The Collapse of Journalism in America

[Pogo]

This all began off two factors -- (a) the transition of News to a commercial profit-making enterprise, and (b) Lush Rimjob.

The former cheapens what's defined as news, not at all ameliorated by its being controlled by an increasingly shrinking number of corporations with whose interests objective News conflicts, i.e. if you own a television network and also make nuclear power generators and war machines ---- then your network is not going to be trustworthily reporting on nuclear power and war. In the old daze the networks were still commercial but the News was treated as a public service pill they would swallow and operated at a loss, subsidized by the mindless sitcoms that followed.

And (b) served to bring about the Eliminationist polarization that we swim in today, the soup where one's adversaries become dehumanized creatures to be rounded up and exterminated. We see it every day on this board.

The money factor plays a role but the culprit is the culture. It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard.

It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard


Assuming that you actually attended an institution of higher learning, do you have PERSONAL experience with this, or are you just taking some hyperventilating propagandist's word for it?

Apparently he believes that people are just robot-sponges that will parrot anything they're told --- except somehow he alone is immune to it.

Isn't that special.

 

[Pogo]

A close horse race sells. Reporting "Clinton is winning easily" means lower ratings and less money. Hence, journalists will keep trying to help Trump.

Astute point. Any kind of conflict sells too, which means Rump all by himself, with no opponents whatsoever, makes news with his own mouth. Even if it buries him in the polls it's still newsworthy and still sells papers. And he knows it -- it's how he's always operated.

As we've noted in the past, if it wasn't for the media and its milking whatever it can for attention to sell to advertisers ---- nobody would even know who Donald Trump is and he certainly wouldn't be a political candidate. Rump sells because he's a giant clown. And he knows how that works as well as anyone does. That's exactly why he plays the role.

 

[IcebergSlim]

You don't need to go any further than the W Post pursuing Nixon and Watergate while Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse. Not only did the WP, etc., give this admin a pass on that but Bernstein is actually cheering for Hillary.

Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse.

This would be an article of faith, I assume...

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

 

[IcebergSlim]

This all began off two factors -- (a) the transition of News to a commercial profit-making enterprise, and (b) Lush Rimjob.

The former cheapens what's defined as news, not at all ameliorated by its being controlled by an increasingly shrinking number of corporations with whose interests objective News conflicts, i.e. if you own a television network and also make nuclear power generators and war machines ---- then your network is not going to be trustworthily reporting on nuclear power and war. In the old daze the networks were still commercial but the News was treated as a public service pill they would swallow and operated at a loss, subsidized by the mindless sitcoms that followed.

And (b) served to bring about the Eliminationist polarization that we swim in today, the soup where one's adversaries become dehumanized creatures to be rounded up and exterminated. We see it every day on this board.

The money factor plays a role but the culprit is the culture. It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard.

It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard


Assuming that you actually attended an institution of higher learning, do you have PERSONAL experience with this, or are you just taking some hyperventilating propagandist's word for it?

Apparently he believes that people are just robot-sponges that will parrot anything they're told --- except somehow he alone is immune to it.

Isn't that special.

Guess who spends suspenseful moments waiting for Drudge to refresh..........

 

[TooTall]

Great article. Since when did it become an acceptable professional guideline to be a partisan hack for one party or against a candidate as badly as ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and others have become for the Clinton campaign and against Trump?

Why should anyone trust any of these snooze organizations for reliable information about anything any more given their inability to remain objective at all?

http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/

But something else happening before our eyes is almost as important: the complete collapse of American journalism as we know it.

The frenzy to bury Trump is not limited to the Clinton campaign and the Obama White House. They are working hand-in-hand with what was considered the cream of the nation’s news organizations.

The shameful display of naked partisanship by the elite media is unlike anything seen in modern America.

The largest broadcast networks — CBS, NBC and ABC — and major newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post have jettisoned all pretense of fair play. Their fierce determination to keep Trump out of the Oval Office has no precedent.

Indeed, no foreign enemy, no terror group, no native criminal gang, suffers the daily beating that Trump does. The mad mullahs of Iran, who call America the Great Satan and vow to wipe Israel off the map, are treated gently by comparison.

By torching its remaining credibility in service of Clinton, the mainstream media’s reputations will likely never recover, nor will the standards. No future producer, editor, reporter or anchor can be expected to meet a test of fairness when that standard has been trashed in such willful and blatant fashion.

How's that different than the NY Post doing the same thing to Clinton?

The basic difference is that ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN, ( I won't even mention MSNBC) reach millions of viewers 24/7 while a few hundred thousand people may read the NY Post.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The money factor plays a role but the culprit is the culture. It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard.

There is no "left bent" in simple profiteering. As I keep telling people, nobody makes a dime off of pushing an ideology. They make dimes and dollars from ensnaring eyeballs to sell them commercials. And that means the objective is whatever will catch attention.

That's why most of our "news" consists of freak shows. They sell.

The NYT is the template and the have very little advertising in conspicuous places.
You're a shill.

I get the NYT and the first section is chock full of ads starting on pages 2 and 3. Some ads are full page.

How many on the front page?
What page is visible on the stand?
You're a shill, too. And an apologist for corruption.

False comparison. You're talking about newspapers -- a different format where you actually purchase the artifact by the day.

My assessment was about electronic media, specifically broadcast, the objective of which is to ensnare viewers/listeners by whatever method they can, including news theater, sports theater, music theater, whatever works -- so they can then deliver those eyes and ears to an advertiser. And they know, and have known for a very long time, that salacious pandering-to-emotions bullshit will sell those eyeballs and ears and keep them there for the commercial.

But the newspapers do the same thing, via a different format. That's where the old adage "if it bleeds it leads" comes from --- newspaper publishing. That content directly affects how many papers you can sell. That's how Rupert Murdoch made his fortune........... selling sleazy tabloids around the world.

The thread is about journalism.
You're excusing left wing propaganda.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

This all began off two factors -- (a) the transition of News to a commercial profit-making enterprise, and (b) Lush Rimjob.

The former cheapens what's defined as news, not at all ameliorated by its being controlled by an increasingly shrinking number of corporations with whose interests objective News conflicts, i.e. if you own a television network and also make nuclear power generators and war machines ---- then your network is not going to be trustworthily reporting on nuclear power and war. In the old daze the networks were still commercial but the News was treated as a public service pill they would swallow and operated at a loss, subsidized by the mindless sitcoms that followed.

And (b) served to bring about the Eliminationist polarization that we swim in today, the soup where one's adversaries become dehumanized creatures to be rounded up and exterminated. We see it every day on this board.

The money factor plays a role but the culprit is the culture. It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard.

It begins with academia teaching (propagating) a left bent as standard


Assuming that you actually attended an institution of higher learning, do you have PERSONAL experience with this, or are you just taking some hyperventilating propagandist's word for it?

Apparently he believes that people are just robot-sponges that will parrot anything they're told --- except somehow he alone is immune to it.

Isn't that special.

Speak for yourself, Polly. You're the one excusing the propaganda.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You don't need to go any further than the W Post pursuing Nixon and Watergate while Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse. Not only did the WP, etc., give this admin a pass on that but Bernstein is actually cheering for Hillary.

Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse.

This would be an article of faith, I assume...

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

 

[Bush92]

Great article. Since when did it become an acceptable professional guideline to be a partisan hack for one party or against a candidate as badly as ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and others have become for the Clinton campaign and against Trump?

Why should anyone trust any of these snooze organizations for reliable information about anything any more given their inability to remain objective at all?

http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/

But something else happening before our eyes is almost as important: the complete collapse of American journalism as we know it.

The frenzy to bury Trump is not limited to the Clinton campaign and the Obama White House. They are working hand-in-hand with what was considered the cream of the nation’s news organizations.

The shameful display of naked partisanship by the elite media is unlike anything seen in modern America.

The largest broadcast networks — CBS, NBC and ABC — and major newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post have jettisoned all pretense of fair play. Their fierce determination to keep Trump out of the Oval Office has no precedent.

Indeed, no foreign enemy, no terror group, no native criminal gang, suffers the daily beating that Trump does. The mad mullahs of Iran, who call America the Great Satan and vow to wipe Israel off the map, are treated gently by comparison.

By torching its remaining credibility in service of Clinton, the mainstream media’s reputations will likely never recover, nor will the standards. No future producer, editor, reporter or anchor can be expected to meet a test of fairness when that standard has been trashed in such willful and blatant fashion.

All these television news people and newspaper reporters and editors have ever done is go to Journalism school. They want to run news like a college campus newspaper. People don't even care about most of the shit they spew. It's not what middle class cares about. It's like cable news is reporting from Grenwich Village or Nancy Pelosi's district out in the left coast.

 

[Bush92]

Great article. Since when did it become an acceptable professional guideline to be a partisan hack for one party or against a candidate as badly as ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and others have become for the Clinton campaign and against Trump?

Why should anyone trust any of these snooze organizations for reliable information about anything any more given their inability to remain objective at all?

http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/

But something else happening before our eyes is almost as important: the complete collapse of American journalism as we know it.

The frenzy to bury Trump is not limited to the Clinton campaign and the Obama White House. They are working hand-in-hand with what was considered the cream of the nation’s news organizations.

The shameful display of naked partisanship by the elite media is unlike anything seen in modern America.

The largest broadcast networks — CBS, NBC and ABC — and major newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post have jettisoned all pretense of fair play. Their fierce determination to keep Trump out of the Oval Office has no precedent.

Indeed, no foreign enemy, no terror group, no native criminal gang, suffers the daily beating that Trump does. The mad mullahs of Iran, who call America the Great Satan and vow to wipe Israel off the map, are treated gently by comparison.

By torching its remaining credibility in service of Clinton, the mainstream media’s reputations will likely never recover, nor will the standards. No future producer, editor, reporter or anchor can be expected to meet a test of fairness when that standard has been trashed in such willful and blatant fashion.

So the NYP writes a very biased article about journalism being biased. That's rich.

Trump brings his negative press on to himself. The articles write themselves. Now run along and be a good little Republican and remember that Republicans believe that people should take responsibility for their actions and their words, remember? That goes for Mr. Trump too

So when they twist his words that's him bringing on himself? If the guy farts headlines read, "Trump Spews Geenhouse Gases Into Environment!" Guy has been treated completely wrong by mainstream liberal corporate media and their Clinton handlers.

 

[IcebergSlim]

You don't need to go any further than the W Post pursuing Nixon and Watergate while Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse. Not only did the WP, etc., give this admin a pass on that but Bernstein is actually cheering for Hillary.

Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse.

This would be an article of faith, I assume...

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

 

[Bush92]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/22/u...rigged-election-and-the-politics-of-race.html
NY Times accusing Trump of playing race card. Just fucking unbelievable.

 

[whitehall]

The concept of journalism probably collapsed during or shortly after FDR suspended the 1st Amendment for the duration of WW2. "Journalists" should have at least questioned the use of two Nuclear Bombs on a defenseless country which allegedly was looking for surrender terms but they dubbed the little former bean counting senator "give 'em hell Harry". "Journalists" should have been covering Truman's war in Korea but they gave up and called it the "Forgotten War" and gave Truman and his failed General a Tickertape parade after they lost 50,000 Troops in a three year quagmire. Walter Cronkite was a left wing liberal but he was voted the "most trusted man in America" when the only information available to Americans was slanted left. Two reporters brought down the Nixon administration with "information" supplied by an unverified informant who wasn't identified until he was dead. NBC's Dan Rather tried to skew the results of a presidential election with fake documents.

 

[2aguy]

The concept of journalism probably collapsed during or shortly after FDR suspended the 1st Amendment for the duration of WW2. "Journalists" should have at least questioned the use of two Nuclear Bombs on a defenseless country which allegedly was looking for surrender terms but they dubbed the little former bean counting senator "give 'em hell Harry". "Journalists" should have been covering Truman's war in Korea but they gave up and called it the "Forgotten War" and gave Truman and his failed General a Tickertape parade after they lost 50,000 Troops in a three year quagmire. Walter Cronkite was a left wing liberal but he was voted the "most trusted man in America" when the only information available to Americans was slanted left. Two reporters brought down the Nixon administration with "information" supplied by an unverified informant who wasn't identified until he was dead. NBC's Dan Rather tried to skew the results of a presidential election with fake documents.

Japan was going to fight to the end in a war they started.....dropping the bombs saved American lives....get over it already.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You don't need to go any further than the W Post pursuing Nixon and Watergate while Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse. Not only did the WP, etc., give this admin a pass on that but Bernstein is actually cheering for Hillary.

Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse.

This would be an article of faith, I assume...

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

Not at all. A corrupt event in the name of reelection enhancement complete with attempted cover-up. What makes Benghazi so much worse is that it led to the deaths of Americans.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse.

This would be an article of faith, I assume...

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

Not at all. A corrupt event in the name of reelection enhancement complete with attempted cover-up. What makes Benghazi so much worse is that it led to the deaths of Americans.

Uh.......which of the elements of the Benghazi myth which so excites you PRECEDED the attack?

 

[guno]

This has to be a new record, the trumpkins making excuses why he lost 3 month before the election!!

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You're a Nixon apologist.

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

Not at all. A corrupt event in the name of reelection enhancement complete with attempted cover-up. What makes Benghazi so much worse is that it led to the deaths of Americans.

Uh.......which of the elements of the Benghazi myth which so excites you PRECEDED the attack?

So you're a Nixon apologist.

 

[IcebergSlim]

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

Not at all. A corrupt event in the name of reelection enhancement complete with attempted cover-up. What makes Benghazi so much worse is that it led to the deaths of Americans.

Uh.......which of the elements of the Benghazi myth which so excites you PRECEDED the attack?

So you're a Nixon apologist.

We already covered that jive, bot.....and moved on......

 

[JimBowie1958]

How does that "follow"?

By excusing Benghazi. It's a figurative parallel.

The comment I responded to Boldly Asserted that "Benghazi and its cover-up are exponentially worse."

Which is manifestly insane.....

Not at all. A corrupt event in the name of reelection enhancement complete with attempted cover-up. What makes Benghazi so much worse is that it led to the deaths of Americans.

Uh.......which of the elements of the Benghazi myth which so excites you PRECEDED the attack?

So you're a Nixon apologist.

roflmao, good catch, dude