• 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!

A failed attempt at googling highlights an issue with "media" today

Hawkeye10 said:
As these creeps have gotten more fanatical about driving their agenda they sure do a lot more of it. Like some of the Anti-Trump stuff these last months are "The Onion" bad....EXACTLY like sitting in church and getting a lecture from a Bible Thumper on what I have to believe and on how I have to behave.

We are in a new Dark Age says me.
Click to expand...

We may have little schoolgirls bickering about the Trump WH but how is that worse than Obama having to prove that he was born in this country?
 
ModerateGOP said:
It obviously is a business model that works. Otherwise news media wouldn't be doing as well as it is, yes even including the New York Times.
Click to expand...

You do understand that the question "Does Journalism work?" is infinitely more important than is "Does the News Media Work economically?"....
 
Hawkeye10 said:
You do understand that the question "Does Journalism work?" is infinitely more important than is "Does the News Media Work?"....
Click to expand...

It's the free market. If journalists are doing their jobs, and they are (you just don't like what they are reporting regardless if it is true), then the media will make money and ratings and they are. I am not seeing what a Trumpster like you has to complain about. Trump has effectively used this model himself countless numerous hundreds of times to get publicity for himself and to eventually become President.

IT WORKS!
 
ModerateGOP said:
It's the free market. If journalists are doing their jobs, and they are (you just don't like what they are reporting regardless if it is true), then the media will make money and ratings and they are. I am not seeing what a Trumpster like you has to complain about. Trump has effectively used this model himself countless numerous hundreds of times to get publicity for himself and to eventually become President.

IT WORKS!
Click to expand...

The point you miss is that the economic system we build for ourselves is in existence to facilitate what we want to do as a people, as a society, as a collective.

It is here to serve us.

We do not serve it.

SEE?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The point you miss is that the economic system we build for ourselves is in existence to facilitate what we want to do as a people, as a society, as a collective.

It is here to serve us.

We do not serve it.

SEE?
Click to expand...

It worked for Trump it can work for you. Methinks you jealous.
 
ModerateGOP said:
We may have little schoolgirls bickering about the Trump WH but how is that worse than Obama having to prove that he was born in this country?
Click to expand...

I was talking about the failure of the journalists, I see no place where your post intersects with my point. However, if you were trying to say that the journalists have been failed for some time now then for sure I agree with you........ the failure in the selling of the invasion of Iraq was horrible, the failing to see the Great Recession forming, the failing to see all of the failings in the system years and decades before, the failure to demand justice for all this failure should have been your last straw says I. There is now a basic failure to find the news, and to then tell it too us straight, because no one wants to do that anymore, because we suck that badly now.

Everyone wants to sell their trinkets now, the notions that they have allowed to roam their heads is what they need to preach, and they do need to preach, that is all the better they can behave......they are preachers not journalists.

There used to be a lot more Journalists to help us.

USED TO BE
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye10 said:
1. the failure in the selling of the invasion of Iraq was horrible, the failing to see the Great Recession forming, the failing to see all of the failings in the system years and decades before, the failure to demand justice for all this failure should have been your last straw says I.

2. There is now a basic failure to find the news, and to then tell it too us straight, because no one wants to do that anymore, because we suck that badly now.
Click to expand...

1. Journalists have reported on all of this ad nauseam. If you don't know that then IDK where you get your news from or what to tell you.

2. What news sources do you use? I think the failure is your own not the news organizations. If you are unhappy with the medium you are using there are 100s of other choices out there. Experiment and find the ones you like. If you don't like any then you are lost.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Trump is here because America is in crisis.
Click to expand...

Um no Trump is here because he manipulated the media and working class people into thinking and believing that he is something that he is not. Clearly his tactics in the media and working with journalists have only helped him in his life.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Analysis is literally the entire point of journalism. There is no such thing as non-analytic journalism, and there never has been at any point in history. So, sorry, you're wrong. Like I said, if you just want the transcript their secretary made, that's why they have a press department.
Click to expand...

Analysis is the point of analysts not journalists. You're wrong. Perhaps you should stop using the precedent of Yellow Journalism established by William Randolph Hearst and instead reference the good folks at Reuters. Or if personal individuals are your thing the late Gwen Ifill was consistently terrific and I've said so many times. She had the integrity to be completely neutral in her presentation even though she was very liberal in her personal life. That you cannot be bothered to find unbiased sources is your own personal problem. Journalists can be neutral but they're too agenda driven.
 
Zyphlin said:
Awesome! Thank you! I guess I shouldn't have put "response" in my search. I was going "trump charlottesville response transcript" into google and wasn't having much luck.



See, I don't agree there.

That is part of their job. But I'd suggest the primary job of the NEWS is to REPORT the news. Not comment, analyze, or opine on it; but to simply provide it. Provide information to the public to make them aware and informed, allowing the PUBLIC to form opinions on it.

Yes, to some degree, an extension of their job...which is sadly seemingly becoming the main part of their job in the race for ratings, ad revenue, clicks, etc...but to me that is not, nor should be, the primary duty of the news.

Now I don't disagree with you. Providing a broader picture in terms of various reactions to a particular story, other relevant facts to the story, etc is absolutely part of that news REPORTING. But giving the writers opinion/analysis of a situation is not, and never has been, my impression of the purpose of the news.
Click to expand...

Journalists these days are more into telling you how to think and feel about a particular incident.
 
Caine said:
Journalists these days are more into telling you how to think and feel about a particular incident.
Click to expand...

If you are that easily brainwashed by journalists than how are you an independent?
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
Awesome! Thank you! I guess I shouldn't have put "response" in my search. I was going "trump charlottesville response transcript" into google and wasn't having much luck.



See, I don't agree there.

That is part of their job. But I'd suggest the primary job of the NEWS is to REPORT the news. Not comment, analyze, or opine on it; but to simply provide it. Provide information to the public to make them aware and informed, allowing the PUBLIC to form opinions on it.

Yes, to some degree, an extension of their job...which is sadly seemingly becoming the main part of their job in the race for ratings, ad revenue, clicks, etc...but to me that is not, nor should be, the primary duty of the news.

Now I don't disagree with you. Providing a broader picture in terms of various reactions to a particular story, other relevant facts to the story, etc is absolutely part of that news REPORTING. But giving the writers opinion/analysis of a situation is not, and never has been, my impression of the purpose of the news.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Analysis is something that's separate from "news." There used be a much clearer line.
 
ModerateGOP said:
If you are that easily brainwashed by journalists than how are you an independent?
Click to expand...

Did I claim to have been brainwashed by journalists?

Please quote me.

Otherwise, stop this hostile ASSumption stupidity.

Stay with me here....... in the land of intellectual creatures...

It is possible.... that I could bring up a fact about how the media treat their role of reporting the news...... WITHOUT agreeing that their method has an effect on me.

*GASP* I know right? Craazy.



:roll:
 
Caine said:
Did I claim to have been brainwashed by journalists?

Please quote me.

Otherwise, stop this hostile ASSumption stupidity.

Stay with me here....... in the land of intellectual creatures...

It is possible.... that I could bring up a fact about how the media treat their role of reporting the news...... WITHOUT agreeing that their method has an effect on me.

*GASP* I know right? Craazy.



:roll:
Click to expand...

Then what are you complaining about? If it doesn't effect you, then what evidence do you have that it affects others in the way that you claim it does? seems like something silly to complain about. Well it doesn't happen to me but I just know it must happen to others!
 
ModerateGOP said:
Then what are you complaining about? If it doesn't effect you, then what evidence do you have that it affects others in the way that you claim it does? seems like something silly to complain about. Well it doesn't happen to me but I just know it must happen to others!
Click to expand...

Can I not be allowed to point out that it is wrong that the purpose of our media has shifted from "Just the Facts maa'm" to "This is what happened, and I am going to tell you how you must feel about it according to the party's approved GroupThink."

The media has turned itself into the role of the "Ministry of Truth" from 1984.
 
Caine said:
Can I not be allowed to point out that it is wrong that the purpose of our media has shifted from "Just the Facts maa'm" to "This is what happened, and I am going to tell you how you must feel about it according to the party's approved GroupThink."

The media has turned itself into the role of the "Ministry of Truth" from 1984.
Click to expand...

You do realize that some source somewhere probably told you to believe this right? Why are they better than others?
You have still not proved that this is what is happening. Just what you feel is happening. When was the media "Just the facts?" people keep saying this yet never point to a specific time or place.
 
ModerateGOP said:
You do realize that some source somewhere probably told you to believe this right? Why are they better than others?
You have still not proved that this is what is happening. Just what you feel is happening. When was the media "Just the facts?" people keep saying this yet never point to a specific time or place.
Click to expand...

No source told me to believe this.

I witnessed it by watching news coverage over the course of years on various news sources and seeing how each one covered it. You witness it by closely examining the language used in news reports about various incidents. Often times the language used in itself is an indicator of how the media wants you to feel about an incident.
 
Caine said:
No source told me to believe this.

I witnessed it by watching news coverage over the course of years on various news sources and seeing how each one covered it. You witness it by closely examining the language used in news reports about various incidents. Often times the language used in itself is an indicator of how the media wants you to feel about an incident.
Click to expand...

So when do you think this started to change?
 
ModerateGOP said:
So when do you think this started to change?
Click to expand...

Dunno...

Probably a long time ago to be sure.

If I were 70 years old I could probably tell you.

But im not, so I can't.
 
Caine said:
Dunno...

Probably a long time ago to be sure.

If I were 70 years old I could probably tell you.

But im not, so I can't.
Click to expand...

But before you said you witnessed it happening. So it must have happened in your lifetime.
 
ModerateGOP said:
But before you said you witnessed it happening. So it must have happened in your lifetime.
Click to expand...

I've witnessed it sure.

I don't have a recollection when it WASN'T like that because at some point I was too young to really understand what I was watching anyways.



This is going the way of one of those typical DP "GOTCHA" games... so I'll stop here with your futhur silly questions.
 
Caine said:
I don't have a recollection when it WASN'T like that because at some point I was too young to really understand what I was watching anyways.
Click to expand...

See it's only your opinion, not that it's actually happening since you can't even point to an historical event when it happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom