Who else remembers a respectable news media In America ?
- ahorsebackposted 7 years ago
0Not the sensationalizing "face -book " mentality of todays mainstream news media . Once , there was a time when selling the headline was the profiteering, business method of presenting the mainstream media , Sure profit , selling , circulation numbers , even some sensationalism was the norm . But the integrity, honesty , accuracy of media was mostly even flowing .
It all came from a neutral and politically ideological standpoint ! Imagine that !
I believe WITHOUT a ideologically neutral mainstream media America cannot survive without a definite and extreme decline in " quality of life , liberty and a pursuit of happiness " . This isn't just political . In the long run THIS present media direction only contributes to the disintegration of those qualities !
Who thinks we are in for decline ,Thoughts ?The media is dead and has been for a while. The decline started in 2008 and has been going down and reached the bottom in 2016. It cannot go any lower. We now have fake news treated and reported by media as news. We now have open bias and they are even proud of it. We now have editorials in the main news page and even spills into sports and fashion pages...
we now have media matters that suppose to check other news sites who themselves are biased...
There are no jounalism standards, there are no right or wrong, there are no shame...
The internet is the answer. It is now up to the people to determine for themselves what is truth and what is fake...It is the new age and the blame is squarely on the main street media who allow this to happen and participated in its own demise.Oh its true that we HAVE to do our own research for the most basic of truths in media ! Media Maters IS HORRIBLE , I agree a hundred percent on your assessment !
So what is your idea of credible media? Infowars, Brietbart, CmD, Fux News?
Credence , IF the left would simply admit that they own ALL 90% of the media ,as they should , I would have a heart attack.
(By the way, "the media" is not an it, but a they, plural, as I am sure were already aware. TV is a medium. Newspapers are a medium, so is the Internet.)
Now, back to the topic of discussion: you are not being fare by pushing all blame onto the media. They only put out what sells, what the viewing/reading/listening/surfing public want.
Nothing works or has any effect without a careless, gullible audience that desires easily digestible news fodder where there's no need to think for themselves.
Each of us, to some extent, searches for easy knowledge, unwilling or educationally unable to gain much deeper understanding even once we have looked up the knowledge. All it does is enhance our fear, sense of entrapment and helplessness.
Hence that popular trend towards religion and political devisiveness. We are looking for conviction and certainty - at least to the extent we convince our minds.
Yet, the media moguls, the insurance companies, government administrators, church leaders, all continue to tar us with lies and uncertainty, with this they can more easily control our minds. Fear!
"I" can only change this by leaning to control my own mind, regardless of Media input.This response about Media [s] is a joke ! That is suggesting all sources of news media are as fair and balanced as the mainstream media itself actually was ? Just because you look to , for instance , face-book for honest news , because you like the sway of The Hill, or the Washington Post or Google news more than proves my point . You don't know what fair , balance , honest truthful News is to begin with. !
I'm a conservative , I actually hate Rush Limbaugh , I always have , Why ? because he is unbalanced in his beliefs and presentations , he is extremely one sided in his opinions , Just like 90 % of what we now call the mainstream media . ABC , MSNBC , CNN , MSN , AOL , GOOGLE < these companies of media should be ashamed of themselves .
Last night Pres. Trump said all that needed to be said about the White House Press , As far as Trump supporters goes , it would be fine if he kicked them totally out of OUR white house ! Now !
News media , medium , media's ,..... .you get my point !.Ok, my spelling of "fare" was the wrong one. Should have been fair. But you unfairly twisted what I said: "... pushing all blame onto the media." That does not imply, nor was it meant to, that all media are blameless. Maybe it's the poet in you that tries to twist meanings....
Yes, you seem to be conservative, very. And very one-sided, anti-"left" and anything you perceive to be anti-"socialist." If you were to use a bit more intelligence, that which you claim conservatives have in abundance, then you would show much more credibility in this argument. IMHO.
Religion is certainly most popular where life is most insecure. But, I see no reason to blame religion for insecure economic or social systems. That is a political failure.
Oh, I agree. Blaming religion is false and pointless. It's the human mind that influences religious trends, and political minds that chose to conveniently abuse the religiosity.
In seeing the failings and shortcomings of the human mind under various circumstances, I am much less likely to "blame," preferring to understand and appease where possible and appropriate.
Mainstream news media , Fox = conservative . All the rest = liberal .
Recounting the last three years for Democrats In spite of your promotion of and strict adherence to
"Fake News ";.
- Hillary lost
- Bernie Lost
- Jill Stein Lost
- Gary Johnson Lost
- The DNC totally Lost
- You lost the House
- You lost the Congress
- You lost states offices
- You lost the Obama Legacy
- You lost the White House
- You lost your minds .............Isn't it time to regroup and consider what" Fake" really is ?
So Now , you continue your rants about Trump with the same " Fake News " media , Is anyone starting to see why you can't get any traction ?
I almost feel bad for you .
psst! Are you sure "Fux" News was what you were going for? I think that "au" combination is pretty necessary for that faux allusion.
GA
It's the media's job to report facts. If Trump and his band of merry morons lie about something, it's the media's job to report it. Not reporting it because Trump doesn't like it would be false reporting and propaganda.
For example, why should the media ignore the fact that a senior figure in the administration has just resigned because FBI signals intelligence proves he lied about what he said to Russian officials? In what strange, messed up world do you live in, where you would think that's not major news, and shouldn't be covered in depth by the news media?Flynn's problem with Trump is an internal administrative one ! Simply put , why does the liberal media concern itself with internal administrative problems at the white house except to manipulate ! Your 90 % liberal media is meddling where it doesn't belong as usual .
If the media WOULD report facts it would totally amaze a lot of waiting people .
Thanks for your contribution to "fake news" .The FBI finding out that the National Security Advisor is compromised by a foreign state, is not an "administrative" problem. It's a grave matter of national security.
Please tell me exactly which of these facts is "fake"?
Fact 1: Michael Flynn spoke to the Russian ambassador on the phone about sanctions
Fact 2: The FBI intercepted the call
Fact 3: Michael Flynn falsely told the FBI he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions (a federal offense)
Fact 4: Michael Flynn falsely told the Vice President and others he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 5: The Vice President appeared in the media saying Flynn told him he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 6: At this point Flynn is compromised. The Russians could blackmail him by threatening to reveal that he lied to the Vice President. That disclosure would also reveal that Flynn had lied to the FBI too. So an adversarial foreign state now had leverage over the country's National Security Advisor. Only the diligence of the FBI prevented that leverage from being used.
Fact 7: The FBI told the DoJ that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 8: The DoJ informed the president that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 9: The president allowed Flynn to remain a member of the National Security Council for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 10: The president allowed Flynn to remain National Security Advisor for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 11: A whistleblower from within the administration gave this information to news reporters
Fact 12: The public was made aware, after the media published the information
Which of these facts are you disputing?Your logic is not valid. It starts by Flynn did not break any law. He is allowed to speak with the Russian ambassador. His sin was not telling the VP or the FBI what was discussed. He can say he forgot the details which if you recall during the Hillary hearings "i don't recall" used too many times.
So he is out of a job for lack of trust and nothing else. You happy now?Read each of those facts again (especially number 6) and think about the full ramifications of the situation, then you may have something useful to say.
And I repeat the same question to you as I did to ahorseback. Exactly which of the facts I have outlined, which have all been reported by the media, is fake?What law did he brake by talking to the Russian Ambassador? If you can't answer that, you can't ask any more questions.
Now remember, if you were going on and on and on about Russians you would be labeled a xenophobe. A good rule of thumb is that its okay to sell uranium to Russians, just don't know any Russians.For the best explanation on this topic -
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 … ambassador
I can ask as many questions as I choose. Whether you answer or not is your business.
Does it say anywhere in the facts below that Flynn broke the law?
If so, where?
Do you understand what "compromised by a foreign state" means?
Exactly which of the facts below, as reported by the media, is fake?
See, that's three more questions than last time.
Am I now on the list of people who need to be sent for "re-education"? (oops that's four now)
______________________________
Fact 1: Michael Flynn spoke to the Russian ambassador on the phone about sanctions
Fact 2: The FBI intercepted the call
Fact 3: Michael Flynn falsely told the FBI he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions (a federal offense)
Fact 4: Michael Flynn falsely told the Vice President and others he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 5: The Vice President appeared in the media saying Flynn told him he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 6: At this point Flynn is compromised. The Russians could blackmail him by threatening to reveal that he lied to the Vice President. That disclosure would also reveal that Flynn had lied to the FBI too. So an adversarial foreign state now had leverage over the country's National Security Advisor. Only the diligence of the FBI prevented that leverage from being used.
Fact 7: The FBI told the DoJ that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 8: The DoJ informed the president that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 9: The president allowed Flynn to remain a member of the National Security Council for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 10: The president allowed Flynn to remain National Security Advisor for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 11: A whistleblower from within the administration gave this information to news reporters
Fact 12: The public was made aware, after the media published the informationYour judgement is clouded by TDS. Give it a rest.
Don W's problem ;
He watches too much of that , why ? All he does in turn on CNN and believe !Memes won't help you.
If you are saying the facts reported in the Flynn story are fake, fine, here are the facts that have been reported. Which is fake? That's a perfectly fair, and simple question:
Fact 1: Michael Flynn spoke to the Russian ambassador on the phone about sanctions
Fact 2: The FBI intercepted the call
Fact 3: Michael Flynn falsely told the FBI he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions (a federal offense)
Fact 4: Michael Flynn falsely told the Vice President and others he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 5: The Vice President appeared in the media saying Flynn told him he did not speak to the Russian ambassador about sanctions
Fact 6: At this point Flynn is compromised. The Russians could blackmail him by threatening to reveal that he lied to the Vice President. That disclosure would also reveal that Flynn had lied to the FBI too. So an adversarial foreign state now had leverage over the country's National Security Advisor. Only the diligence of the FBI prevented that leverage from being used.
Fact 7: The FBI told the DoJ that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 8: The DoJ informed the president that the National Security Advisor was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 9: The president allowed Flynn to remain a member of the National Security Council for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 10: The president allowed Flynn to remain National Security Advisor for three weeks, after being informed he was compromised by a foreign state
Fact 11: A whistleblower from within the administration gave this information to news reporters
Fact 12: The public was made aware, after the media published the informationDon W, - And your biggest failure to acknowledge ,which negates every one of your rhetorical points :
The leftist politicization of the ENDING Obama administrations-- FBI , the DOJ. , and painfully , obvious . His mainstream media outlets .
Your - Facts = "Fake News"
He simply didn't honor the political trust of Trumps administration .You can call them "rhetorical points" as much as you want, but facts are facts.
You suggested the facts are not being reported in the Flynn story: "If the media WOULD report facts it would totally amaze a lot of waiting people".
Well we can check if what you are saying is true by listing the facts reported in the Flynn story, and asking which ones are not accurate.
So far you have not indicated a single one. Now you seem to be suggesting that all 12 facts are fake, which would mean:
The FBI is mistaken or lying
The DoJ is mistaken or lying
Trump's spokesperson, Sean Spicer, is mistaken or lying
The Vice President is mistaken or lying
Every news outlet in the world that has reported on the story is mistaken or lying
And Trump himself is mistaken or lying
because these 12 facts come from those sources. That doesn't make sense
So let me make this even simpler: which of those 12 facts do you believe is inaccurate, or do you genuinely believe that none of them are accurate and all the above sources are mistaken or lying?Don W, you are talking about logic and honesty here.
Who wants logic or honesty? It all gets in the way of a good story...better to put Inconvenient Truth out of the way.
- if the potential consequences were not so serious....so.....no laughing matter.What , because Johnny says they are facts , then they are facts ? Read all the real news Johnny and then make up your own mind , that which requires a thought process apparently no longer available to the left , Got to get your head out of the leftist slop that's calling itself news media and is all but" fake " - opinion columns.
If the FBI and DOJ say there is nothing to investigate then there isn't . Why then , is that okay if its a Hillary investigation but not a Trump investigation . See my point ?
Besides all of your "facts " are simply stones thrown from a democratic party presently on" life support "! Face it .
Horse, get your facts right please. I do not know what the facts are. I have not been engaged in the substance of this argument, because I don't have any "facts" to go on. It is not my fight. If you are an American citizen, then I suggest it's very much your fight, i.e., to get some honestly into everyone's discourse.
Watching from afar, I see all of the argument pathetic and laughable - so, if you can, try to raise the quality of that argument. Otherwise your input can be seen as nothing but a joke.Johnny , You are right , you DON"T know what the facts are , The joke is when someone from down under suggest they know what's wrong and what's accurate , factual and fact while staring through the extremely distorted lenses of the mainstream news media in America today !
Might want to focus on your own kitchen mess ...........
Promisem , Seriously ? You must be a reporter ? I could do better reporting with my ideas of fact as centered as a liberal children's book writer .The very same media magnates span the oceans and continents. They harness the same political leanings to spin a web of influence, regardless of national boundaries.
Thus our "kitchen down under" and the mess it's in is intrinsically linked with the selfishness within your country. It thrives on partisan politics, spin and fostering public fears.
When you keep bleating about the "left" and "those liberals, " you are helping to spread whatever lies are abroad. So let's hear some real provable facts from you....if you indeed know any.According to many 'Google ' polls ---only 8 {eight } % of journalists consider themselves conservative in America . If those on the left cannot see the problem with that alone then you are incapable of all that you profess of fact .
What message lies there ?
Where is the neutrality in media then ?
Guess what ?
The entire Mainstream NEWS media is then entirely compromised but you don't get that ?Are you personally able to view anything from a neutral position? You seem to be adamantly anti-left.
I can see many flaws in the philosophy of those on the left. Yet this does not mean everything they do or say is wrong.
Similarly with right-wing thinkers.
So, when you are predominantly biases one way or the other, how are you helping to resolve any impasse?
Less blame on others; look to your own mind.
8%? Im surprised if its that many. But lets not forget the entertainment news and hollywood programming of the mind. If it werent for Eastwood, hollywood would be 100% liberal. Look forward to A whole generation of namby pambies.
This is not about whether the FBI or DoJ investigates Flynn. It's about your claim that the key information reported about Flynn is fake.
I want to check if that's true, so I'm asking which of the 12 facts taken from the Flynn story are fake.
If you know enough to suggest these facts are fake, then you must know enough to tell us specifically which ones are fake.
If not, that raises the question: if you can't point to any specific facts outlined that you know to be fake, then on what grounds are you claiming the information is fake?
You can have the logic and factual basis of an Albert Einstein, and extremists will still disagree with you.
Insults won't help you. Only facts will.
If the news reports about Flynn are fake, tell everyone exactly which of the reported facts above (1 - 12) is fake.
If what you are saying is true, that will be easy.
If what you are saying is not true, you will not be able to do it, and will try to deflect the question.
So far you have only tried to deflect the question, which suggests you are not telling the truth.Don,
Here is reference to a NYT article you may find helpful -
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism … ing-trump/
Btw, I was not trying to insult you. I was commenting on your judgement...And here are some links you may find helpful:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_blind_spot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrationality
Not trying to insult you of course. Just commenting on your judgement.
Now, how about answering the question. If you support the view that the information outlined about Flynn is fake, please explain exactly which of those reported facts is fake.
Should not be difficult if you are telling the truth.Those stories are not fake but it matters not if the original act is not unlawful. If it was, they should charge him with a crime, if not, let it go.
Here is a term you may have missed -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_standard
When Democrats do similar things, it is overlooked.,.At least you have answered the question honestly. Credit to you for that..
The issue is not whether a law has been broken though.
The issue is that Russian intelligence were in a position to blackmail the National Security Advisor. The seriousness of that situation cannot be overstated.
Because Flynn lied to the VP, the Russians (who knew he lied) were in a position to use the threat of revealing the truth (and ending his career in disgrace) as leverage to get him to do what they want.
This means the man who provides advice about national security to the President of the United States would essentially have been a Russian intelligence asset. Again, the seriousness of that cannot be overstated.
Thankfully the FBI intercepted the call, and alerted the DoJ and the President that Flynn was under threat of blackmail to a foreign power. But this is where things get really scary.
Trump did nothing with that information for 3 weeks, and instead only acted when the Washington Post published a story about it!
Why did Trump risk national security in this way? Incompetence? Inexperience? Was it because he asked Flynn talked to the Russians about sanctions and felt guilty about Flynn being in this position? Who knows?
Now Trump (and some of his fanatical followers) blame the Washington Post, for alerting the public to what was happening! But if they had not published the story, Flynn might still be the National Security Advisor, and the FSB would have scored a major intelligence victory. I'm thankful to the Post for performing this public service.
Instead of deflecting attention by attacking the media, there needs to be a thorough, independent investigation. Not into Flynn, but into what the president knew, when he knew it, what he did, and why? If there is nothing to hide, then an investigation will hopefully show that.
I do! I remember a respectable news media, when journalists reported in a way that seems So foreign now. Of COURSE we are seeing the fall out from it, especially people that believe in a manner that really turns out to be "side taking." People aren't being critical thinkers anymore, and employing such poor thinking that we see a lot of unrest. Then when they see the unrest and anger and rage, they look for an explanation for it, and the majority of the current media feeds into their minds the reasons they want to explain all of the unrest, anger and rage. Its a vicious cycle and the most alarming is that people don't care, and I think they really might believe the lies they hear and then repeat. The combination of just these facts enables an environment for decline and destruction, all the while finger pointing.
Oh how I wish for more reasonableness, morality, logic, critical thinking. The funny part is, people think that by hoping to force wanted views onto others will somehow change the world to a better place or to their way of thinking things should be. The thing is, truth and facts don't bend to people's wants and bad thinking, but that is not all. It isn't "free". One can be on the very wrong side of things, and think they are right, and they can still be hurt by this for lack of paying attention and responding in a more truthful and reasonable way. There is great cost. So I hope all will consider testing their own views the hardest of all, but there is also a second component. After testing one's views, one needs to care about what is good and true in the first place. I am not sure many are there anymore, whereas before, it was safe to assume most people cared about what is good and true and reasonable.
With the advent of the internet news outlets were faced with the problem of being the first with breaking news so fact checking slowly took a back seat. And, with all of the biased 'news' sources on the internet it is not difficult to understand why the traditional news outlets began to lean toward bias also. But, honestly, the news outlets have always used their platform to attempt to sway public opinion. If you doubt, think about reporting on any local news you know of. How close does the media come to reporting facts in an unbiased manner?
As an older dude , I see that ideologically liberal persuasion of younger and minority generations by 90 % of our media - very clearly !
They will in TOO in time . But it'll be too late .As an older dude you might simply be refusing to take all sides into account.
Problem is , When your "all sides " is slanted almost entirely left ! It's so obvious that the news media wants a politician to quiver when dealing with them - Trump will not back down .
This left ideological slant and their love affair with the mainstream media is a huge problem for all democracy, which the left supposedly -SO adores ! , The Pravda-ization of the American mainstream news media is happening right before ALL our eyes . The same thing happened in every country that has and had fallen to communism and socialism . Russia , Germany , Italy , Poland , you name the country that fell and see ----------that their actual news media integrity fell first .
Trump nailed it last night and hopefully he will oust this leftist media from OUR white house until they start neutralizing the message . I watch multiple sources of news and THEY ARE HORRIBLY LEFT SLANTED.
In 1971, the first rule of journalism I learned in college was to be objective. They showed us a film (no DVDs or video in the 70s) of three news anchors reading the same story. One was told to give it a positive tone, one a negative tone, and one to be as objective as possible. In the class of 200 students, we were fairly split on who thought which anchor was doing what. Turned out, each one had been instructed to read the story as objectively as possible. The lesson: For all your best efforts, people will see what they are looking for. The best you can do is to be as objective as you can be.
Lesson for today? As soon as a media outlet brands themselves with a point of view - run - do not walk - to the nearest exit. They've failed their first responsibility as journalists.Very true. However, read the book Bias by Bernard Goldberg who worked at CBS for many years...
There are bias by people in newsrooms that are inherent and therefore unavoided... They can pass a lie detector test and yet still be biased. It is part of what is called group think. When 90% of the people you see and interact with agrees with everything you belief, it is hard not to show bias. To that person, being themselves is the bias...what they see as the norm is not what the American people see. There lies the problem. To cure this type of bias, they need to fire most of the staff and start from scratch and the same goes with the Academia, unfortunately, they all have tenure...we just have to wait till they retire...hahaI think it was CBS's Dan Rather who wrote a book about the dangers of so much of the traditional media being based in NYC and DC. It inherently gives them a specific point of view, as if the rest of America doesn't exist. I'd like to see the headquarters for more news organizations located in other big cities, like Dallas, Chicago, St. Louis - in other words, in the heartland of our country. Unfortunately, that will not happen as long as these two cities are the capitals of our nation's wealth, travel, communications, and powerbrokers.
Yes but that does not matter if they hire people of various background. You can be located in NY or DC but still come from Dallas and Minnisota...and else where...
It is the ideology that is too narrow, and not the physical location. I live in NY a blue state and yet I am conservative. There are people living in Houston that are progressive...so what?
What is needed is a diversity of views on the top news channels and newspapers...and campuses.
I suggest you ask permission to attend a news meeting at the nearest daily newspaper to see the hoops reporters and editors go through to avoid bias.
Then sit through the entire editing process with the reporter and the multiple editors who view a story and question that reporter about using multiple sources, why a sentence was written a certain way, whether both sides were fairly represented on the issue, etc., all to avoid bias and ensure accuracy.
Then sit by the phone next to the reporter and listen to people scream at him or her about being a liberal and then to people scream at him or her about being a conservative -- all in response to the same story.
- ahorsebackposted 7 years ago0
The "mainstream media " has evolved to a point where truth , fact , honesty in presentation is boring , unsellable , unprofitable . The presentation of truth BY this media is now an opinion column. They know it , the right knows it , the left knows it .
As I watch the main actors in media , I realize they are younger , less wise and far more programmable in their personal perceptions of fact , truth and yes , even honesty . They need to all go back , way back ,to be schooled in what the reality of one truth really is .Well, you seem to be steeped in McCarthyism, so why not get yourself another Joseph McCarthy for this modern era? That might well turn out to be your Trump card for all we know. And, while you are at it, another Edgar J. Hoover, to get rid of all that heavily-biased dust gathering under your bed?
I don't know where we start in cleaning up the mess we have made for this world. We older folk maybe don't have the time left to do much about it, but.....what sort of example do we need to be offering?
There are a great number of young people who are looking to us for some kind of guidance. Are we up to it?Yes Johnny , we are up to teaching Tolerance !
The youth of all generations tuned into politics are always gravitated to fixed ideologies . Hoover ? No , a freak of nature ! McCarthy ?No shortsightedness in spades , We should have taught our youth tolerance first , second and last .
Instead what they have learned is a fived and determined IN -tolerance of all things uncomfortable , sad part is ; They have evolved to this point from being taught by the "best " of the sixties generation .I do try to see issues from more than one perspective. I am not totally "left," nor totally "conservative."
I do understand the some of the financial and economic needs for business ventures to succeed and thrive. Good management, personal and corporate discipline, avoiding greed and laziness, getting up and out to do the work when it must be done, not when it's just nice and pleasant to do it.
Also, I can see that the workforce includes not just the guys on the ground floor doing the drudgery, but also competent and hard-working executive/management jobs, that are vitally important to the success of a business and its "sustainable" existence.
Many a "left-winger" has never had the experience or insight to understand this. YET: it often happens that it's those who are on the ground level who can see a different perspective which is obscure from those at the "top."
I have often seen in these HubPages forums, self-serving conservative opinions which trash the very idea of anthropogenic global warming and climate change. It takes a down-to-earth honesty to see and appreciate the reality of this phenomenon. Without the shouting and protesting of what you might call the "liberalists," none of this would get out to the world consciousness. Certainly those who think they stand to lose a pocketful of cash, if things are made to change, will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo, painting and preserving the lies and camouflage that will bring about wholesale destruction of this our fragile planet.
I have just been watching a YouTube video of huge chunks of ice breaking up of the coast of Greenland. If you can find it, I recommend watching. It's real, factual, awesome and horrible to contemplate. Yet we humans are in a position to do at least something about it if we take of our rose-tinted spectacles.
En.newsner.com/man-points-camera-at-ice-then-captures-the-unimaginable-on-film/about/nature
(Sorry if this does not open for you, but my Facebook skills are limited)
Once again, IMHO.
- ahorsebackposted 7 years ago0
Johnny , All twelve of your points are uselessly posted , Why ?
The FBI -DOJ says Flynn broke no laws ," There will be no investigation ".
Your #ed list is YOUR way of justifying Fake News .
Ever heard "If you tell a lie enough times it becomes truth "? Congratulations , you fell for it . My theory is TV news started going downhill when newsbroadcasts started including the name of the anchor in the title. CNN used to stand above the rest because with a 24-hour format and too many anchors to remember, the news was still the star of the show. That soon went by the wayside.
When the government gave away the airways, all they asked for was 30 minutes each night for public information. Their mistake was not making that 30 minutes advertisement free.Probably only 8% of journalists consider themselves conservative because they stay informed on a daily basis, adjusting their views to the information that changes daily, instead of clinging, irrationally, to closely held beliefs even in the face of reality.
I'm sorry but I find that funny. Considering the news media coverage of the election and its outcome I'd say that might better describe the left leaning media.
A recent study found that 50% of journalists describe themselves as political independents, 28% as Democrats, 7% as Republicans and 15% as Other.
What's interesting is that the number of journalists who describe themselves as Republican used to be 28% of the total. Many of them have bailed out as the party moves farther and farther to the right.
Fortunately, that 50% who are independents is growing in size as more journalists recognize the need to avoid any affiliation.I don't know where you got those numbers, but I would guess they are lying. The estimate is 90% liberal and 10% conservative. The same ratio in academia.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/201 … can-188053
I respect the fact that you try to be civil with other posters and try to raise the level of debate on this site. I also respect your right to hold beliefs that are more conservative than mine.
But more of us need to get past one side versus the other and find some common ground for the truth.
Related Discussions
- 114
Trump Tweets Disappoint Mainstream Media
by ahorseback 7 years ago
Gee , that's too bad ,....... That simply informs anyone with any brains that the mainstream media cannot stand being unable to filter in or out their own agenda to press room releases ? If the rest of the world has social media and uses it in an immature , uninformed and...
- 98
It seems the main stream media has its set of problems besides bias...
by Jack Lee 5 years ago
Could not have happened to a more deserving crowd...I hope all of them are held accountable for all that they have done in harming our Republic...
- 29
"Enemy of the people" in light of recent events
by PrettyPanther 6 years ago
David Lapan@DaveLapanDC"Over 30+ years as a U.S. Marine, I defended our country against its true enemies. In 20+ years as a USMC, Pentagon and DHS spokesman, I dealt w/ the news media nearly every day. I know quite a bit about the press and know this -- they are NOT the enemy of the American...
- 27
Do you realize that the mainstream media is lying to you about this election?
by Virginia Allain 8 years ago
Do you realize that the mainstream media is lying to you about this election?Because I'm a librarian & skilled with the Internet, this election has disillusioned me with trusting network news like CNN, MSNBC & even PBS. They obviously have their own agenda & it doesn't...
- 65
Why Does the Mainstream Media Keep Falling for Obvious Hoaxes?
by Readmikenow 5 years ago
Too many people working in the reporting field fall for hoaxes. They rush to judgment and do real damage. Should they be required to apologize for their unprofessional behavior?“There's been much commentary in the past few days about the MSM's lack of critical thinking skills in...
- 92
Why do Conservatives think the media is biased? And not to be trusted.
by Jack Lee 7 years ago
In discussions here on HubPages, a common topic arises when discussing the media. In most circles, people believes what they read and see on TV. That is why we Conservatives don't trust the media for providing the truth...because we know who we are and the media is mis characterizing conservatives...