• 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!

Trust in Media Hits All Time Low

calamity said:
Personally, I trust no one, especially not the media.

IMO, all news organizations are biased and agenda driven. That some lean Right while others lean Left is a given. That some are pro-gay and others are against it, or that some are pro-gun versus those that are pro-gun control, is to be expected. After all, all humans have a bias. But, there is more. I also see media turning into corporate whores, being driven more and more by the demands of their advertisers. Lately, I've been seeing articles that read like outright press releases for some product or special interest group disguised as news.

Rare is a media company that writes objectively. And, it seems, the country agrees.

Hardly Anyone Trusts The Media Anymore
Click to expand...

This was a great Ted Talk about manipulation in the media.
https://youtu.be/-bYAQ-ZZtEU
 
No ****. It took long enough to dispel the myth of the superior free western media.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Sharyl Atkisson knows the media from inside out, she was one of the best reporters at CBS before she went independent. She has her own show and website now.
Click to expand...

I'm a big fan of Sharyl, and just read her book "Stonewalled" a few months back.
 
JasperL said:
Like I said, I don't believe the bias is explicit or overt. But if you're a producer for ABC news, in the worldwide behemoth that is Walt Disney, and nearly all you ad dollars come from Fortune 500 companies, it doesn't take a genius to realize who's interests you damn well better serve every night, and it's 1) your behemoth worldwide owner, and 2) your behemoth worldwide advertisers and any sane executive with the survival skills of a rabbit knows not to offend either of those two unless absolutely required by the events of the day.

Heck, if you're an anchor (who's getting paid $millions to read news other people write for you), what kind of idiot doesn't realize that he/she can do a lot of things, but he/she damn well better not take positions on air that run counter to the interests of that guy signing his mid 6 figure check every month?
Click to expand...

Really?

Given that position, how would you explain and / or justify this statement? On a news channel by a media personality.

New Day host Chris Cuomo asked Louis about a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that found that even among Democrats, Clinton had a 56% unfavorable rating. “Let me suggest, because some of her strategists have said this kind of quietly, it’s not really a big thing on this campaign trail: a lot of this is sexism,” he responded

“It’s buried so deep that people just say, ‘I don’t trust her, she doesn’t keep her word,’” he said. “And then you turn it around and say, ‘What politician does?’”
CNN Commentator on Hillary’s High Unfavorables: ‘A Lot of This is Sexism’
Click to expand...

I suppose her over all public (and accurate) perception of a career of conflicts of interest has little or nothing to do with Hillary's high unfavorable polling numbers, specifically in honestly and trustworthiness.

No, I don't think it's sexism in the least. I think Hillary has earned everyone of her unfavorables.
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
Really?

Given that position, how would you explain and / or justify this statement? On a news channel by a media personality.

I suppose her over all public (and accurate) perception of a career of conflicts of interest has little or nothing to do with Hillary's high unfavorable polling numbers, specifically in honestly and trustworthiness.

No, I don't think it's sexism in the least. I think Hillary has earned everyone of her unfavorables.
Click to expand...

The test isn't that there is NEVER ANY bias on the news, but that the message of the news division is consistent with the position of the corporate parent. Also not sure why you'd be surprised that Time Warner is supporting Hillary for POTUS - they're long time democratic party supporters in general.
 
JasperL said:
The test isn't that there is NEVER ANY bias on the news, but that the message of the news division is consistent with the position of the corporate parent. Also not sure why you'd be surprised that Time Warner is supporting Hillary for POTUS - they're long time democratic party supporters in general.
Click to expand...

So then you admit that news media outlets are biased. You've just posted that Time Warner appears to be little more than a Hillary shill.
 
eohrnberger said:
So then you admit that news media outlets are biased. You've just posted that Time Warner appears to be little more than a Hillary shill.
Click to expand...

What I said in part is the media is liberal like the Fortune 500 is liberal...
 
JasperL said:
What I said in part is the media is liberal like the Fortune 500 is liberal...
Click to expand...

Right. The thing is that I don't think you are correct on that. Not sure if we are going to be able to find common ground on that.

I have my impression as you do yours.
I have a long list of things that backs up what I believe the same way that you probably have a long things that demonstrates what you believe.
Both of us are pretty firm on our positions, and not easily dissuaded.

Fair enough?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom