Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: George Zimmerman had gun to fend off pit bull
You overemphasis what you see as bias.
They aren't news. They are entertainers. To expect them to be news is silly.
What serious news their is has not been shown to be biased. And largely what you have presented hasn't been biased, you just refuse to accept any other explanation for wrrors, and sometimes, you think really non-political errors are biased, because you attach a belief system to the event that is really there only in your mind, and this case with Zimmerman is an example of that. There is no politcal side on this.
I have made that clear more times than I can possibly count, and of oourse the main stream news has other problems besides their political bias.
You overemphasis what you see as bias.
OK, lets say I agree with you on that point. In the previous paragraph you said that "political entertainers are admittedly biased", so if the the news is being taken over by them, then how on earth can you possibly say the main stream news media is not politically biased?
They aren't news. They are entertainers. To expect them to be news is silly.
1. I agree
2. Sensationalizing some news, yes... All news, no.
3. I disagree... Politically biased news equals poor news.
Let's take network news... Their news broadcasts are designed to appeal to the interests of as many people as possible, because what is watched on TV is generally a family decision, not just that of one person. So yes they offer what I like to call "useless" or "Sensationalized" news, like "Britney", "Linsey Lohan" for the "National Inquirer" crowd... Human tragidy news for people attracted to that sort of thing... Human triumph stories that make people happy or give them a sense of hope.... "That's incredible" news that people tune in to marvel at... And finally there's the important, or serious news (aka, hard news), which is the news that directly impacts the country and huge segments of the population. (political, economic, legal, etc...)
We can't change the type of news that is presented, because like you said, it is about ratings and they have to appeal to those who want serious, politically oriented news, as well those who could care less about hard news and only want news that's entertaining. My issue is with the presentation of serious, hard news, which can (and most often does) have serious political implications, that can directly effect the outcome of elections and alter the future direction the country. It is so very important that the presentation of that news be done with balance, fairness, and without the presence of political bias, but unfortunatly that's never happened in my lifetime of watching the news.
What serious news their is has not been shown to be biased. And largely what you have presented hasn't been biased, you just refuse to accept any other explanation for wrrors, and sometimes, you think really non-political errors are biased, because you attach a belief system to the event that is really there only in your mind, and this case with Zimmerman is an example of that. There is no politcal side on this.