CDZ Serious question for independents/moderates/centrists, etc.

[Mac1958]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

 

[JoeMoma]

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

 

[JoeMoma]

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

And unfortunately, media sources take sides and don't just present the facts.

 

[Auld Phart]

online news, from AP, UPI Reuters, Yahoo

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

I research the subject matter and weigh both sides to get tp the truth.

Too many partisan hacks today and just have to filter the partisan nonsense to find the truth and it is almost impossible!

 

[Mac1958]

online news, from AP, UPI Reuters, Yahoo

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

I'll listen to Rush or one of the other talkers and watch MSNBC or CNN (and I do this exercise quite a bit) and I'm just stunned by the sheer separation in realities. Not just opinions, but actual realities. It's like informational whiplash, and because the separation is expanding so quickly, it's just getting more difficult to make sense of it.
.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

online news, from AP, UPI Reuters, Yahoo

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

I'll listen to Rush or one of the other talkers and watch MSNBC or CNN (and I do this exercise quite a bit) and I'm just stunned by the sheer separation in realities. Not just opinions, but actual realities. It's like informational whiplash, and because the separation is expanding so quickly, it's just getting more difficult to make sense of it.
.

NPR vs Talk Radio can be the most funniest thing to do if it were not sad how polar opposite they are.

 

[Mac1958]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

I research the subject matter and weigh both sides to get tp the truth.

Too many partisan hacks today and just have to filter the partisan nonsense to find the truth and it is almost impossible!

Yeah, it's difficult to form a solid opinion without going through the motions of gathering various data points.

And now that I think about it ===> there was a time where I could at least identify a few areas in which the two "sides" would be saying or reporting roughly the same thing. At least you could start there.

But it's just getting tougher and tougher to identify those areas now. Maybe that's what has me so bugged about this.
.

 

[aaronleland]

I don't find it hard to tell fact from opinion. If CNN or Fox says "this happened" it probably did happen. Partisan hacks will interpret it differently from there.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't find it hard to tell fact from opinion. If CNN or Fox says "this happened" it probably did happen. Partisan hacks will interpret it differently from there.

But what I'm seeing is that they're "reporting" two entirely different things. They're "not seeing", evidently, the same things as the other guy. All CNN sees, for example, is material on Trump that they can attack. All Fox sees is what remains, the information that mitigates what CNN sees. And vice versa.

Bad enough that "news reporting" is so infused with opinion. But now we're only getting smaller pieces of reality, and THEY'RE infused with opinion.

Or I'm just nuts. I'll go either way on this one.
.

 

[kiwiman127]

online news, from AP, UPI Reuters, Yahoo

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

I'll listen to Rush or one of the other talkers and watch MSNBC or CNN (and I do this exercise quite a bit) and I'm just stunned by the sheer separation in realities. Not just opinions, but actual realities. It's like informational whiplash, and because the separation is expanding so quickly, it's just getting more difficult to make sense of it.
.

Being as I have a life, I get my news from Reuters and that's about it. Reuters is heavily used by most news sources who add their contribution to the Reuter article. I have an app for Reuters, so I skip the right/left addition that have been added by the MSM.

 

[Mac1958]

online news, from AP, UPI Reuters, Yahoo

I know not to accept anything in the news at face value. Both (all) sides spin facts to make their side look good and the other side look bad. It kind of makes me think of creative resume writing.

I'll listen to Rush or one of the other talkers and watch MSNBC or CNN (and I do this exercise quite a bit) and I'm just stunned by the sheer separation in realities. Not just opinions, but actual realities. It's like informational whiplash, and because the separation is expanding so quickly, it's just getting more difficult to make sense of it.
.

Being as I have a life, I get my news from Reuters and that's about it. Reuters is heavily used by most news sources who add their contribution to the Reuter article. I have an app for Reuters, so I skip the right/left addition that have been added by the MSM.

Yeah, Reuters has always been one of the places I check.
.

 

[saveliberty]

The OP is correct. I find myself watching the national news less and less. Media and government have no credibility, which makes me wonder how anyone can have enough faith to trust them with your rights, healthcare or retirement.

 

[gipper]

The OP is correct. I find myself watching the national news less and less. Media and government have no credibility, which makes me wonder how anyone can have enough faith to trust them with your rights, healthcare or retirement.

I stopped believing anything presented by any mainstream media source, long ago. They clearly are incapable of telling the truth.

I have long thought if we had an honest media, Americans would not be divided but united against a tyrannical central government. Since the media is controlled by corporate and government entities, they must keep us divided so that they can continue to enrich and empower themselves.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

People need to be able to discern fiction from non fiction. Once upon a time the most trusted man in America was Walter Cronkite. What happened? CNN and Ted Turner happened, and the news programs began to compete for ratings, And, then the Internet became a source for news, rumors and today is a propaganda machine where lies, half-truths, rumors and innuendos thrive.

Once upon a time editorials were separate from the news, making clear what was opinion and what was not. Most of us learned that primary sources are the best bet in understanding a complicated world. The written word, using euphemisms and dysphemisms are clues, and should be red flags for the serious reader. Video too can be manipulated and designed to blend fact and fiction.

And to complicate and already complicated situation most of us have a bias and some are biddable and only believe what confirms their biases.

Investigators have been trained to observe verbal and non verbal clues in their effort to decide truth from deception. There are books which can help a lay person understand these methods and the difference between an interview and an interrogation. Matters which seem to be instrumental in understanding current events.

 

[Mac1958]

And to complicate and already complicated situation most of us have a bias and some are biddable and only believe what confirms their biases.

Of all that is happening, I think this could be the key point. This is clearly being enabled and exacerbated by the proliferation of "news" sources out there, and by people in the "media" who have vested professional interest in carving out their niche (as opposed to, say, being intellectually honest).

So now, the various tribes can seek out and adhere themselves to the "news" sources that (as you say) confirm, support and increase their biases. It's like going to a specialist instead of a general practitioner.

And for those of us who don't really belong to a tribe - and I maintain that's a majority of us - we are essentially being left out of that process.
.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And to complicate and already complicated situation most of us have a bias and some are biddable and only believe what confirms their biases.

Of all that is happening, I think this could be the key point. This is clearly being enabled and exacerbated by the proliferation of "news" sources out there, and by people in the "media" who have vested professional interest in carving out their niche (as opposed to, say, being intellectually honest).

So now, the various tribes can seek out and adhere themselves to the "news" sources that (as you say) confirm, support and increase their biases. It's like going to a specialist instead of a general practitioner.

And for those of us who don't really belong to a tribe - and I maintain that's a majority of us - we are essentially being left out of that process.
.

My tribe, if I adhere to your assessment, hasn't a label, I believe in equal rights for all citizens, equal opportunity for all citizens, and equal rights for all people.

I am personally fiscally responsible, something the Congress is not and never has been. Fiscal conservatives are simply kicking a can down the road, leaving today's problems for generations in the future, and yet, hypocritically, blame those who do not buy into the austerity theory as giving the bill to our kids and theirs.

Of course I wear my biases proudly, and consider 21st century conservatives driven by a creed which holds to a callous disregard for others, rejecting the principles of social justice and the paradigm Jefferson alluded to in the Declaration of Independence, as self-evident truths.

 

[rightwinger]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

I only trust what I read on USMB

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's a serious question for posters here who don't identify with either side of the political spectrum (a limited audience here, but worth a shot):

It really seems like we've moved beyond "fake news" and have have literally reached a point where there are two separate realities. Listen to a lefty, and they're 100% convinced that the other "side" is in abject meltdown and about to collapse at any moment. Listen to a righty and you get the same. So:

How are you consuming the news right now? When a media person (either the traditional "press" or a partisan advocate or someone on the internet) says or reports or claims something, do you take it at face value any more, to any degree?

I've literally reached a point it's impossible for me to trust pretty much any input. And honestly, because I am curious about what's happening around me, that's troubling.

How about you?
.

I only trust what I read on USMB

Concise and spot on.

 

[Mac1958]

My tribe, if I adhere to your assessment, hasn't a label, I believe in equal rights for all citizens, equal opportunity for all citizens, and equal rights for all people.

Well, now there is an absolutely appropriate post for this thread.

Both ends of the spectrum will tell me that. Both ends will be absolutely serious and sincere when they say it. Both ends will be able to provide examples and various levels of "proof" to back it up. Both ends will claim that the examples and "proof" provided by the other are insufficient.

Opposite messages coming from opposing sources, each with their own absolute reality.

So, as a consumer, if I were trying to determine which was true and which was false, or which was MORE true, what they are "reporting" has value only in that it is a starting point.

Once objectivity is gone, the source cannot be trusted. And the point I'm making is that it is now essentially impossible to detect objectivity on its face. That, to me, is pretty damn dangerous.
.