POLL: What do you expect from the major media?

[Mac1958]

Let's first define "major media" fairly specifically: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times.

From what I've seen here on several threads, it appears we don't expect our major media to provide a comprehensive, objective look at the news any more. Lefties defend CNN and MSBNC's bias by attacking FOX. Righties do the opposite. Neither side appears to claim at this point that their favored sources are unbiased.

Me, I'd like to see a comprehensive look at the news, and I'll draw my own conclusions and seek out my own details.
.

 

[Disir]

Well, if I had my druthers then it would be facts and I can do my own analysis.

Media conglomerates. Same problem that we have had for well over 20 years. These are not independent or even examples of well thought out journalism. We keep expecting these people to deliver and they will never do so because...........media conglomerates. They don't have to.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Let's first define "major media" fairly specifically: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times.

From what I've seen here on several threads, it appears we don't expect our major media to provide a comprehensive, objective look at the news any more. Lefties defend CNN and MSBNC's bias by attacking FOX. Righties do the opposite. Neither side appears to claim at this point that their favored sources are unbiased.

Me, I'd like to see a comprehensive look at the news, and I'll draw my own conclusions and seek out my own details.
.

/-----/ Your question is a bit misleading. By "expect" do you mean prefer or what I think they will do? By expect, I know they will twist and distort the news to fit their agenda. I prefer for them to report the facts so I can decide for myself.

 

[Mac1958]

Well, if I had my druthers then it would be facts and I can do my own analysis.

Media conglomerates. Same problem that we have had for well over 20 years. These are not independent or even examples of well thought out journalism. We keep expecting these people to deliver and they will never do so because...........medial conglomerates. They don't have to.

I certainly understand that angle, but I'm curious about what people are actually looking for. A conglomerate is usually going to serve up what it thinks the people want to serve its bottom line. It appears to me that "the people" prefer to be told what to think.
.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I expect them to cherry pick the 'facts' they can spin into making their side look good or the other look bad.

I fully expect them to ignore the rest of the facts that don't fit the spin.

ex; women make less for the same work.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Let's first define "major media" fairly specifically: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times.

From what I've seen here on several threads, it appears we don't expect our major media to provide a comprehensive, objective look at the news any more. Lefties defend CNN and MSBNC's bias by attacking FOX. Righties do the opposite. Neither side appears to claim at this point that their favored sources are unbiased.

Me, I'd like to see a comprehensive look at the news, and I'll draw my own conclusions and seek out my own details.
.

you asked what we 'expect', not want.

I 'want' msn to be replaced by Naked News.

 

[Windparadox]

`
Objectivity amongst the corporately owned media, really no longer exists. More people are getting their news online.
`

 

[Mac1958]

`Objectivity amongst the corporately owned media, really no longer exists. More people are getting their news online.`

Do you think that's healthy or unhealthy for a democracy?
.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Let's first define "major media" fairly specifically: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times.

From what I've seen here on several threads, it appears we don't expect our major media to provide a comprehensive, objective look at the news any more. Lefties defend CNN and MSBNC's bias by attacking FOX. Righties do the opposite. Neither side appears to claim at this point that their favored sources are unbiased.

Me, I'd like to see a comprehensive look at the news, and I'll draw my own conclusions and seek out my own details.
.

I prefer the unbias form of news but let be factual news reporting has turn into tabloid news and most people prefer tabloid news and bias opinions than actual unbias news reporting...

 

[Mac1958]

Let's first define "major media" fairly specifically: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times.

From what I've seen here on several threads, it appears we don't expect our major media to provide a comprehensive, objective look at the news any more. Lefties defend CNN and MSBNC's bias by attacking FOX. Righties do the opposite. Neither side appears to claim at this point that their favored sources are unbiased.

Me, I'd like to see a comprehensive look at the news, and I'll draw my own conclusions and seek out my own details.
.

I prefer the unbias form of news but let be factual news reporting has turn into tabloid news and most people prefer tabloid news and bias opinions than actual unbias news reporting...

I do think that's the case.

Obviously, for some, they like it because they don't care about hearing the whole story. But for others, maybe it's just more interesting than objectivity and their attention span requires it. Seriously.
.

 

[Two Thumbs]

`
Objectivity amongst the corporately owned media, really no longer exists. More people are getting their news online.
`

I'm 51 y/o, I can assure you that I have never heard objective news.

 

[fncceo]

These days? Nothing.

Walter Cronkite is dead and news died with him.

 

[JoeB131]

Ahhh, another Pompous Mac being self-righteous thread.

Okay, as I explained on the other thread, this is about "Corn Flakes"

You see, there used to be a time when journalism used to be considered a public service. Networks didn't make money on their nightly news program, they were just there to report the news. If you wanted to sell corn flakes, that what Gilligan's Island was for, and if Gilligan wasn't selling enough corn flakes, cancel him and put something else on! The news was expected to take a loss. This philosophy and why they came to hate it in boardrooms were savagely satirized in the movie Network.

To be fair, though, Howard Beale comes off relatively sedate compared to Maddow or Hannity.

So what happened was that the networks decided that news was going to be about making money! How do you make money? Attract an audience! How do you attract an audience? Figure out why people watch your show and give them more of that. And like any other business, cut expenses like actual reporters going out doing investigations.

So yes, Pompous Mac will get on here and lament that Fox and MSNBC and CNN will give their audiences what they want. (I think of the three, CNN is trying to actually do journalism, but they are biased.)

I do think that journalism has a left wing bent overall. You ask a kid why they become journalism majors, before 90% of them end up serving coffee at Starbucks, and they'll tell you it's because they want to change the world.

Nor is this entirely a new thing. Hey, you all remember when Walter Cronkite got up there and denounced the Vietnam War as "lost" after the Tet Offensive? It didn't matter that the Viet Cong had been utterly smashed, Cronkite said the war was lost, and he was the most trusted man in America.

when we gave the media THAT kind of power, now you act surprised when the corporations that own the media abuse it?

So here's what I do. I read a lot of right wing sources, and then I read left wing sources. I did this when I used to be a Republican, and do that now. Kind of see what everyone is thinking.

 

[Mac1958]

`
Objectivity amongst the corporately owned media, really no longer exists. More people are getting their news online.
`

I'm 51 y/o, I can assure you that I have never heard objective news.

Certainly part of the problem is the absolute proliferation of "news" "sources", beginning with cable TV many years ago and then the internet.

I guess this was inevitable. But I don't know how a democracy is supposed to function when its population exists in separate realities.
.

 

[Two Thumbs]

most people want to be told what they were told to think is the right way to think.

it's why I stopped watching fox and only listen to npr.

I avoid being told what cons are supposed to think and learn what leftist are told to think and develop my views based on their obvious spin.



fun fact; npr has a 90 second science set, one day they announce that independent minded people are more evolved.


let that sink in.

 

[Two Thumbs]

`
Objectivity amongst the corporately owned media, really no longer exists. More people are getting their news online.
`

I'm 51 y/o, I can assure you that I have never heard objective news.

Certainly part of the problem is the absolute proliferation of "news" "sources", beginning with cable TV many years ago and then the internet.

I guess this was inevitable. But I don't know how a democracy is supposed to function when its population exists in separate realities.
.

well fortunately we are a republic, and the most important aspects of our country can't be voted on.

 

[fncceo]

Cronkite said the war was lost,

So, you’re saying he was wrong? We won Vietnam?

 

[Mac1958]

most people want to be told what they were told to think is the right way to think. it's why I stopped watching fox and only listen to npr.
I avoid being told what cons are supposed to think and learn what leftist are told to think and develop my views based on their obvious spin. fun fact; npr has a 90 second science set, one day they announce that independent minded people are more evolved. let that sink in.

It seems that, lately, I'm seeing more and more people admitting how biased "the news" has become. I wonder if that's because it's just so blatant that they can no longer deny it.

There are still a few hardcore holdouts, but they're essentially lost and swallowed by the Borg at this point.
.

 

[Disir]

Well, if I had my druthers then it would be facts and I can do my own analysis.

Media conglomerates. Same problem that we have had for well over 20 years. These are not independent or even examples of well thought out journalism. We keep expecting these people to deliver and they will never do so because...........medial conglomerates. They don't have to.

I certainly understand that angle, but I'm curious about what people are actually looking for. A conglomerate is usually going to serve up what it thinks the people want to serve its bottom line. It appears to me that "the people" prefer to be told what to think.
.

No. They do not. You need to take a look at who sits on the board because the vast majority of them also sit on the boards of other businesses/organizations. They determine what is seen and what view point will be promoted.

 

[JoeB131]

These days? Nothing.

Walter Cronkite is dead and news died with him.

Walter "We've lost Vietnam" Cronkite? That Walter Cronkite?