Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Sep 26, 2016 - 01:06pm PT
|
The media used to put objectivity above all else. The public trusted the media to give fair and balanced coverage.
Exactly. Gallup shows public trust of the media to report news objectively at an all-time low.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx
Rather than assessing why the mistrust exists, the media continue to act as if only irrational people (i.e. non-Democrats) mistrust them. Even among Democrats, though, only 51% have "great deal" or "fair" trust in the media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly." Among independents it's only 33%, and among Republicans, it's 14%.
Bernie supporters and non-Trump Republicans complained about the reporting during the primaries, and supporters of Clinton and Trump both feel that the media report about the candidates unfairly. The media largely ignore the complaints, then can't seem to figure out why people don't subscribe to print media, or watch or listen to broadcast media, as much as they used to.
I personally think the internet makes it harder to hide stories that hurt the reporters' points of view, but most media outlets continue to treat the internet as if it consisted solely of lies, and therefore can remain ignored. While there's plenty of noise there, there's lots of signal, too, and the American public seems to have gotten better at separating the two. I just wish more media outlets would put more effort into reporting the news "fully, accurately and fairly."
John
|
|
Larry Nelson
Social climber
|
|
Sep 26, 2016 - 03:48pm PT
|
"No year during George W. Bush's, Bill Clinton's, George H.W. Bush's or Ronald Reagan's presidency was as safe as 2015," according to a summary prepared by the project leaders. "Violent crime in the U.S. is near historic lows and the country is dramatically safer than it was 45 years ago, 25 years ago, and 10 years ago."
Did we just pass some massive and trans-formative gun control law that I didn't notice?
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
Sep 26, 2016 - 06:26pm PT
|
Did we just pass some massive and trans-formative gun control law that I didn't notice?
I doubt that "we" did. I don't think anyone did.
Since you're apparently interested in guns, from the report.
Firearms were used in 71.5 percent of the nation’s murders, 40.8 percent of robberies, and 24.2 percent of aggravated assaults.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
Sep 27, 2016 - 02:55am PT
|
inner citys have a morality problem that annother gun law could not fix. most of their guns are allready illeagle.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Sep 27, 2016 - 03:25am PT
|
tradmanclimbs wrote:
most of their guns are allready illeagle.
Is the "Illeagle" the American version of the Desert Eagle .50?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Sep 27, 2016 - 03:44am PT
|
JEleazarian wrote:
Exactly. Gallup shows public trust of the media to report news objectively at an all-time low.
Rather than assessing why the mistrust exists, the media continue to act as if only irrational people (i.e. non-Democrats) mistrust them.
I personally think the internet makes it harder to hide stories that hurt the reporters' points of view, but most media outlets continue to treat the internet as if it consisted solely of lies, and therefore can remain ignored.
My assessment of the downfall of quality, hard-hitting, investigative journalism as well as simply reporting the news has to do with a couple of key factors (in order):
1) The development of the 24-hour news channel.
2) The need to sensationalize the news to maintain an audience for 24 hours (not to say that sensationalism was not part of the news prior to 24-hour cable news networks, but much less so).
3) The corporate buyout of the media, which exacerbated point #2. For free access to the airwaves, TV channels were required to provide a certain amount of news (which NBC, ABC, and CBS still do to a certain extent). Cable news doesn't have this requirement and the corporations owning the major 24-hour news channels have decided that only sensationalism (and conflict) make revenues, not any form of quality journalism.
4) The Internet. Print and TV media failed to see the dead-end future of their business models in the late 1990s, and so failed to establish the right subscription or advertising model in the early years of the Internet before everyone became accustomed to getting information for free. This 4th point further exacerbates point 2. Now both TV and print focus solely on sensationalism and crises to try to capture an audience.
Other than Fox, I don't mistrust the media per se, but I no longer look to what is commonly referred to as the MSM (cable or network) for any kind of actual news and analysis.
Personally I read journals like Courrier International, which does a good job in separating the wheat from the chaff in worldwide news sources. Magazines like Vanity Fair have also found what looks to be a sustainable model with just the right mix of NYC high-society goings-on and quality investigative journalism. Advertisers clearly line up to work with them, which is probably what allows VF to send people overseas, to spend a year investigating a topic, etc.
Anyway, cheers.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Sep 29, 2016 - 04:39am PT
|
Now it's all about sensationalism... doing anything and everything to suck in viewers.
Well, as Degaine points out, unbridled free-market capitalism has [naturally] led to a corporate takeover of the fourth estate with all-to-predictable results. It's an inevitable outcome of the strident economic memes all right-leaning folk espouse.
Yet the Black Lives Matter movement is based on a lie. The idea that the United States is experiencing an epidemic of racially-driven police shootings is false — and dangerously so.
You're right, there is no 'epidemic' of racially-driven police shootings. Racially-driven police shootings have been 'built-in' to the system as a matter of course going back to the post-civil war days of Free Black, Irish and Italian immigrant police killings. Widespread, racially-driven police shootings are a fact and undeniable structural and institutional forms of racism which have always been with us and are only now seeing the light of day due to smart phones and the internet.
You or anyone else attempting to deny it is both sad and patently dishonest. If you lived in Boston, Philly, NYC, Baltimore, Chicago or St. Louis instead of lily-white Vermont you'd know just how stupid and ignorant your denials sound.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
Sep 29, 2016 - 04:52am PT
|
The bare facts of an event never make saleable news...
It takes a mind to make a story that is thought of as news.
It also takes a mind to create a view of any of these possible stories created.
Make you own news[stories] from the bare facts. Ask yourself, "Now what is a likely scenario from these bare facts?"
|
|
c wilmot
climber
|
|
Sep 29, 2016 - 08:47am PT
|
An unarmed white guy was shot dead by the police in vermont recently. Where is the outrage? Where is the black lives matters movements outage?
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
I find John Oliver annoying to listen to and would have preferred to read this vs. listen to him.
But he hits the nail on the head.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
Escopeta.. I saw that the other day and agree with you. Both on the annoying part and on his defining the issues. I'm not sure he hits it exactly on the head, but he does a good job. Hopefully people can get past his annoying nature and hear what he has to say.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
That was a strong video.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
Dude in Charlott had a gun. the guys last weerk in cali had guns. BLM still riots for the bad guys and lets the little children die in vain.......
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
John Ehrlichman on creating the "war on drugs":
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin.
And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities.
We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Margaret Holcomb, an 81-year-old woman from Amherst, Mass., grew a single marijuana plant in her garden, tucked away behind the raspberries. She used it to ease the ailments of old age: glaucoma, arthritis and the occasional sleepless night.
She hadn't tried to get a medical marijuana card, because of the challenges of getting a doctor's approval, she told the Daily Hampshire Gazette. And traveling to the dispensary in the next town over and paying for marijuana grown by someone else would be too costly, she feared.
So on the afternoon of Sept. 21, a team of Massachusetts State Police and Massachusetts National Guard troops sent a helicopter, several vehicles, and a handful of troopers to Holcomb's house to chop down the plant and haul it away in a pickup truck.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|