• 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!

Just the Facts....

Tigger

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
12,879
Reaction score
2,707
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Both ends of the political spectrum in the United States complain constantly about the biased news coverage from media outlets at the other end of the spectrum. In my mind thus is due to the fact that news outlets are more interested in opinions rather than facts these days. IF there were a media outlet (TV, radio, newspaper, internet, etc...) that would stick solely to FACTS, would you follow them and do you think others would?
 
I don't know how exactly that we would hold them to that, but yeah.


People are sneaky buggers who tend to find ways around the rules.
 
Goshin, I agree it would be hard to enforce but I think it would be a wonderful thing.
 
Both ends of the political spectrum in the United States complain constantly about the biased news coverage from media outlets at the other end of the spectrum. In my mind thus is due to the fact that news outlets are more interested in opinions rather than facts these days. IF there were a media outlet (TV, radio, newspaper, internet, etc...) that would stick solely to FACTS, would you follow them and do you think others would?

Facts can be bias when you only present one side. The majority of our mass media is corporate owned which may present a conflict of interest.
 
Facts can be bias when you only present one side. The majority of our mass media is corporate owned which may present a conflict of interest.

See, there's really no way to please everyone. Some one dispute the facts, dispute the choice, and always assume politics was the only reason for the choice. There's no logic or profit in complaining about bias.
 
Facts can be bias when you only present one side. The majority of our mass media is corporate owned which may present a conflict of interest.

Facts are not biased, by definition. The problem us that neither side wants to accept that the Facts do not always support their personal point of view on things. Therefore they prefer to present opinion in place of facts in the news media.
 
Well, a good first step would be to can the entertainment, can the big boobed women and blonde and brunette bombshells in short skirts with cameras pointed right up their crotches, can the glitzy graphics and lighting, can the "feel good" stupid stories that mean nothing to anyone but the 3 - 5 people directly affected, can the op-ed commentaries, can the polls, can the country singer guest visits, can all the non-news sillines and get back to basic news reporting. They'll still report the news as they see it; they'll still pick and choose what facts to present, but we're smart enough to wade through a few inches of brown stuff to know what's true and what's spin.
 
Well, a good first step would be to can the entertainment, can the big boobed women and blonde and brunette bombshells in short skirts with cameras pointed right up their crotches, can the glitzy graphics and lighting, can the "feel good" stupid stories that mean nothing to anyone but the 3 - 5 people directly affected, can the op-ed commentaries, can the polls, can the country singer guest visits, can all the non-news sillines and get back to basic news reporting.

That would be a good start. However it means little if they are still reporting opinions and conjecture as facts.
 
Facts are not biased, by definition. The problem us that neither side wants to accept that the Facts do not always support their personal point of view on things. Therefore they prefer to present opinion in place of facts in the news media.

I didn't say facts were biased. Nice red herring. I specifically said facts can be biased when you only present one side. There are pros and cons to everything and sometimes media does a piss poor job presenting both sides of the story when presenting those facts. As I originally stated, our mass media is mostly corporate owned which in itself may present a conflict of interest and the reprecussions may be only get the facts that positively impact their interest and not necessarily represent competing interest.
 
That would be a good start. However it means little if they are still reporting opinions and conjecture as facts.
I know. Whoever it is is still going to pick and choose what facts or details they think are pertinent to the story, and that largely based on their biases, but we're smart enough to sift through that - I think.

Problem is now that they've become so enamored with entertainment they don't even report the salient facts anymore.

For example, some of the typical ways they've diluted facts:

[Team A] beat [Team B] last night (technically correct, but what was the actual score?)
[Team A] beat [Team B] last night by 10 points, 2 touchdowns, 3 runs, 4 scores... (technically correct, but what was the actual score?)
The stock market rose 35 points today (technically correct, but to what?)
The stock market gained 2% over the past week (technically correct, but from what value to what value?)
Temperatures are expected to rise over the next few days (technically correct, but by how many degrees?)
It's going to be a cold morning, so better put on that jacket (might be accurate, but how cold? Should we put on a light jacket or a heavy coat?)

The news has become largely relative in all its reporting - which makes news a function of whatever basis on which they're disseminating whatever facts they choose to divulge. It's very frustrating.
 
Well, a good first step would be to can the entertainment, can the big boobed women and blonde and brunette bombshells in short skirts with cameras pointed right up their crotches, can the glitzy graphics and lighting, can the "feel good" stupid stories that mean nothing to anyone but the 3 - 5 people directly affected, can the op-ed commentaries, can the polls, can the country singer guest visits, can all the non-news sillines and get back to basic news reporting. They'll still report the news as they see it; they'll still pick and choose what facts to present, but we're smart enough to wade through a few inches of brown stuff to know what's true and what's spin.

In other words lose ratings. Do you know nothing of the news.
 
See, there's really no way to please everyone. Some one dispute the facts, dispute the choice, and always assume politics was the only reason for the choice. There's no logic or profit in complaining about bias.

Another problem with media. Our media depends on profit. Instead of being driven on presenting facts to inform citizens, it is based on stories that will bring in profits. Many of those tend to be sensentionalized stories. A democracy can only truly function with a well informed citizenry.
 
Another problem with media. Our media depends on profit. Instead of being driven on presenting facts to inform citizens, it is based on stories that will bring in profits. Many of those tend to be sensentionalized stories. A democracy can only truly function with a well informed citizenry.

Quite correct.
 
Both ends of the political spectrum in the United States complain constantly about the biased news coverage from media outlets at the other end of the spectrum. In my mind thus is due to the fact that news outlets are more interested in opinions rather than facts these days. IF there were a media outlet (TV, radio, newspaper, internet, etc...) that would stick solely to FACTS, would you follow them and do you think others would?
There's a reason the media has shifted to catering to niche' audiences. It works.

Wasn't the original CNN Headline News Channel just a fact reporting outlet? They had no commentary or any other opinion giving talking heads. All they had was bland news reporting. I think maybe 17,000 people watched that.

Same with CSPAN. It's not really news, but it shows a lot of stuff without comments. Few people watch anyting on that channel, not even the debates. The bulk of the folk usually watch the debates on their favorite newsie channel: Fox, MSNBC, Cnn...not CSPAN.
 
Both ends of the political spectrum in the United States complain constantly about the biased news coverage from media outlets at the other end of the spectrum. In my mind thus is due to the fact that news outlets are more interested in opinions rather than facts these days. IF there were a media outlet (TV, radio, newspaper, internet, etc...) that would stick solely to FACTS, would you follow them and do you think others would?

Tigger even the decision on what facts to tell is biased. There is and will never be such a thing as unbiased news.

All the news sources are reporting on things that sell. They are in the business of making money.
 
Well, a good first step would be to can the entertainment, can the big boobed women and blonde and brunette bombshells in short skirts with cameras pointed right up their crotches, can the glitzy graphics and lighting, can the "feel good" stupid stories that mean nothing to anyone but the 3 - 5 people directly affected, can the op-ed commentaries, can the polls, can the country singer guest visits, can all the non-news sillines and get back to basic news reporting. They'll still report the news as they see it; they'll still pick and choose what facts to present, but we're smart enough to wade through a few inches of brown stuff to know what's true and what's spin.

And guess what? Nobody will watch it.
 
In other words lose ratings. Do you know nothing of the news.
Well unless I'm mistaken, it's the race for ratings, and the attendant ills to which that leads that pretty much defines what it is we're complaining about w/r to the news these days, right?
 
Well unless I'm mistaken, it's the race for ratings, and the attendant ills to which that leads that pretty much defines what it is we're complaining about w/r to the news these days, right?

I should have put a smiley face with my post :)
 
Facts are not biased, by definition. The problem us that neither side wants to accept that the Facts do not always support their personal point of view on things. Therefore they prefer to present opinion in place of facts in the news media.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. So long as there's a human being delivering a "fact" it'll always be assumed by at least one group of people that the fact was tainted by the messenger.
 
Both ends of the political spectrum in the United States complain constantly about the biased news coverage from media outlets at the other end of the spectrum. In my mind thus is due to the fact that news outlets are more interested in opinions rather than facts these days. IF there were a media outlet (TV, radio, newspaper, internet, etc...) that would stick solely to FACTS, would you follow them and do you think others would?

No. It would by dry as dirt.
 
I think an educated public would see through the bias. We have trained a generation, through educational techniques and curriculum, to think emotionally to the exclusion of logical assessment. Many times reporters simply quote rhetoric given by politicians and call it news, subsequently they use "man on the street" interviews that parrot the rhetoric creating an availability bias. Seeing the bias leads one to question the premise, not seeing leads one to jump on the bandwagon. The news therefore can be whatever news organizations want it to be as long as we start educating.
 
I understand that the cable news outlets have to be entertaining in order to draw viewers, which means bias is going to be there. What I have an issue with is the the bias that's presented in the straight, hard news broadcasts.

It is possible and would not be difficult for the networks to present the news nearly bias free, and/or from a politically balanced perspective. The first step is the hardest and in the case of the big 3 (CBS, NBC and ABC) a seemingly impossible one. They have to acknowledge they have a political bias. If they could do that, fixing it would be easy.
 
Back
Top Bottom