Why is the age of unbiased journalism over?

[Vanquish]

It's no secret that the age of unbiased journalism is over. Perhaps it was an anomaly in time, a hiccup in history. I wasn't old enough to have lived through Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite, but these two seem to be the bookends on the golden age of journalism.

I did a brief stint in the field, but are there any real journalism experts on this board? I'd really like to hear their thoughts on why objective journalism has gone the way of the Dodo.

Dont get me wrong...I get the basics- extreme opinions = better ratings and journalism is a business...most facts can be spun...today's public doesn't have the time or inclination to put work into what they're listening to...

I've heard that for most of modern history, news rags were knownto be biased...and you picked what rag you read based on your agreed bias...

but surely there's a way to go back to real, unbiased reporting? Is even the PBS NewsHour spun too much?

 

[uscitizen]

It's no secret that the age of unbiased journalism is over. Perhaps it was an anomaly in time, a hiccup in history. I wasn't old enough to have lived through Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite, but these two seem to be the bookends on the golden age of journalism.

I did a brief stint in the field, but are there any real journalism experts on this board? I'd really like to hear their thoughts on why objective journalism has gone the way of the Dodo.

Dont get me wrong...I get the basics- extreme opinions = better ratings and journalism is a business...most facts can be spun...today's public doesn't have the time or inclination to put work into what they're listening to...

I've heard that for most of modern history, news rags were knownto be biased...and you picked what rag you read based on your agreed bias...

but surely there's a way to go back to real, unbiased reporting? Is even the PBS NewsHour spun too much?

Ahh the PBS newshour has a slight conservative slant to it.

The age of unbiased journalism if over because "news" has become a contest of profit and corporatism in our age of bread and circuses.

Well that combined with the merging of corporatism and government.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's no secret that the age of unbiased journalism is over. Perhaps it was an anomaly in time, a hiccup in history. I wasn't old enough to have lived through Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite, but these two seem to be the bookends on the golden age of journalism.

I did a brief stint in the field, but are there any real journalism experts on this board? I'd really like to hear their thoughts on why objective journalism has gone the way of the Dodo.

Dont get me wrong...I get the basics- extreme opinions = better ratings and journalism is a business...most facts can be spun...today's public doesn't have the time or inclination to put work into what they're listening to...

I've heard that for most of modern history, news rags were knownto be biased...and you picked what rag you read based on your agreed bias...

but surely there's a way to go back to real, unbiased reporting? Is even the PBS NewsHour spun too much?

Ahh the PBS newshour has a slight conservative slant to it.

The age of unbiased journalism if over because "news" has become a contest of profit and corporatism in our age of bread and circuses.

Well that combined with the merging of corporatism and government.

Are you stupid? PBS has always maintained a liberal slant. the Bill Moyers show was a perfect example.

 

[uscitizen]

It's no secret that the age of unbiased journalism is over. Perhaps it was an anomaly in time, a hiccup in history. I wasn't old enough to have lived through Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite, but these two seem to be the bookends on the golden age of journalism.

I did a brief stint in the field, but are there any real journalism experts on this board? I'd really like to hear their thoughts on why objective journalism has gone the way of the Dodo.

Dont get me wrong...I get the basics- extreme opinions = better ratings and journalism is a business...most facts can be spun...today's public doesn't have the time or inclination to put work into what they're listening to...

I've heard that for most of modern history, news rags were knownto be biased...and you picked what rag you read based on your agreed bias...

but surely there's a way to go back to real, unbiased reporting? Is even the PBS NewsHour spun too much?

Ahh the PBS newshour has a slight conservative slant to it.

The age of unbiased journalism if over because "news" has become a contest of profit and corporatism in our age of bread and circuses.

Well that combined with the merging of corporatism and government.

Are you stupid? PBS has always maintained a liberal slant. the Bill Moyers show was a perfect example.

Umm, it is no longer the Bill Moyers show.

Many other shows on PBS do have a liberal slant, bbut not the News Hour.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Journalism has ALWAYS been biased, and generally liberal at that. Some only see it as biased now that their beloved Ossiah is no thet golden child.

 

[uscitizen]

I saw it when Bush was the golden child of the majority.

I saw it in the 60's.

I have seen it change.

 

[boedicca]

We never had unbiased journalism. Every media outlet has an editorial slant.

What we do have now is much more variety than in the days of the Big Three Networks, which puts such biases in relief when contrasted with other sources.

 

[uscitizen]

We never had unbiased journalism. Every media outlet has an editorial slant.

What we do have now is much more variety than in the days of the Big Three Networks, which puts such biases in relief when contrasted with other sources.

Yeah now they compete to see who can be the most sensationalistic.

I recall when the National Enquirer was a joke. Now it is pretty much mainstream journalism.
And I do not say that the Enquirer raised it's standards any.

 

[boedicca]

Uh...haven't you ever heard of Yellow Journalism?

It's been around for a Very Long Time.

 

[Avatar4321]

When the heck did we ever have unbiased journalism?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Ahh the PBS newshour has a slight conservative slant to it.

The age of unbiased journalism if over because "news" has become a contest of profit and corporatism in our age of bread and circuses.

Well that combined with the merging of corporatism and government.

Are you stupid? PBS has always maintained a liberal slant. the Bill Moyers show was a perfect example.

Umm, it is no longer the Bill Moyers show.

Many other shows on PBS do have a liberal slant, bbut not the News Hour.

Thanks for answering my question about whether you are stupid, seems that you are indeed stupid. Does the word "was" mean anything to you? As in the Bill Moyers Show was an example.


On Tuesday night, the PBS Newshour discussed the debate over gays in the military, but that didn’t mean there was a debate on the show. Instead, PBS booked three gay-promoting liberal academics and pollster Andrew Kohut to talk about "American attitudes evolving." The liberal hope and dream of suppressing religious speech against homosexuality was blatantly expressed by Georgetown history professor Michael Kazin:

Woodruff said absolutely nothing challenging Kazin on the notion of shaming (or legislating) the end of "public" speech against homosexuality – or the possibility that governments might begin punishing such speech by religious or political leaders.

PBS lets a professor mock the Christian right as despicable demonizers, and there is no rebuttal on a taxpayer-funded channel. Instead, viewers are simply treated to a litany of complaints about how homosexual lobbyists have yet to find the promised land of "robust integration" (read: forced acceptance) of gays until we live in a "post-gay" era.

PBS Newshour Spikes Conservatives From Gay Segment, as Professors Hope 'Anti-Gay' Speech Goes Away | NewsBusters.org

 

[Vanquish]

But isn't unbiased journalism supposed to be the ideal? Reporting facts that are uncontroverted in order to let the audience make their own decisions?

(For the record, I think the NewsHour is lightly liberal, but only a bit. Moyers is definitely liberal)

Weren't Murrow and Cronkite unbiased? (That's what I've been led to believe)

Does anyone have any links to fact-checking / neutral news organizations? Do they even exist?
How is anyone supposed to think for themselves if they can't trust a bare reporting of facts or have a source that doesn't spin things?

 

[uscitizen]

Are you stupid? PBS has always maintained a liberal slant. the Bill Moyers show was a perfect example.

Umm, it is no longer the Bill Moyers show.

Many other shows on PBS do have a liberal slant, bbut not the News Hour.

Thanks for answering my question about whether you are stupid, seems that you are indeed stupid. Does the word "was" mean anything to you? As in the Bill Moyers Show was an example.


On Tuesday night, the PBS Newshour discussed the debate over gays in the military, but that didn’t mean there was a debate on the show. Instead, PBS booked three gay-promoting liberal academics and pollster Andrew Kohut to talk about "American attitudes evolving." The liberal hope and dream of suppressing religious speech against homosexuality was blatantly expressed by Georgetown history professor Michael Kazin:

Woodruff said absolutely nothing challenging Kazin on the notion of shaming (or legislating) the end of "public" speech against homosexuality – or the possibility that governments might begin punishing such speech by religious or political leaders.

PBS lets a professor mock the Christian right as despicable demonizers, and there is no rebuttal on a taxpayer-funded channel. Instead, viewers are simply treated to a litany of complaints about how homosexual lobbyists have yet to find the promised land of "robust integration" (read: forced acceptance) of gays until we live in a "post-gay" era.

PBS Newshour Spikes Conservatives From Gay Segment, as Professors Hope 'Anti-Gay' Speech Goes Away | NewsBusters.org

OHH I thought this threas is about IS not WAS.
Sorry.

 

[uscitizen]

But isn't unbiased journalism supposed to be the ideal? Reporting facts that are uncontroverted in order to let the audience make their own decisions?

(For the record, I think the NewsHour is lightly liberal, but only a bit. Moyers is definitely liberal)

Weren't Murrow and Cronkite unbiased? (That's what I've been led to believe)

Does anyone have any links to fact-checking / neutral news organizations? Do they even exist?
How is anyone supposed to think for themselves if they can't trust a bare reporting of facts or have a source that doesn't spin things?

Good point that most miss. Most listen to what reinforces their beliefs. If it matches their beliefs it is unbiased, if not it is biased
It is far easier to be a follower than an individual thinker.

 

[boedicca]

But isn't unbiased journalism supposed to be the ideal? Reporting facts that are uncontroverted in order to let the audience make their own decisions?

(For the record, I think the NewsHour is lightly liberal, but only a bit. Moyers is definitely liberal)

Weren't Murrow and Cronkite unbiased? (That's what I've been led to believe)

Does anyone have any links to fact-checking / neutral news organizations? Do they even exist?
How is anyone supposed to think for themselves if they can't trust a bare reporting of facts or have a source that doesn't spin things?

We can NEVER get rid of bias. Even the selection of what is and isn't news is based upon bias.

Good journalists will do the yeomans' work of separating the reporting of facts from opinion, and leave the editorializing to others. One of the better examples of this is Special Report on FNC. They have a few news stories by decent reporters, with the final part of the program devoted to a panel discussion.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Umm, it is no longer the Bill Moyers show.

Many other shows on PBS do have a liberal slant, bbut not the News Hour.

Thanks for answering my question about whether you are stupid, seems that you are indeed stupid. Does the word "was" mean anything to you? As in the Bill Moyers Show was an example.


On Tuesday night, the PBS Newshour discussed the debate over gays in the military, but that didn’t mean there was a debate on the show. Instead, PBS booked three gay-promoting liberal academics and pollster Andrew Kohut to talk about "American attitudes evolving." The liberal hope and dream of suppressing religious speech against homosexuality was blatantly expressed by Georgetown history professor Michael Kazin:

Woodruff said absolutely nothing challenging Kazin on the notion of shaming (or legislating) the end of "public" speech against homosexuality – or the possibility that governments might begin punishing such speech by religious or political leaders.

PBS lets a professor mock the Christian right as despicable demonizers, and there is no rebuttal on a taxpayer-funded channel. Instead, viewers are simply treated to a litany of complaints about how homosexual lobbyists have yet to find the promised land of "robust integration" (read: forced acceptance) of gays until we live in a "post-gay" era.

PBS Newshour Spikes Conservatives From Gay Segment, as Professors Hope 'Anti-Gay' Speech Goes Away | NewsBusters.org

OHH I thought this threas is about IS not WAS.
Sorry.

Hey stupid, PBS has always maintained a liberal bias. Key words here are "has always", meaning past and present. Newshour and Frontline are just two current examples. You obviously overlooked this.

 

[uscitizen]

Frontline now has a strong liberal slant.

Pretty ironic, being called stupid by a Texican.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Frontline now has a strong liberal slant.

Pretty ironic, being called stupid by a Texican.

Seems you equate irony with honesty. Oh and Texan or Texian are both acceptable, Texican is just your lame attempt to marginalize Texas citizens.

Texas, the 12th largest economy in the world is faring better than any other state during these harsh economic times. Texas metro areas claimed four of the top five spots in an economic index of U.S. cities compiled by the Milken Institute and Greenstreet Real Estate Partners. The index includes measurement of past employment and salary growth, over the long term (the last five years) and the short term (the last year). The index also includes measurements of technology output growth, since that industry is seen as a big contributor to driving regional economies’ growth.

 

[uscitizen]

Frontline now has a strong liberal slant.

Pretty ironic, being called stupid by a Texican.

Seems you equate irony with honesty. Oh and Texan or Texian are both acceptable, Texican is just your lame attempt to marginalize Texas citizens.

Texas, the 12th largest economy in the world is faring better than any other state during these harsh economic times. Texas metro areas claimed four of the top five spots in an economic index of U.S. cities compiled by the Milken Institute and Greenstreet Real Estate Partners. The index includes measurement of past employment and salary growth, over the long term (the last five years) and the short term (the last year). The index also includes measurements of technology output growth, since that industry is seen as a big contributor to driving regional economies’ growth.

I hope you strained nothing with all that chest thumping and back patting.

Actually I am very pleased you like it there. Keeps you from moving out to my area.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Are you stupid? PBS has always maintained a liberal slant.

No it doesn't! Moyers was an entirely different show than News Hour. I watch N.H. every night along w/BBC news. Those + NPR are the only real news reporters left.