Fake news, media manipulation etc

[omochain]

I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?

If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.

If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.

OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.

[AZOffaly]

Ah OK. I see what you mean. Yes I agree with you

[seafoid]

The search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.

BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda  as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?

In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so.  Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.

I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.

Israel/Palestine has always been polarised, Puckoon, because Israel is a groupthink story.
Climate change is manipulated by people like the Kochs

the new news polarisation is a very different thing.

I disagree that it is very different. I just used an older and more documented example.

Maybe it is different in the US

[LeoMc]

I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?

If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.

If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.

OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.

Good analysis.

[omochain]

Thank you
Now if I could only get McGeeney to listen to me

[dferg]

I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?

If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.

If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.

OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.

The established media is and always has been owned by people like Rupert Murdoch and Denis O'Brien.  Their only interest is in making money.

http://fermanaghherald.com/2014/04/local-outrage-as-the-sun-backs-fracking-campaign/.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/09/02/exclusive-regulator-says-murdoch-oil-shale-comp/183862

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/9098653/The-Blairs-and-the-Murdochs-a-special-relationship.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/12/why-is-the-irish-government-scared-of-billionaire-denis-o-brien.html

[seafoid]

Papers have self censorship and may not address issues entirely squarely but it is a long way from the Daily Sport or Weekly World news which is what  Breitbart is equivalent to. Readers who want to go deeper into subjects can go for the Phoenix or Private Eye . Trump and Bannon are about lies.

[macdanger2]

Didn't know where else to post this:

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1005/910122-communicorp-outlaws-irish-times-journalists-on-radio/

Not sure what the article in question was but it seems like an extreme move to block journalists from an entire newspaper

[johnneycool]

Nick Robinson getting caught with manipulation back in the Scottish referendum debates;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_XhTALHQzI

Tory Nick up to his work