How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

[iceberg]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

 

[william the wie]

It's a question of declining ad revenue and a generally innumerate press. investigative reporting costs more money than tear and print. Only Bloomberg and Reuters can afford to do investigative reporting as a sideline to providing information to their terminal renters

 

[Slade3200]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

 

[Oddball]

Some reporters lack the self-awareness and objectivity to understand they are revealing themselves when they selectively apply labels in a one-sided fashion. They are servicing a narrative, even if unintentionally.

The left is utterly lacking in self-awareness...Been saying that for a long time now.

 

[iceberg]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

 

[Slade3200]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

I dont know about you but for myself and most people in my circle we take all the media noise with a grain of salt... have for years. I use it to learn about world events but when it comes to politics it’s always been a spin factory.

I think most the spin gets used by partisans to try and progress their agenda. Not sure how that gets stopped. Honesty and integrity seems to have been replaced with buzz, popularity and ratings

 

[Flopper]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

Generally people seek affirmation of their beliefs. They don't like being told they are wrong. So someone that upholds progressive ideology is not going to spend a lot of time watching Fox News commentators tell him he's wrong. The same holds true for conservatives. We love to have people tell us we're right so we're much less likely to question someone that shares our beliefs. It's that simple.

 

[Crepitus]

why do we let "media" do this?

So they can sell us their expensive survival food?

 

[Slade3200]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

Generally people seek affirmation of their beliefs. They don't like being told they are wrong. So someone that upholds progressive ideology is not going to spend a lot of time watching Fox News commentators tell him he's wrong. The same holds true for conservatives. We love to have people tell us we're right so we're much less likely to question someone that shares our beliefs. It's that simple.

Maybe it’s just me but I’m pretty liberal minded and I would never vote for a guy like Trump but I listen to Fox News more than the others and conservative radio in the car, mostly Beck and Levine, sometimes Hannity and Buck if I want a laugh. I don’t feel threatened by opposing ideas, I like to hear what narratives are out there. Especially those contrary to my beliefs

 

[Flopper]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

Generally people seek affirmation of their beliefs. They don't like being told they are wrong. So someone that upholds progressive ideology is not going to spend a lot of time watching Fox News commentators tell him he's wrong. The same holds true for conservatives. We love to have people tell us we're right so we're much less likely to question someone that shares our beliefs. It's that simple.

Maybe it’s just me but I’m pretty liberal minded and I would never vote for a guy like Trump but I listen to Fox News more than the others and conservative radio in the car, mostly Beck and Levine, sometimes Hannity and Buck if I want a laugh. I don’t feel threatened by opposing ideas, I like to hear what narratives are out there. Especially those contrary to my beliefs

I think you are in the minority. Both progressives and conservative I know would never be caught watching or listening to media that biased against their beliefs. As my daughter puts it, I would never watch or listen to that shit. It pisses me off and makes my blood pressure rise. Probably conservatives patronized more national liberal media outlets because there are more of them that conservatives outlets.

 

[Slade3200]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

Generally people seek affirmation of their beliefs. They don't like being told they are wrong. So someone that upholds progressive ideology is not going to spend a lot of time watching Fox News commentators tell him he's wrong. The same holds true for conservatives. We love to have people tell us we're right so we're much less likely to question someone that shares our beliefs. It's that simple.

Maybe it’s just me but I’m pretty liberal minded and I would never vote for a guy like Trump but I listen to Fox News more than the others and conservative radio in the car, mostly Beck and Levine, sometimes Hannity and Buck if I want a laugh. I don’t feel threatened by opposing ideas, I like to hear what narratives are out there. Especially those contrary to my beliefs

I think you are in the minority. Both progressives and conservative I know would never be caught watching or listening to media that biased against their beliefs. As my daughter puts it, I would never watch or listen to that shit. It pisses me off and makes my blood pressure rise. Probably conservatives patronized more national liberal media outlets because there are more of them that conservatives outlets.

Perhaps you’re right, I don’t know. I try not to compare myself with others. To each their own

 

[iceberg]

We let them do this because of constitutional freedom of speech. I don’t thunk regulation is the answer, I think accountability is. Take uber for example... drivers and passengers get ratings and are held accountable for their performance. Would be great to have a similar system with our media, where reporters, news programs, publications and network all get rated, fact checked and held accountable for what they report. I do agree that something needs to be done

ok - good point. but my premise was more why do we believe them?

that's on us.

Generally people seek affirmation of their beliefs. They don't like being told they are wrong. So someone that upholds progressive ideology is not going to spend a lot of time watching Fox News commentators tell him he's wrong. The same holds true for conservatives. We love to have people tell us we're right so we're much less likely to question someone that shares our beliefs. It's that simple.

Maybe it’s just me but I’m pretty liberal minded and I would never vote for a guy like Trump but I listen to Fox News more than the others and conservative radio in the car, mostly Beck and Levine, sometimes Hannity and Buck if I want a laugh. I don’t feel threatened by opposing ideas, I like to hear what narratives are out there. Especially those contrary to my beliefs

I think you are in the minority. Both progressives and conservative I know would never be caught watching or listening to media that biased against their beliefs. As my daughter puts it, I would never watch or listen to that shit. It pisses me off and makes my blood pressure rise. Probably conservatives patronized more national liberal media outlets because there are more of them that conservatives outlets.

Perhaps you’re right, I don’t know. I try not to compare myself with others. To each their own

i don't listen to any of the talking heads on either side. to me it's all:

1) the other side is going to be your doom
2) here's what you should fear
3) here's a very stupid person who claims to be a R or L minded person and look how stupid they are

both sides love to take the worst of the other side and hold that up as what the entire side is like while pushing only the best in our own side.

we really need to get over that.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We "let" them by continuing to watch.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

 

[iceberg]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

We "let" them by continuing to watch.

and by posting their inflammatory headlines in here going ANY DAY NOW on both sides.

 

[iceberg]

not completely related, but back to sharyl and her court case against the DOJ for spying. the difference between when the FBI admitted it vs this time?

they didn't have a warrant to spy on her.

 

[Darkwind]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

She has an outstanding TEDx talk about something very similar to this.

 

[iceberg]

How Media Narratives Became More Important Than Facts

one of my most respected writers strikes again. my contention has long been the media reports on what people say, not do. in time this becomes "fact" because enough people re-report the initial report as suddenly it makes the rounds and the lie becomes true because enough people say it.

for example - her own words:

"A case in point: the smear that was promulgated when I left CBS. It was often incorrectly reported that I told CBS management I was quitting due to liberal media bias. That false story turned out to be convenient for both political sides, and largely survives today. It simply wasn’t rooted in fact. And I don’t recall reporters even asking me whether it was true. Once a few articles reported that it was, others simply copied the claim and adopted it as if established fact, eventually without attribution. Now there would be no point in trying to clarify it. After all, Wikipedia says it’s true. No going back from that."
==========

no one ever asked her why she left. they made assumptions and ran with their own answers, not hers.

why do we let "media" do this?

She has an outstanding TEDx talk about something very similar to this.

yep. she did a lot of research and traced it all back to google.

while google may have taken advantage of human nature, it's still on "we the people" for falling for this shit time and again. we know better, we just don't WANT to know better. so we make up wall of fake news to hide behind while we keep fighting our own battles of insecurity.