Why is the age of unbiased journalism over?

[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.

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.

Texans have every reason to boast about the state of our economy. I'm willing to bet you're not currently employed. I've lived in several states Oregon, California. Georgia and Wyoming, but none can compare to the great state of Texas. It sounds like you don't like Texas very much, which means you've probably never lived here.

 

[Samson]

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

It's been around for a Very Long Time.

RACIST!!!!

You likey Flied Lice with your FNC, Round-Eye???!!!

 

[Samson]

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.

Texans have every reason to boast about the state of our economy. I'm willing to bet you're not currently employed. I've lived in several states Oregon, California. Georgia and Wyoming, but none can compare to the great state of Texas. It sounds like you don't like Texas very much, which means you've probably never lived here.

I've lived and worked all over Texas. No one in their right minds would live there without air conditioning.

The Economy is great, but you can keep the fire ants and 100 F+ from April to October.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

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.

Texans have every reason to boast about the state of our economy. I'm willing to bet you're not currently employed. I've lived in several states Oregon, California. Georgia and Wyoming, but none can compare to the great state of Texas. It sounds like you don't like Texas very much, which means you've probably never lived here.

I've lived and worked all over Texas. No one in their right minds would live there without air conditioning.

The Economy is great, but you can keep the fire ants and 100 F+ from April to October.

Pussy!

My father is 89 years old and never owned an A/C unit, to this day he relies soley on a fan. Not having the luxery of an A/C growing up benefited me greatly while I was incarcerated.

 

[Samson]

Texans have every reason to boast about the state of our economy. I'm willing to bet you're not currently employed. I've lived in several states Oregon, California. Georgia and Wyoming, but none can compare to the great state of Texas. It sounds like you don't like Texas very much, which means you've probably never lived here.

I've lived and worked all over Texas. No one in their right minds would live there without air conditioning.

The Economy is great, but you can keep the fire ants and 100 F+ from April to October.

Pussy!

My father is 89 years old and never owned an A/C unit, to this day he relies soley on a fan. Not having the luxery of an A/C growing up benefited me greatly while I was incarcerated.

I qualified my opinion with, "No one in their right minds," for a reason.

Houston is the only place I've been where I could work up a sweat playing pool at 2300 hrs during November.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I've lived and worked all over Texas. No one in their right minds would live there without air conditioning.

The Economy is great, but you can keep the fire ants and 100 F+ from April to October.

Pussy!

My father is 89 years old and never owned an A/C unit, to this day he relies soley on a fan. Not having the luxery of an A/C growing up benefited me greatly while I was incarcerated.

I qualified my opinion with, "No one in their right minds," for a reason.

Houston is the only place I've been where I could work up a sweat playing pool at 2300 hrs during November.

Yep, you're a pussy.

 

[George Costanza]

Frontline now has a strong liberal slant.

Pretty ironic, being called stupid by a Texican.

I once asked directions on how to get to Texas from California. I was told: "Simple, son. You just go east until you SMELL IT and then south until you STEP IN IT."

 

[Vanquish]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

 

[uscitizen]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

My own personal brain.

 

[Samson]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

My own personal brain.

 

[Vanquish]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

My own personal brain.

LOL. Pardon, I misspoke.

Where do you go for your unbiased reporting?

 

[uscitizen]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

My own personal brain.

LOL. Pardon, I misspoke.

Where do you go for your unbiased reporting?

Mosty PBS and BBC. They are still biased but not as bad as most commercial MSM outlets.
I do not even watch any of the blatantly biased outlets. They are like reading the Enquirer.
I also do not listen to talk radio.

I actually read some as well. I do not need video to learn things.
And I also consider what I have already learned. History you know?
I try and look beyond what is being said and also consider what is not being said.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Why ?The father of modern journalism author of
Public Opinion (1922) and The Phantom Public (1925).

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Lippmann saw the purpose of journalism as "intelligence work". Within this role, journalists are a link between policymakers and the public. A journalist seeks facts from policymakers which he then transmits to citizens who form a public opinion. In this model, the information may be used to hold policymakers accountable to citizens. This theory was spawned by the industrial era and some critics argue the model needs rethinking in post-industrial societies.

Walter Lippmann - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[code1211]

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?

Unbiased? No such thing. Murrow and Cronkite were both American patriot Liberals. If there is no defined bias in their reporting, it is because those who are defining it agree with them.

Bias is unavoidable. If you are an American, you see things from a given viewpoint. Same if you are a Moslem, Methodist, Catholic or Mormon. Raised in a union household? Raised in a religious household? Agnostic? Atheist? White? Black? We are nothing if not a collection of biases both as individuals and as a society.

It is the bias in jounalism that exposes truth.

It is only the lazy or narrow that settle for one source. Or the insecure. To gain a perspective of the truth, you must hear the news from various souces of various bias. In this way, you will gain an understanding of the understanding of those whose bias you can peg.

Glenn Beck and Keith Oberman describing the same event will give very different stories. By understanding both, you will gain an insight into the story, Beck and Oberman.

If you think that you are hearing unbiased news and ALL of the sources are relaying the same story with the same nuances and biases, you are most certainly hearing an orchestrated and very biased presentation. This is how state run media propaganda works and what causes the cynical among us to distrust three "independant" networks that all lead with the same story night after night and parrot the same key words like "gravitas".

This is not indepedance. It's an echo chamber.

Bemoaning the lack of unbiased reporting is unwise. There is, will be and always has been bias in reporting. Understanding this is the first step to squeazing a little truth out of the drivel.

Don't attack it. Use it.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

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?

Unbiased? No such thing. Murrow and Cronkite were both American patriot Liberals. If there is no defined bias in their reporting, it is because those who are defining it agree with them.

Bias is unavoidable. If you are an American, you see things from a given viewpoint. Same if you are a Moslem, Methodist, Catholic or Mormon. Raised in a union household? Raised in a religious household? Agnostic? Atheist? White? Black? We are nothing if not a collection of biases both as individuals and as a society.

It is the bias in jounalism that exposes truth.

It is only the lazy or narrow that settle for one source. Or the insecure. To gain a perspective of the truth, you must hear the news from various souces of various bias. In this way, you will gain an understanding of the understanding of those whose bias you can peg.

Glenn Beck and Keith Oberman describing the same event will give very different stories. By understanding both, you will gain an insight into the story, Beck and Oberman.

If you think that you are hearing unbiased news and ALL of the sources are relaying the same story with the same nuances and biases, you are most certainly hearing an orchestrated and very biased presentation. This is how state run media propaganda works and what causes the cynical among us to distrust three "independant" networks that all lead with the same story night after night and parrot the same key words like "gravitas".

This is not indepedance. It's an echo chamber.

Bemoaning the lack of unbiased reporting is unwise. There is, will be and always has been bias in reporting. Understanding this is the first step to squeazing a little truth out of the drivel.

Don't attack it. Use it.

Please alert me when the media starts covering the stories Beck files.
Cloward /Piven
The Progressive roots of fascism .
Social justice and slave reparations Health care and Education reform.

 

[code1211]

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?

Time and space are limited on air or page. Bare facts do not convey truth. There must be some context and that is the editorial slant, bias, that sneaks into reporting.

What is a fact? Is it a fact that the spokesman said something? Is what he said a fact? Was his description a fact? Was the spokesman spinning when he spoke? If you report only his spinning with no context, is that truth or is it itself spinning?

A person thinking for himself is not accepting what he is fed by a single source. You must hear the story from different sources, understand the bias and try to deduce the truth. All organizations fact check. Most still frame their stories in the template that results from their bias.

 

[code1211]

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.

The panel discussion is comprised of statements from biased speakers and the interplay exposes many sides of many issues. This is my favorite part of any news show.

It allows a thinking listener to think.

 

[code1211]

So the question becomes...

if good arguments have at least some level of unbiasedness...

and most news outlets today are insanely biased...

where do all of you go for your logic?

David Hume. Thomas Aquinas.

 

[code1211]

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?

Unbiased? No such thing. Murrow and Cronkite were both American patriot Liberals. If there is no defined bias in their reporting, it is because those who are defining it agree with them.

Bias is unavoidable. If you are an American, you see things from a given viewpoint. Same if you are a Moslem, Methodist, Catholic or Mormon. Raised in a union household? Raised in a religious household? Agnostic? Atheist? White? Black? We are nothing if not a collection of biases both as individuals and as a society.

It is the bias in jounalism that exposes truth.

It is only the lazy or narrow that settle for one source. Or the insecure. To gain a perspective of the truth, you must hear the news from various souces of various bias. In this way, you will gain an understanding of the understanding of those whose bias you can peg.

Glenn Beck and Keith Oberman describing the same event will give very different stories. By understanding both, you will gain an insight into the story, Beck and Oberman.

If you think that you are hearing unbiased news and ALL of the sources are relaying the same story with the same nuances and biases, you are most certainly hearing an orchestrated and very biased presentation. This is how state run media propaganda works and what causes the cynical among us to distrust three "independant" networks that all lead with the same story night after night and parrot the same key words like "gravitas".

This is not indepedance. It's an echo chamber.

Bemoaning the lack of unbiased reporting is unwise. There is, will be and always has been bias in reporting. Understanding this is the first step to squeazing a little truth out of the drivel.

Don't attack it. Use it.

Please alert me when the media starts covering the stories Beck files.
Cloward /Piven
The Progressive roots of fascism .
Social justice and slave reparations Health care and Education reform.

To be absolutely honest, I simply cannot listen to the ravings of either of these guys, Beck or Oberman, for more than a couple minutes. I suppose some would call them passionate. It feels more like hateful to me.