• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are News Networks News Or Entertainment

Are news networks news, entertainment, or news entertainment


  • Total voters
    24
Continued from my last post,

Bear in mind that today we have Chris Wallace still riding on his late father, Mike's coattails.
NBC's Katy Tur is the daughter of the couple you, CBstrangler, posted about recently, the Sulzbergers continue at the NY Times,
the Murdochs at Fox News.

William McAndrew is credited with teaming Huntley and Brinkley. Under McAndrew's watch, NBC News "mishandled" its "reporting
of Jim Garrison's "investigation".

Broadcasting: Something of a Shambles - Videos Index on ...

http://content.time.com › time › magazine › article
"For months, New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison has been releasing the findings ... NBC News President William R. McAndrew denied Garrison's charges, ..Lie-detector tests, said NBC, had cast doubt on the testimony of two key witnesses:.."


I cannot locate the transcript page now, but in 1978 in questioning by the HSCA, CIA's David Atlee Phillips
described his long friendship, socializing along with their respective wives, with Jerry O'Leary. On page 577 (on left) in an unrelated law suit
deposition, Phillips is describing specifics of O'Leary's health problems,


Background :

1649185459948.jpeg

In 1963, a mystery pallbearer at Lee Harvey Oswald's funeral

https://www.star-telegram.com › article237412504
Nov 18, 2019 — Former Washington Post reporter and Washington Times columnist Jeremiah O'Leary has written and told how he was one of Oswald's pallbearers.

O'leary, a "newsman," omits the word, alleged...
Jeremiah A. O'Leary, 74, a Washington Times columnist and award-winning journalist who was president of the White House Correspondents Association in 1988 and 1989, died Dec. 19 at Alexandria Hospital. He had circulatory ailments.
....In a memo, he also recalled that "I stood just 12 feet from Jack Ruby when he killed President Kennedy's assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald. I danced the Big Apple with Eleanor Roosevelt."
....
Jeremiah Aloysius Patrick O'Leary Jr., a Washington native, was born into a family with deep journalistic roots in the area. His father covered Congress for the Star for a half-century. An uncle, Mike Flynn, had edited the Washington Times-Herald, and a cousin, William McAndrew, served as president of NBC news.

One highlight of his career in the reserves was a weekend he spent on duty at Andrews Air Force Base. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, whom Mr. O'Leary often covered, arrived at the base from a diplomatic mission. He was greeted by the reporter, resplendent in his medals and colonel's uniform, who with a stern visage told Kissinger that "the coup was successful, and I am in charge here."

When the Star went out of business in 1981, Mr. O'Leary was asked to join the government. He spent eight months as a special assistant to William Clark, first when Clark was deputy secretary of state and then when he was the president's national security adviser...."

Not mentioned in my last post, Jinx Falkenberg was the first cousin of this man's wife, Jane McAtee,

Priscilla Johnson was a close enough friend of Jane to be in her wedding party.

Drew Pearson vacationed with Earl Warren. Pearson's stepson, Dan Moore, described in this CIA document planning to kidnap defector
Robert E. Webster and spirit him out of the Soviet Union in the trunk of a car.

1649187598599.png

Three former OSS men, Shaheen, defector Webster's employer, Rand, and Dan Moore, diving for treasure along with Moore's next door
neighbor and Yale bonesman, Crile. Shaheen, born in Reagan's birthplace, population 700, is linked to the 1980 October surprise with his
OSS friend, Bill Casey,
1649188319785.jpeg
 
Last edited:
The news is news and the commentary and analysis is propaganda. Watch PBS or BBC news to know the difference.

Their separation and labeling is better, but one must remember that most media bias is accomplished by simple omission.
 
Their separation and labeling is better, but one must remember that most media bias is accomplished by simple omission.
Sorry, not the case in some of the most controversial key events in U.S. history. In numerous examples, the disinfo was willful, coordinated, the
"working press" always eager to lend a helping hand to an "alteration" or a full-blown cover-up in exchange for a seat at rhe table, access.

They all had editors at so called, well respected, prominent news outlets when they headed toward the Fox News "cesspool". Editors who let them file and then approved the disinfo that was the undoing of their credibility,


Link to cached page of article,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/30/lara-logan-fringe-journalists/
Politics Analysis

When once-respected journalists move to the fringe​

By Philip Bump
National correspondent
November 30, 2021
"...
There’s an irony here, too. Fox News hosts and guests spend a lot of time disparaging the rest of the mainstream media as leftist shills, but the network is not shy about leveraging the credibility of other news outlets to bolster its offerings. When Logan joined Fox last year, the network repeatedly identified her as a “former CBS News correspondent.” Other networks use similar credentials, of course, but they aren’t also in the habit of trying to tear down those other organizations.
The best example here is Fox News’s use of the descriptor “former New York Times.” Since 2017, the network has used that phrase on air 155 times, compared with about 20 times each for MSNBC and CNN. Often, it’s used to describe Alex Berenson, a former reporter for the paper whose wild and untrue claims about the coronavirus earned him a welcome home at the network.
...
I am not an unbiased observer on the following point, but I still believe it to be true: There is value in organizational constraints that enforce accountability and caution. No media outlet is perfect, but good ones try to self-correct, even when painful, and even when that self-correction is used as a point of attack. CBS was roundly criticized for its handling of Logan’s report on Benghazi, but it handled it, offering multiple on-air corrections and apologies.

A good example of how a lack of such institutional constraints can affect reporting comes from the emerging world of Substack newsletters. There, writers and reporters have been offered healthy paychecks to opine on their areas of specialty or interest — but success has often been a function of generating controversy on social media. (“The only way a Substack grows is through tweets,” Casey Newton wrote in evaluating his own participation earlier this year.) Combine a reward system often centered on winding people up and an employer who doesn’t care how you do it and you get a sort of microcosmic Fox News — down to leveraging people’s past gigs as credentials. There’s a reason that, when editors at the Intercept took issue with a piece Glenn Greenwald submitted, he decamped to Substack. Berenson is there now, too."
 
Last edited:
That's why it's so hard. The propaganda media presents a few facts and then covers it all up with their particular propaganda.
Isn't what you just said there completely ass backwards? They do present facts but cover it up? How do you cover up facts if you present them?

I'm not saying that to knock you, because in this conversation, I agree with you more than I disagree. What I am saying is that if people trust nobody, but yet trust that the "facts" that they see are truly "facts", then clearly you are giving even just a little bit of trust.

Now, if many of us are in agreement that simply reporting the news is what we all want, warts and all, then we have to give that trust. How does one earn that trust? It is clear that FOX, CNN, MSNBC, OANN, etc, is more worried about money. The thing is, is that you HAVE to be worried about money, in order to stay in business and ply your trade. The ratings, whether we like it or not, clearly show that the general public watches Hannity, Maddow, Carlson, etc, much more than "the news".
 
Until they run away from it....

Except the liberal media theory is not about promoting good journalism, it's about protecting conservative elites from the consequences of their actions.

Any conservative elites from Donald Rumsfeld to Donald Trump can blame their own flaws or failures on "media bias" and the conservative base will give them a Free pass, it let's conservative elites get away with murder.

Conservatives whine endlessly about so called "media bias against them", but they never offer any solutions, because they don't care about good journalism, they just want personal responsibility to only apply to people they don't like, not wealthy conservative elites.
 
Isn't what you just said there completely ass backwards? They do present facts but cover it up? How do you cover up facts if you present them?

I'm not saying that to knock you, because in this conversation, I agree with you more than I disagree. What I am saying is that if people trust nobody, but yet trust that the "facts" that they see are truly "facts", then clearly you are giving even just a little bit of trust.

Now, if many of us are in agreement that simply reporting the news is what we all want, warts and all, then we have to give that trust. How does one earn that trust? It is clear that FOX, CNN, MSNBC, OANN, etc, is more worried about money. The thing is, is that you HAVE to be worried about money, in order to stay in business and ply your trade. The ratings, whether we like it or not, clearly show that the general public watches Hannity, Maddow, Carlson, etc, much more than "the news".
It is clear? "FOX, CNN, MSNBC, OANN," lazy and misleading to lump CNN, MSNBC with "Trump TV". Why do it?

"Its prime-time political talk shows have a conservative perspective, and the channel has described itself as one of the "greatest supporters" of Donald Trump. Trump himself has promoted both the network and some of its hosts. The channel is known for promoting falsehoods and conspiracy theories. In November 2020, YouTube suspended OANN for one week and ended its ability to monetize its existing content as a first strike under its three-strike community guideline violation policy for advertising a false cure for COVID-19. In 2021, the channel was sued by Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic for promoting false claims..."

".. among others, practicing biased reporting in favor of the Republican Party, its politicians, and conservative causes, while portraying the Democratic Party in a negative light. Critics have cited the channel as detrimental to the integrity of news overall. Fox News' official position is that its news reporting operates independently of its opinion journalism, and it has denied bias in its news reporting.
...
On March 26, 2021, Dominion filed a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News, alleging that Fox and some of its pundits spread conspiracy theories about Dominion, and allowed guests to make false statements about the company. On May 18, 2021, Fox News filed a motion to dismiss .. was denied on December 16, 2021, by a Delaware Superior Court judge. In addition to Bartiromo, Dobbs, and Pirro, the suit also names primetime hosts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. Venezuelan businessman Majed Khalil sued Fox, Dobbs and Powell for $250 million in December 2021, alleging they had falsely implicated him in rigging Dominion and Smartmatic machines.

Compulsory reductions in meat consumption​

In April 2021, at least five Fox News and Fox Business personalities amplified a story .. that incorrectly linked a university study to President Joe Biden's climate change agenda, to falsely assert that Americans would be compelled to dramatically reduce their meat consumption to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions caused by flatulence. Fox News aired a graphic detailing the supposed compulsory reductions, falsely indicating the information came from the Agriculture Department, which numerous Republican politicians and commentators tweeted. Fox News anchor John Roberts reported to "say goodbye to your burgers if you want to sign up to the Biden climate agenda." Days later, Roberts acknowledged on air that the story was false.

Report that Biden administration was building Trump wall..."​

 
Last edited:
Except the liberal media theory is not about promoting good journalism, it's about protecting conservative elites from the consequences of their actions.

Any conservative elites from Donald Rumsfeld to Donald Trump can blame their own flaws or failures on "media bias" and the conservative base will give them a Fred pass, it let's conservative elites get away with murder.

Um, no. Corporate media is in the business of making a profit and manufacturing consensus and consent.
 
Um, no. Corporate media is in the business of making a profit and manufacturing consensus and consent.

That's what Noam Chomsky said, but I doubt any conservative here cares about his theories, because he is a leftist.

Why was Fox News started by a former Nixon aide? To prevent something like Water Gate from happening again.

Conservatives whine endlessly about so called "media bias against them", but they never offer any solutions, because they don't care about good journalism, they just want personal responsibility to only apply to people they don't like, not wealthy conservative elites.

I knew the liberal bias theory was BS when Rumsfeld used to say the Iraq War was going fine later on, after that I concluded it was pure BS. Conservatives never apply personal responsibility to conservative elites like Trump or Rumsfeld.
 
Their separation and labeling is better, but one must remember that most media bias is accomplished by simple omission.
Hunter Biden laptop.
 
And how do you know that podcast is wrong, you clearly have not listened to it.
I listened to enough of it to know it's propaganda.

(It didn't take much.)
 
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.....

They don't even have real reporters. They have talking heads. Balanced?
That is ignorance on steroids to suggest.

Good grief.

My buddy told me how fair and balanced ONN was. He believed that cult folklore.

I simply can't understand people so widely based as you and he , who cannot objectively process information to post.
 
Hunter Biden laptop.
What about it? This is one of three reporters on the byline of the March 16, NY Times article the extreme right claims supports
your opinion.

By Katie Benner, Kenneth P. Vogel and Michael S. Schmidt
March 16, 2022




 
Last edited:
Isn't what you just said there completely ass backwards? They do present facts but cover it up? How do you cover up facts if you present them?
You should go back and read post #11.

I'm not saying that to knock you, because in this conversation, I agree with you more than I disagree. What I am saying is that if people trust nobody, but yet trust that the "facts" that they see are truly "facts", then clearly you are giving even just a little bit of trust.
Facts are facts. It doesn't take trust to accept facts.

Now, if many of us are in agreement that simply reporting the news is what we all want, warts and all, then we have to give that trust. How does one earn that trust? It is clear that FOX, CNN, MSNBC, OANN, etc, is more worried about money. The thing is, is that you HAVE to be worried about money, in order to stay in business and ply your trade. The ratings, whether we like it or not, clearly show that the general public watches Hannity, Maddow, Carlson, etc, much more than "the news".
I disagree with you that it's all just about money. The propaganda is about bias and ideology.

I don't care about "the general public". They can slobber down the propaganda if they want to. I won't.
 
I listened to enough of it to know it's propaganda.

(It didn't take much.)

Oh how much, the first five minutes, do you even know the host's name?

Okay, I seen the articles you posted from Conservative treehouse and declare that site to be total propaganda.

You always demand the right to throw out any information you don't like to be propaganda, but demand any propaganda site you post be given the benefit of the doubt. That's not how this works, you don't get to be the Supreme Judge on what information counts or not. I think it's pretty lazy debating tactic on your part, you don't have to think, Conservative treehouse does it for you and you can dismiss any information that contradicts your ideology. You want media that confirms your biases, not just presents facts.
 
You should go back and read post #11.


Facts are facts. It doesn't take trust to accept facts.


I disagree with you that it's all just about money. The propaganda is about bias and ideology.

I don't care about "the general public". They can slobber down the propaganda if they want to. I won't.
What do you think about your own discernment? How often does it turn out your posts accurately informed anyone
about anything?

Let's not get bogged down with opinions about the law. You can be sure that, if it ever comes down to the DOJ taking legal action, their lawyers will have their legal spin in order and they'll have their judges in their pocket. (That crooked judge, Sullivan, is an example.)

There is only one reason for this action: Intimidation...and there are only two reasons Garland feels it necessary to use the FBI to intimidate citizens: Protecting school boards who have earned the anger of their constituents by their actions and protecting the business that his daughter and her husband are engaged in.


If anyone should be charged and convicted of making threats, it's Garland.
.
 
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?
I look at 3 things...

1. I factor in the bias or agenda of the organization publishing the story.

2. I look at the source material they used to draw their conclusions

3. I apply common sense and credibility. For instance I give unnamed sources no credibility.
 
Last edited:
I look at 3 things...

1. I factor into the bias or agenda of the organization publishing the story.

2. I look at the source material they used to draw their conclusions

3. I apply common sense and credibility. For instance I give unnamed sources no credibility.

And when conservative elites blame their problems on the media, do you instantly give them a Free pass?
 
I don't take issue with anything in your post.

What I am saying is, the profit motive drastically changed the entire nature of how news works in this country.
That's all.
 
What do you think about your own discernment? How often does it turn out your posts accurately informed anyone
about anything?


.
If you are not informed by anything I post, I'm thinking the problem is on your end.

You are dismissed.
 
In the mid 80s when all the major networks moved their news departments from dedicated news agencies and put them under their entertainment divisions it was clear from then on that they have become profit driven entertainment only. And it was the prolification of cable networks, who were not bound by the FCC directives, that drove this change.
 
And when conservative elites blame their problems on the media, do you instantly give them a Free pass?
Im not sure what you mean by a free pass or who you mean, the media or the politician?
Edit*
Reread your post.

I apply the same standard to all of them equally. I call out both sides as needed
 
Last edited:
If you are not informed by anything I post, I'm thinking the problem is on your end.

You are dismissed.

Oh like that means anything more, you will dismiss anyone who challenges far right propaganda like Conservative Treehouse and then "dismiss" them to duck out having to do in any actual work to defend your points. Your dismissal means nothing, it's just a lazy way for you avoid any thoughts independent from Conservative Treehouse propaganda.
 
Back
Top Bottom