The problem with the media - Page 2

Rigged · 04-04-2008, 03:52 PM

IMO I think alot of how we get our new has changed. We used to read newspapers day and evening editions. 24/hr news networks and the internet has really done, argueably not very much, for the quality of news we get

Reporters dont report anymore they give OPINIONS

Facts are events, circumstances, people involved and how X event turned out

Opinons which is what i think we get now is their interpretation of the the facts or circumstances and not to be trusted

CNN, FOX, MSNBC = not to be trusted

Kanadesaga · 04-04-2008, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babylonDon

Unless I'm mistaken, Ronnie boy also passed some laws easing restrictions on media ownership. It was under his stewardship that these mediums became corporate entities in their own right.

Which to me is the absolute core of the issue. Giant corporations and objective truth are not compatible.

Along with that is the bottom line thinking that accompanies corporate think. It costs money to send reporters around the world to news spots. Much cheaper to report on who fucking won the singing contest, or which Hollywood starlet is not wearing panties that day!

And let us not forget that doing stories on the corporation that owns you just might be suicidal, literally.

Kanadesaga · 04-04-2008, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julia

Agreed, I think it was the Fairness doctorine that was dropped. So things on television did not have to be factual anymore.

No, the Fairness Doctrine was an equal time allotment. If you had an hour of right wing hate speech you also had to air an hour of left wing hate speech. Stations are not required to do that anymore. Hence the spewfests that are Rush and Insannity and "savage" Weiner.

BillCosby · 04-04-2008, 08:37 PM

Wow we ranked worse than some of those "bad ppl" countries.....

Hopefully someone will be along shortly to straighten this all out. Surely there must be a mistake or misunderstanding........ We are the good guys.......

lucytalk · 04-04-2008, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julia

First of all, according to a noprofit NGO, the US ranks 58th in the Press Freedom Index.

Every American needs to be aware of this fact and questioning of most if not all American media.

Reporters sans frontières - Annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index - 2006

you're not going to like this different perspective but ~ your media brainwashes

Kanadesaga · 04-04-2008, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillCosby

Wow we ranked worse than some of those "bad ppl" countries.....

Hopefully someone will be along shortly to straighten this all out. Surely there must be a mistake or misunderstanding........ We are were the good guys.......

edit

julia · 04-04-2008, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by julia

First of all, according to a noprofit NGO, the US ranks 58th in the Press Freedom Index.

Every American needs to be aware of this fact and questioning of most if not all American media.

Reporters sans frontières - Annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index - 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucytalk

you're not going to like this different perspective but ~ your media brainwashes

Actually, your observation does not bother me in the slightest. I agree with you,
Am media is crap and ppl better know it for their own good, imho.

Rollerball · 04-05-2008, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanadesaga

No, the Fairness Doctrine was an equal time allotment. If you had an hour of right wing hate speech you also had to air an hour of left wing hate speech. Stations are not required to do that anymore. Hence the spewfests that are Rush and Insannity and "savage" Weiner.

Exactly. I read more about that Fairness Doctrine, it turns out the reason it was created in the first place was fear that COMMIES might get more to say on the airwaves than good Jesus loving Americans. There were a limited number of 'stations' and they wanted to make sure if some Commie said something on the air that it got rebutted.

TIme moves on, commies no longer a problem, the Fairness Doctrine is standing in the way. Interesting part, most of the bill was shot down under Reagan, a resurrection attempt was vetoed by Bush I, but one part of the doctrine stayed in effect up until Bush II took office. That was the part about personal attacks on someone, in that case the person being attacked personally still had the option to demand free time to rebut.

Quote:

Two corollary rules of the doctrine, i.e., the "personal attack" rule and the "political editorial" rule, remained in practice until 2000. The "personal attack" rule applied whenever a person (or small group) was subject to a personal attack during a broadcast. Stations had to notify such persons (or groups) within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said and offer the opportunity to respond on-the-air. The "political editorial" rule applied when a station broadcast editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulated that the unendorsed candidates be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Once that last bit was squashed asses like Rush were completely freed from telling the truth. With the Fairness Doctrine if they told a lie the person they told a lie about could demand air time. Now, lying is free.

Just one more grain of Justice washed down the drain by the Three Stooges of the White House, Reagen, Bush I & Bush II.

Some Democratic Party legislators have been vocal in their support of a reinstated Fairness Doctrine.

Senator Richard Durbin has said "It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine.”
Senator John Kerry has said, "Well, I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there..."
Senator Barack Obama has written that he will "clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum."

BillCosby · 04-05-2008, 10:10 AM

IMO there is much more @ play here than just the "fairness doctrine"......

Executive privilege is just a caveat to do whatever the hell he wants......

He is not King... He is not above the law........... He does not get to make up the game as he plays it out............ Hell he don't even get to make the rules & yet............

MY GAWD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have given the village idiot the keys to the city.....

julia · 04-06-2008, 02:43 AM

Big media problem:

Quote:

No Shame, No Blame -- Media Refuse to Face Up to Role in Iraq Disaster
Greg Mitchell April 2, 2008
In the thousands of articles and television reports in recent days surrounding the fifth anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq -- and the grim milestone of 4,000 U.S. troops dead there -- nearly every important aspect was probed, and fingers were pointed: at Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Bremer or Dick Cheney, at stubborn Republicans or weak-willed Democrats, and at many others. But conspicuously absent as a subject in the media analysis and reassessment were... the media.

It's as if the war had been planned, launched, and continued for more than half a decade with hardly any major media slips or tragic omissions. The media, with months to plan for the five-year commemoration, were ready to take stock of everything but themselves. By and large, when they did review their role, it was to showcase some of the undeniably terrific reporting, photography, and videography that have emerged from the war zone.

A frank assessment of the overall media performance, from the "run-up" to the "surge," was nearly non-existent. That's not only shameful and revealing -- it's a real missed opportunity, since there is so much to be learned from it by current and future generations of journalists.
Yes, the fateful media mistakes and misreporting of Iraqi WMD before the war has been covered in the past, although with few apologies. But how could this not be widely revisited at the five-year mark -- beyond PBS and NPR -- with 4,000 American dead and thousands wounded for life?...

Greg Mitchell: No Shame, No Blame -- Media Refuse to Face Up to Role in Iraq Disaster - Media on The Huffington Post

04-04-2008, 03:52 PM	#11 (permalink)
Rigged We made History Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: The Secret City Posts: 667 My Mood: Thanks: 63 Thanked 90 Times in 59 Posts	IMO I think alot of how we get our new has changed. We used to read newspapers day and evening editions. 24/hr news networks and the internet has really done, argueably not very much, for the quality of news we get Reporters dont report anymore they give OPINIONS Facts are events, circumstances, people involved and how X event turned out Opinons which is what i think we get now is their interpretation of the the facts or circumstances and not to be trusted CNN, FOX, MSNBC = not to be trusted __________________ Click here for further confusion
	Top

04-04-2008, 08:37 PM	#14 (permalink)
BillCosby The party of the pissed!! Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,504 My Mood: Thanks: 183 Thanked 119 Times in 92 Posts	Wow we ranked worse than some of those "bad ppl" countries..... Hopefully someone will be along shortly to straighten this all out. Surely there must be a mistake or misunderstanding........ We are the good guys....... __________________ Preventive war is not war!!!!Counter-terror is not terror
	Top

04-05-2008, 10:10 AM	#19 (permalink)
BillCosby The party of the pissed!! Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,504 My Mood: Thanks: 183 Thanked 119 Times in 92 Posts	IMO there is much more @ play here than just the "fairness doctrine"...... Executive privilege is just a caveat to do whatever the hell he wants...... He is not King... He is not above the law........... He does not get to make up the game as he plays it out............ Hell he don't even get to make the rules & yet............ MY GAWD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have given the village idiot the keys to the city..... __________________ Preventive war is not war!!!!Counter-terror is not terror
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode