American trust in the media

[Boatbum]

Actually there is none.

Between news about stolen elections, COVID origin and the legitimacy of Hunter Biden's laptop. Americans have become even more distrustful of the media.


Screenshot 2023-03-02 095702.jpg



https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/ame...owest-trust-in

[ron ll]

Do you trust who told you that?

[Paul Pless]

choose your sources carefully
it has ever been thus

[Dan McCosh]

What is the trust in surveys about the trust in the media?

[LeeG]

Americans like their news like they like their food. Fast, cheap and easy.

[John Smith]

We've accepted all of this as 'free speech'. I've been a fairly lonely voice in arguing that politicians and those operating under NEWS ought to be required to get matters of fact correct.

Free speech is not absolute. It has limits. There are lines. "Beat the hell out of him. I'll pay our legal bills!" certainly crossed one of those lines, but there were no repercussions from it.

It is, IMO, perfectly reasonable to tune your tv to a 'news' network and believe you are getting honest facts. The fact is these 'news' networks can report fiction as fact and suffer no consequences.

The Dominion suit may bring some consequence; monetary reward, but will it do anything to get them to stop making up facts? Will they ever make a point of telling their viewers the election was NOT stolen and Biden won fairly?

Will they report factual news in the future?

[Boatbum]

We've accepted all of this as 'free speech'. I've been a fairly lonely voice in arguing that politicians and those operating under NEWS ought to be required to get matters of fact correct.

Free speech is not absolute. It has limits. There are lines. "Beat the hell out of him. I'll pay our legal bills!" certainly crossed one of those lines, but there were no repercussions from it.

It is, IMO, perfectly reasonable to tune your tv to a 'news' network and believe you are getting honest facts. The fact is these 'news' networks can report fiction as fact and suffer no consequences.

The Dominion suit may bring some consequence; monetary reward, but will it do anything to get them to stop making up facts? Will they ever make a point of telling their viewers the election was NOT stolen and Biden won fairly?

Will they report factual news in the future?

It's not just about free speech. The media has "debunked" some claims that have turned out to be true and some outlandish claims have later been proven false. Sometimes maybe an honest mistake and sometimes wanting it so badly that you overlook the facts. And sometimes a genuine attempt to give accurate and unbiased details, but with mistakes made in the due diligence efforts.

Though it might be nice to compel reporters and politicians to get matters of fact correct, I think it is a much bigger mistake to attempt to regulate it. You end up with a ministry of truth (or its equivalent) that can ultimately lead to abuse of power

If someone states a falsehood, and that falsehood leads to harm this individual or company, then you can sue them - you can always use the law in this regard.

[LeeG]

It's not just about free speech. The media has "debunked" some claims that have turned out to be true and some outlandish claims have later been proven false. Sometimes maybe an honest mistake and sometimes wanting it so badly that you overlook the facts. And sometimes a genuine attempt to give accurate and unbiased details, but with mistakes made in the due diligence efforts.

Though it might be nice to compel reporters and politicians to get matters of fact correct, I think it is a much bigger mistake to attempt to regulate it. You end up with a ministry of truth (or its equivalent) that can ultimately lead to abuse of power

If someone states a falsehood, and that falsehood leads to harm this individual or company, then you can sue them - you can always use the law in this regard.

wow, “the media” makes mistakes. Sounds like a human enterprise.

[dutchpp]

It's not always willful deception.
Sometimes you can test the specific knowledge you have, in my case air traffic control, against the media coverage.
That often, but not always, produces a rather sad picture of sloppy journalism or even incompetence.
This leads you to critically read/listen to reports about unusual subjects.

[CWSmith]

I had a very uncomfortable experience with this yesterday. A relative keeps sending me propaganda from American Thinker, a horrible right-wing propaganda machine. They argued that Santos' lies are Biden's fault and they did it rather smoothly. We got into an unpleasant exchange where she declared herself to be open minded and I was not. At the same time, I know she won't read conventional sources like Associated Press, NPR, etc.

There is a very deep indoctrination happening in our society and I do not know how to reverse it. I tried challenging her with quotes from the article, but she is trained in deflect and accuse to the point there was no reaching her.

[sandtown]

There is a very deep indoctrination happening in our society and I do not know how to reverse it. .

The utter failure of the MSM to publish a range of views on the Ukr-Russia conflict shows that indoctrination at work.

If anything, it is even worse than 2003.

[Paul Pless]

oh dear lord

[Bill Griffin]

I think it has a lot, maybe mostly, to do with reporters having to be generalists. They can’t possibly be expert, or even we’ll versed, in all the events they cover. Meteorologists do a little better. Overall reporting is t bad. Especially stay aware of who is voicing opinion, or outright lying. That means no fox, no s***

[sandtown]

oh dear lord

Oh yeah, nothing more scary than a range of views . .

Do you honestly believe that MSM pro-war unanimity is good journalism ??

[Paul Pless]

Oh yeah, nothing more scary than a range of views . .

Do you honestly believe that MSM pro-war unanimity is good journalism ??

i actually disagree with the underlying premise of this thread in a way; and with the assumptions in your post i quoted

the biggest problem with journalism and media today lies in the uneducated and superficial consumption of it
there are still reliable and honest and even unbiased sources of news out there - the key is being able* and willing to find it, and being willing to consume news from more than one source

* this is a big deal, large parts of our society are too ignorant to find it; now who's fault is that?

[David G]

Part of a concerted effort to sow confusion and spread fear. But, yes, there are more reliable news sources out there. If you focus on them... you'll be alright. Rupert Murdoch has a lot to answer for. But so does Alex Jones, Andrew Breitbart, and many others. I've posted this before... maybe some of you should bookmark it and study it. While it may be a bit slanted toward the right... it's still the best visual I've found --

https://adfontesmedia.com/

[Peerie Maa]

Americans like their news like they like their food. Fast, cheap and bad for their health.

More accurate?

[Paul Pless]

not the chart, david

please god, not the chart again

noooooo. . . .

[LeeG]

More accurate?

yeah. I better go for a bike ride. What really gets me is the acceptance of popular general terms as having some specific meaning through frequent use. The Media is a dumb ass general term. It’s not a person, it’s not an organization, it’s not a news service, a news outlet, it’s not effing news at all. People are conflating tik tok with Walter Cronkite then declaring “no one trusts the media!”.
Jesus this is dumb.

[LeeG]

not the chart, david

please god, not the chart again

noooooo. . . .

we need more mediums

[Tom Montgomery]

choose your sources carefully
it has ever been thus

^
This. The term "yellow journalism"was coined in the mid-1890's. There have always been reliable sources of information. But it takes a certain level of education to be able evaluate and detect the sh!te from the shinola. Many Americans are simply unable - or unwilling - to do so.

[bluedog225]

6812078[/URL]]not the chart, david

please god, not the chart again

noooooo. . . .

[David G]

not the chart, david

please god, not the chart again

noooooo. . . .

Apparently... it is still needed. Some, I guess, are just slower on the uptake than others.

[LeeG]

Apparently... it is still needed. Some, I guess, are just slower on the uptake than others.

Why isn’t water color and oils on the list, they’re media.

[Paul Pless]

and why is tmz on the list?

[Peerie Maa]

Apparently... it is still needed. Some, I guess, are just slower on the uptake than others.

The problem is I can think of only one Bilge Rat who actually needs to read that chart.

[LeeG]

DailyKos is an echo chamber of folks sharing diaries of thoughts, not a news medium.

[David G]

The problem is I can think of only one Bilge Rat who actually needs to read that chart.

More than one. There are several who continue to bemoan the lack of reliable news sources.

[David G]

Related...

[John Smith]

It's not just about free speech. The media has "debunked" some claims that have turned out to be true and some outlandish claims have later been proven false. Sometimes maybe an honest mistake and sometimes wanting it so badly that you overlook the facts. And sometimes a genuine attempt to give accurate and unbiased details, but with mistakes made in the due diligence efforts.

Though it might be nice to compel reporters and politicians to get matters of fact correct, I think it is a much bigger mistake to attempt to regulate it. You end up with a ministry of truth (or its equivalent) that can ultimately lead to abuse of power

If someone states a falsehood, and that falsehood leads to harm this individual or company, then you can sue them - you can always use the law in this regard.

Dominion had the resources to sue. Many don't. Deliberately misinforming voters, to me, seems classic fraud. Anyone can make a mistake, and when they do, they should retract/correct it.

We had here, and have had for years, NEWS hosts telling their audience 'facts' that simply weren't true. The first amendment is not absolute. Fraud is a crime. It should be prosecuted.

I lived through Watergate. Republicans asked tough questions. They sought the truth. They told Nixon he had to resign. Today's GOP circles the wagon around lies.

If we accept lying by politicians and news, we doom our democracy.

[LeeG]

Related...

huh?

[John Smith]

i actually disagree with the underlying premise of this thread in a way; and with the assumptions in your post i quoted

the biggest problem with journalism and media today lies in the uneducated and superficial consumption of it
there are still reliable and honest and even unbiased sources of news out there - the key is being able* and willing to find it, and being willing to consume news from more than one source

* this is a big deal, large parts of our society are too ignorant to find it; now who's fault is that?

I believe the average "Joe" turns to a "NEWS" network and believes it to be news, is perfectly understandable. A reasonable assumption, no?

[John Smith]

Part of a concerted effort to sow confusion and spread fear. But, yes, there are more reliable news sources out there. If you focus on them... you'll be alright. Rupert Murdoch has a lot to answer for. But so does Alex Jones, Andrew Breitbart, and many others. I've posted this before... maybe some of you should bookmark it and study it. While it may be a bit slanted toward the right... it's still the best visual I've found --

https://adfontesmedia.com/

Yes they have a great deal to answer for: will it just cost them money? Or will some other price be paid?

[John Smith]

^
This. The term "yellow journalism"was coined in the mid-1890's. There have always been reliable sources of information. But it takes a certain level of education to be able evaluate and detect the sh!te from the shinola. Many Americans are simply unable - or unwilling - to do so.

I go back, again, to Watergate. We had antenna tv. Walter Cronkite on one network. Huntley and Brinkley on another, and I forget who was on the other. Didn't matter which one someone watched. They all reported the same facts. We discussed Watergate every evening at work. 20 or so people there each evening. Everyone KNEW, for example, 18 minutes of tape had been erased. There was no 'news' reporting tape had not been erased.

Why is it so difficult, or so wrong, to simply want "NEWS" and politicians to get FACTS correct. 1st amendment protects opinions that some might find offensive, but those offended often do what they can to stop that speech. NEWS and politicians ought to have their feet held to this 'fire'.

[Chip-skiff]

The reason so many RWW fools watch Fox News is they trust it to serve up lies that don't challenge or contradict their bias and hate.