and there is the problem..

Even the news networks that you tend to watch more than others, you don't trust. This is not a shot against you, or anyone in general, but if you trust nobody, then how can you even trust that there is or is not election fraud? How can you even trust the laptop story? "Evidence" can be fabricated, and interpreted differently. The black glove did not fit OJ, but the other side said that it was due to shrinkage from being out in the elements. You said it yourself (and I tend to agree) that you trust nobody.

 

[Yes_Minister]

They are all propaganda. The best you can do is filter the nonsense out and get the kernels of fact. Then you can make up your own mind.

Says the guy who repeats Conservative Treehouse talking points like a parrot. Why don't you apply your own standards to yourself and dismiss yourself?

 

[Yes_Minister]

It's not up to news reporters to determine that someone is lying based solely on their own bias. When news organizations do that, THEY are lying.

What evidence is there that Trump was telling the truth about the election?

 

[Mycroft]

...and there is the problem..

Even the news networks that you tend to watch more than others, you don't trust. This is not a shot against you, or anyone in general, but if you trust nobody, then how can you even trust that there is or is not election fraud?

As I said...I weed through the bias for the kernels of fact.

 

[Mycroft]

Says the guy who repeats Conservative Treehouse talking points like a parrot. Why don't you apply your own standards to yourself and dismiss yourself?

I don't repeat talking points. I present facts.

 

[Mycroft]

What evidence is there that Trump was telling the truth about the election?

You would know if you didn't let yourself be propagandized.

 

[post]

-snip-
What I was getting at is the fact that each news network now HAS a declared political slant.
Fox News IS the Right Wing mouthpiece and always was. One could declare that MSNBC is left oriented, at least left leaning, and certainly not middle of the road.
Cable news IS the dominant member here, the 800 pound gorilla.

And there is a reason why a Fox News or similar RW outlet insists that Russia's view is the correct one: Trumpers love Putin and if Putin says that the Bucha dead were all crisis actors and
that the atrocities were staged by Ukraine, "then goddammit that's what Fox better say" or else massive numbers of viewers will turn off Fox...and that impacts the bottom line.
Fox News Channel cannot exist solely on cable news carriage fees...they can try but it won't be sustainable, otherwise there'd be no need for Mike Lindell's pillow ads.

I don't say or imply that news networks weren't engaged in manufacturing consent to some degree prior to Murdoch's fast tracked citizenship in America,
I'm saying that market pressures to produce a staggering profit did not exist quite as much because prior to the 1990's most American news department budgets were underwritten by prime time programming...that's a fact. The exodus from loss leader news departments BEGAN in the 1980's and by 1996 the process of transformation was virtually complete.

I don't take issue with anything in your post. What I do find fascinating and troubling, to say the least, are "news, family dynasties," too few
having too much influence, "coming at" the public, in two ways. One, by ownership or majority control of prominent news gathering and distributing corps., and the other by family connections, coming at the public both through ownership/control and on the editorial and journalism side.

Old daze,

Arthur Brisbane - Wikipedia​

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Arthur_Brisbane
"Arthur Brisbane (December 12, 1864 – December 25, 1936)
"..While an employee of Hearst—at one point boasting of making $260,000 in a year—Brisbane also was known for buying failing newspapers, re-organizing them, and selling them to Hearst. ..
....
In 1918, he became editor of the Chicago Herald and Examiner, and in the 1920s became editor of Hearst's first tabloid, the New York Mirror. He remained part of the Hearst media empire until his death in 1936. His daughter Sarah married one of his Daily Mirror employees, Tex McCrary, who later became a radio-TV personality with second wife Jinx Falkenburg. .."

Tex McCrary was a Yale bonesman, he and Jinx rented a bungalow from 1946 on Jock Whitney's estate until Jock's widow, Betsy,
former daughter-in-law of FDR, evicted Jinx after Jock's death. Jock Whitney owned the New York Herald Tribune. He is credited with "penning" this editorial, within 24 hours of the assassination, pushing the "lone nut" narrative, in harmony with his then recent hire, Jimmy Breslin,

Breslin, by late on Nov. 22, "camped out" in Dallas and was "managing" Dr. Malcolm Perry!

Jimmy Breslin and the Lost Voice of the People - The New ...​

https://www.newyorker.com › News › Jimmy Breslin
Mar 20, 2017 — Jimmy Breslin's first big break came when he was hired, in 1963, as a columnist for the New York Herald Tribune. There was a reason so many ...

Jimmy Breslin on JFK's Assassination: Two Classic Columns​

https://www.thedailybeast.com › jimmy-breslin-on-jfks-...
Particularly at the corner window on the sixth floor, the one where this Oswald and his scrambled egg of a mind stood with the rifle so he could kill the ...

Continued in my next post....

 

[KingLeo]

I'll give you an example:

Trump hammers at false claims of voter fraud in return to Michigan​

​

Trump hammers at false claims of voter fraud in return to Michigan

The former president spoke in Washington Township in support of candidates for attorney general, secretary of state.

news.yahoo.com

​

The "fact" in that headline is that Trump said something about voter fraud, etc. The "nonsense"...the "propaganda"...is the bias-generated modifier, "false". If Yahoo News is just reporting facts, then they don't need to add their bias.​

​

So...in this headline, alone, I have to filter out the nonsense and decide if I'm interested in what Trump was saying at his rally. In this case, I'll likely just pass this news story by because it's certain the report, itself, will be chock full of nonsense and I don't want to go through the effort to wade through it all just to find the facts.​

​

Again, this is just one example. All of the news organizations...hell, all of the sources of news large or small...add their bias...their nonsense. I don't want to hear their opinion. I just want the facts.​

LOL
So the article quoting Trumps own words, "The presidential election was rigged and stolen and because of that our country is being destroyed," he said as the speech began. "We did win, we did win. … We won by a lot, not just a little."
Which are proven false by the countless recounts and many in his own party stating his claims are blatantly false is somehow 'propaganda' in your mind?

 

[Yes_Minister]

I don't repeat talking points. I present facts.

Oh please, you will just say whatever Conservative treehouse talking points are saying that day is a fact, can you tie your shoes without Conservative treehouse telling you how in the morning?

You saying something is a fact doesn't make it a fact, you just present conspiracy theories without evidence all the time.

 

[Yes_Minister]

You would know if you didn't let yourself be propagandized.

Or I did my own research and came to obvious conclusion that Trump was lying:

The Assault on America | iHeart

A documentary series from host Robert Evans investigating the Capitol insurrection. Stories of instigators and extremists hellbent on subverting democracy.

www.iheart.com

 

[donhughesmusic]

As I said...I weed through the bias for the kernels of fact.

But again, you said it yourself, you trust nobody. Who do you trust to give you the facts if you trust nobody? If you are searching for the kernels of facts, you still have to trust those people who are giving you those kernels.

 

[Mycroft]

Or I did my own research and came to obvious conclusion that Trump was lying:

The Assault on America | iHeart

A documentary series from host Robert Evans investigating the Capitol insurrection. Stories of instigators and extremists hellbent on subverting democracy.

www.iheart.com

If all you looked at was that iHeart podcast, you haven't done much research. You HAVE taken a big bite of propaganda, though.

But hey...it's not a problem that you've come to your own conclusion...even if it's based on propaganda.

 

[Mycroft]

But again, you said it yourself, you trust nobody. Who do you trust to give you the facts if you trust nobody? If you are searching for the kernels of facts, you still have to trust those people who are giving you those kernels.

That's why it's so hard. The propaganda media presents a few facts and then covers it all up with their particular propaganda.

 

[Schism]

Is the "Trump 7-hour phone log gap on 1/6" still a story?

 

[Schism]

That's why it's so hard. The propaganda media presents a few facts and then covers it all up with their particular propaganda.

Until they run away from it....

 

[Yes_Minister]

If all you looked at was that iHeart podcast, you haven't done much research. You HAVE taken a big bite of propaganda, though.

But hey...it's not a problem that you've come to your own conclusion...even if it's based on propaganda.

And how do you know that podcast is wrong, you clearly have not listened to it.

Or you are listening to Conservative Treehouse propaganda that exists to protect conservative elites like Trump from facing any consequences for their actions.

Sites like Conservative Treehouse exist to protect conservative elites, not promote good journalism.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Fox does not do news at all, they do propaganda. They also distinguish themselves by selling sex with the propaganda.

When Tucker is FOX's #1 cash cow it's hard to argue against your assertion.