Media's Omissions

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by insein
The media is supposed to REPORT the news and we decide. Hense FOX's "We report, you decide" motto. It is most certainly NOT to swing the news to one side or another. If the news only reported good things, i'd be weary of the info. If it only reported bad things (much like everyone except FOX is doing now) i'd be weary of the info.

That is my problem with the media these days. They report in their opinion what we should see. FOX reports every side so that we can decide what we think.

Actually, insein, the media is supposed to give news and opinion(editorials anyone?).

The problem is that too often they confuse one for the other...

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by menewa
Of course FOX can do and say whatever it wants. My problem is how much can you trust a news station that must reiterate the fact that it's fair and balanced a thousand times a day. That's the type of strategy used by the insane ruler of North Korea.
And of course I used opinions in my post, do you think this is an objective message board?

What you should be asking is how much can you trust a news station that cant honestly say its fair and balanced.

 

[menewa]

Originally posted by Kathianne
I'll check out your fair link. here's what the other was about:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7304

That's an interesting story. I've always been upset by demonstrators use their children as a selling point. Last year when I was covering the anti-war demos in Raleigh, NC. Lot's of parents would have their young kids carrying picket signs and banging on drums. It was pretty weird.
However, it also just might make children more politically active and involved when they get older. I mean, the kids I saw were having a blast, even if they didn't really understand what was going on. Considering most of today's youth think news and politics is the ultimate bore, something needs to be done to perk children's interest in their future. But I agree, brainwashing a child to follow one narrow political path is disparaging to think about. Reminds me of Nazism.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by menewa

"Lot's of parents would have their young kids carrying picket signs and banging on drums. It was pretty weird.
However, it also just might make children more politically active and involved when they get older. I mean, the kids I saw were having a blast, even if they didn't really understand what was going on. Considering most of today's youth think news and politics is the ultimate bore, something needs to be done to perk children's interest in their future. But I agree, brainwashing a child to follow one narrow political path is disparaging to think about. Reminds me of Nazism."

I 'get' what you are saying, but do you? Activists without understanding are just anarchists. There is no soul. Shoot, half the time the parents don't know what they are spouting off on, but they'll throw their kids out there.

We need to teach our children. If one is of a 'liberal' bent, I guess that means that you teach your children that the state should care for them. In my mind, it means that children recognize that they need to become active, as volunteers and citizens. Seek office or support those that do, that they agree with. Saving the world is fine, but start with your flood plains and pollution in your own back yard.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by menewa
You're correct in saying it goes further than this. But that is a core responsibilty and that is the legacy of the press in this nation. Without the circulation of tons of pamphlets and newsletters amongst colonists condemning the British, the Revolutionary War may have never gotten the backing necessary to oust the Redcoats.

Good point.
I just wanted to clarify that there is a difference between what we want and what we get.
Poeple want news, opinion and gossip and journalists are paid for all three. We usually don't CALL them journalists when they are providing the latter, though.

Probably the greatest contribution the media make to society-- besides REPORTING local, national and international news on a daily basis-- is just what you said, vigilantly watching over BIG government and making sure that it represents the people and their wishes.

It is not enough to say that it is their job though. A job is something you get paid for...

 

[insein]

Originally posted by nycflasher
Actually, insein, the media is supposed to give news and opinion(editorials anyone?).

The problem is that too often they confuse one for the other...

I think you misundertsand. Im refering to standard news. Editorials are clearly stated as being opinionated. Thats the disclaimer right their. News is quite often opinionated based upon the anchor (Rather, Brokaw) without any disclaimer that the anchor is giving his or her opinion with the coverage. On shows like Rush, O'Reilly and Hannity, they clearly state "This is my opinion" every 5 minutes. News just bombards you with infromation and then spins it the way they see fit.

See the difference.

 

[proud_savagette]

I think you misundertsand. Im refering to standard news. Editorials are clearly stated as being opinionated. Thats the disclaimer right their. News is quite often opinionated based upon the anchor (Rather, Brokaw) without any disclaimer that the anchor is giving his or her opinion with the coverage. On shows like Rush, O'Reilly and Hannity, they clearly state "This is my opinion" every 5 minutes. News just bombards you with infromation and then spins it the way they see fit.

I agree with you. In Sacramento i can't even read the newspaper anymore because it's so incredibly SLANTED. My father cancelled the subscription right after an issue I'll never forget...besides a huge hate-Bush type article which made my father more angry than he is on tax day, there was another article that was screaming about how two marines killed two unidentified persons who would not i.d. themselves and blah blah blah, you know, making it sound like the marines were cruel, and that they should have let them get away. This was about one paragraph. The rest of the stupid article, which was seven or eight more long paragraphs, was about how some idiot french soldier shot and killed another fellow French soldier while cleaning his rifle. i was rather puzzled as to why there was the huge headline about us killing two unidentified persons when most of it was talking about the French...hmm..well, I suppose that they did so in order for the paper to fulfill it's "hate the conservatives" type of viewpoint. Or rather, its anti-america viewpoint...

 

[Annie]

Welcome proud_savagette, glad to see you here. Perhaps your father would like to join us also?

 

[proud_savagette]

Thanks.

Perhaps your father would like to join us also?

Hehehe. Most likely not. He is a workaholic and most likely wouldn't take time off from his precious job to type on a messageboard. Plus, his posts would be quite amusing. He once wrote to me that he "could not acquiesce to my request." I told him he was a copy cat, for I thought that he had gotten it from Pirates of the Caribbean, and he replied, "I regret to inform you that I have not yet viewed that film." Hehehe. He likes to talk to me about politics though. He has converted many liberal clients. Of course, I'm not sure how you view that, but I always view that as a good thing.