Of course. I am speaking in general terms concerning the mainstream broadcast media. There are always going to be outliers.
I remember seeing my father watch the news in October 1962, I was 8 years old at the time, and wondering why he was watching the news so intently. Every time I watched it to learn about the weather it bored me to tears. It was just facts in a monotone male voice (these were the days before female broadcasters). The importance of the news did not dawn on me until the following year. In November 1963 I finally grasped why my father paid such close attention to the news.Ahh to good old days of yore, eh?
Yep, and the ratings races began.
Quite true. No issue with that here.
Because that is bad journalism.
It's not about withholding opposing views . You don't hide the fact that there were flat earthers there, you report that there were flat earthers there, and they were saying some kooky, wildly inaccurate things.
People riding bikes with clothes on?
Why is it bad?
But you can only find truth if you let people hear all the arguments and then discuss about it. Yet you want to prevent certain views from being considered. This is the biggest obstacle in the question for truth.
Because journalists are supposed to report the truth.
But how can you find truth when you suppress one side?
From the background reading I did on the OP topic, I determined from reporting, that, "the other side" was to hear more reporting about straight, white, Conservatives and their doings.
Sorry, but if a journalist wants to be respected and taken seriously, she/he has to draw the line somewhere...
In the example We already know the truth. Flat earthers are dumb and wrong. Reporting it as if their points are equal is a lie.
You keep getting that wrong.
This is not reporting/news. This is political commentary.
You mean straight pride? Hum.....now there is an interesting concept.
If a journalist thinks flat earth is false and ridiculous and chooses not to report it, that's his right. But if a rival chooses to cover the story, and if flat earth turns out to be correct, then the rival wins.
No. That is reporting the truth objectively. Journalism.
Oh my god!
You just can't make this shit up...can ya'
I am not saying flat earth is correct. I was just giving it as an example. People can choose what to report, and if their decision is correct, they win. If not, they lose viewership and money.
Journalists should always report the objective truth.
Some homosexuals in the UK dislike Pride thinking it too flamboyant, too exhibitionist and counter productive. Their views are an 'other side of the story'.
You mean straight pride? Hum.....now there is an interesting concept.
Mr Beefcake: "I just can't tell enough people how proud I am to be attracted to women. Any of you gals want to come on over here so I can show you how proud I am to be attracted to women?"
Assembled women: Yeah but No
A handful of naysayers does not a viewing base make.
But Tang was improperly directing his journalistic staff to follow his own established personal biases against the Pride community, that had allegedly recently been echoed by just a scant few watchers that felt uncomfortable with WOOD TV reporting.
