The decline of the American Media II: Journalism Boogaloo

[CrimsonJazz]

U.S. journalists differ from the public in their views of ‘bothsidesism’ in journalism

55% of journalists surveyed say that every side does not always deserve equal coverage in the news. 22% of Americans overall say the same.

www.pewresearch.org

Journalists in the United States differ markedly from the general public in their views of “bothsidesism” – whether journalists should always strive to give equal coverage to all sides of an issue – according to a recent Pew Research Center study. A little more than half of the journalists surveyed (55%) say that every side does not always deserve equal coverage in the news. By contrast, 22% of Americans overall say the same, whereas about three-quarters (76%) say journalists should always strive to give all sides equal coverage.

No surprises here. I do wish we had more data on the average Americans who agree with the majority of the media on this.

 

[NationalTitles18]

It's petty simple:

Facts deserve more coverage than baseless conspiracies.

Racists views/rhetoric do not deserve equal coverage.

And so on.

Part of the problem these days is that there is no gatekeeping or editorial discretion in some areas or when it does exist in some areas it is biased in the objectively wrong direction (away from facts).

 

[CrimsonJazz]

It's petty simple:

Facts deserve more coverage than baseless conspiracies.

Racists views/rhetoric do not deserve equal coverage.

No disagreement here, but inconvenient "facts" can be labeled conspiracies at the whim of whoever is in control. The problem runs a bit more deeply.

Part of the problem these days is that there is no gatekeeping or editorial discretion in some areas or when it does exist in some areas it is biased in the objectively wrong direction (away from facts).

Could've stopped right there. As has been said repeatedly, all media is biased and always has been. However, it just feels like the last 10 years or so, they aren't even trying to appear objective. Nobody expects objectivity from Faux News or MSDNC, but be professionals, people! Play the part at least.

 

[NationalTitles18]

No disagreement here, but inconvenient "facts" can be labeled conspiracies at the whim of whoever is in control. The problem runs a bit more deeply.

There is no central "control". It is piecemealed out to individual editors.

And facts get mislabeled all the time while "alternate facts" get preferential treatment in some circles. And people eat it up, so unfortunately the market is full of idiots willing to buy what is being sold.

1/4 to 1/2 of the population delves in media that routinely publishes falsehoods as if they were facts. Yes, I am speaking of rightwing media.

Leftwing source can also often get it wrong, though I would argue they are not as immersed as their rightwing brethren.

And mainstream media try to play it too down the middle instead of calling a spade a spade at times.

When it comes to bias, that's built in and you will never completely remove it. That's why I framed it the way I did - because facts have to be the basis of any reasonable discussion no matter how biased the participants are toward their own opinions. When baseless claims are given equal weight to verifiable facts it skews things in the wrong direction and leaves the door open for demagogues.

 

[twofbyc]

Fact: truth is truth, no matter who says it.
Reality (for those responsible for the decline, John Q.Public): if it doesn’t match my beliefs, biases and prejudices, it’s patently false (fake news); and the opposite is true. No amount of factual data, logical or sensible reasoning, or even common sense matter. This group, if not responsible for the decline, are the support that keeps it going.

 

[NationalTitles18]

common sense

If common sense were common there would not be such a longing for it.

 

[BamaMoon]

I'm not old enough to remember Walter Cronkite but I've heard some crack that he used to give the news without telling you what to think about it.

I don't know if that's true or not, but I think modern-day news on both sides have an agenda to tell what they think happened but tell it in such a way to suggest what you should think about what happened. Whether they are trying to build fear, incompetence, disdain or distrust the aim is to suggest how you should feel.

Of course, news agencies are businesses and support keeps businesses going so they have their patrons to please.

 

[Bamaro]

I'm not old enough to remember Walter Cronkite but I've heard some crack that he used to give the news without telling you what to think about it.

I don't know if that's true or not, but I think modern-day news on both sides have an agenda to tell what they think happened but tell it in such a way to suggest what you should think about what happened. Whether they are trying to build fear, incompetence, disdain or distrust the aim is to suggest how you should feel.

Of course, news agencies are businesses and support keeps businesses going so they have their patrons to please.

He generally played it fairly straight but sometimes you have to show your opinion as Cronkite did after going to Vietnam and coming back calling for a negotiated end to the war. That led to LBJ exiting the campaign for president

 

[dtgreg]

Nixon should have been hanged for negotiating against our soldiers with our enemy.

 

[NationalTitles18]

Nixon should have been hanged for negotiating against our soldiers with our enemy.

The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason'

A Radio 4 documentary, based on declassified tapes of President Lyndon Johnson's telephone calls provide an extraordinary insight into his world.

www.bbc.com

 

[Bamaro]

Nixon should have been hanged for negotiating against our soldiers with our enemy.

Can you explain what you mean by " negotiating against our soldiers with our enemy "?

 

[dtgreg]

Can you explain what you mean by " negotiating against our soldiers with our enemy "?

Read the link above by '92 and then rephrase your question. I'll be glad to discuss it then.

 

[Bamaro]

Read the link above by '92 and then rephrase your question. I'll be glad to discuss it then.

I see no link by '92 above.

 

[dtgreg]

I'm sorry! It was NationalTitles18! Sorry, Nat!

 

[dtgreg]

I'm just waking up!

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Why are NBC anchors throwing a tantrum over Rronna McDaniel?

They should keep in mind that Jen Psaki exists.

reason.com

Indeed, Todd's suggestion that his bosses might have transgressed journalistic norms by hiring and interviewing a political operative with potentially mixed loyalties is pretty rich considering, well, the existence of Jen Psaki. Psaki, of course, is the anchor of her own show on MSNBC, despite formerly serving as White House press secretary for President Joe Biden. There was not some massive time gap between these two positions—on the contrary, she negotiated her move to cable while still working within the administration.

Psaki was a paid CNN contributor before working for Biden, and prior to that, she was part of the Obama administration. It's almost as if there's a revolving door between working in politics and being paid by the media to talk about politics, and liberal journalists did not particularly find this controversial until about 5 seconds ago. Indeed, Scarborough is himself a former Republican member of Congress. Nicolle Wallace, a former communications director for President George W. Bush, also has an MSNBC show. (The network has a type, and that type is ex-Republican-turned-anti-Trump zealot.)

I don't have a high opinion of McDaniel, but this has been a fun development to watch. Now I wanna see KJP try to get a gig on Fox News. I'm betting it would look a lot like this.

 

[NationalTitles18]

NBC News cuts ties with former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel

The decision comes less than a week after NBC News announced her hiring, prompting an extraordinary public protest from the former host of its flagship Sunday morning political show, as well as from many of the most popular MSNBC hosts.

www.nbcnews.com

This is good. They don't need someone on air who tried to overturn the election.

What the hell is a "journalism boogaloo" anyway?

 

[CrimsonJazz]

NBC News cuts ties with former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel

The decision comes less than a week after NBC News announced her hiring, prompting an extraordinary public protest from the former host of its flagship Sunday morning political show, as well as from many of the most popular MSNBC hosts.

www.nbcnews.com

This is good. They don't need someone on air who tried to overturn the election.

What the hell is a "journalism boogaloo" anyway?

It's a reference to a not-quite-obscure 80's movie. Boogaloo is a nonsense word. I simply replaced the word "electric" with journalism since that's the theme of the thread. Breakin' 2 was a sequel, like the thread.

 

[92tide]

NBC News cuts ties with former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel

The decision comes less than a week after NBC News announced her hiring, prompting an extraordinary public protest from the former host of its flagship Sunday morning political show, as well as from many of the most popular MSNBC hosts.

www.nbcnews.com

This is good. They don't need someone on air who tried to overturn the election.

What the hell is a "journalism boogaloo" anyway?

something something both sides /s

 

[Jon]

Why are NBC anchors throwing a tantrum over Rronna McDaniel?

They should keep in mind that Jen Psaki exists.

reason.com

I don't have a high opinion of McDaniel, but this has been a fun development to watch. Now I wanna see KJP try to get a gig on Fox News. I'm betting it would look a lot like this.

remember when Jen Psaki advocated for the overthrow of the US Government, lied about election results, pressured electors to falsify votes while offering to cover their legal costs and went along with calling journalists enemies of the people? #bothsides