Balanced news reporting [@twisteddoodles]
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
They don't just die off naturally. The propaganda machine is always making new idiots.
-
Every story needs an Arthur Dent to ask dumb questions for the audience. It gives the author an excuse to worldbuild without pontificating. So, on the bright side, maybe our crumbling civilization has a lot of authors collaborating with mind-bogglingly panoply audiences, each of which needs their own lovable idiot hero to be a character in our world.
-
Podcasts for "bros" in a nutshell.
Except they sometimes leave out the expert.
-
Maybe this is more an issue with my regional news... but my issue is generally not the idiots - it's when the news does a story where they interview some well-meaning but not media trained person (like a progressive activist at a protest), but then for "balance", they bring in the fucking CEO of Orphan Crushing Inc. to eloquently say why having morals is evil and why the oppressors are actually the victims here. And then give him 90% of the screen time because he's the "expert"
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
While the expert is there only to be present, always talked over
-
I heard it explained like this. If one person says it's raining outside, and another person says it's not. The job of the reporter is to look outside to see if it's raining or not. Their job is not putting them in the same room asking them to debate each other about whether or not it's raining.
-
One of the biggest reasons nobody trusts the media is because of this stupid standard of objectivity. Not the journalists fault, might as well insist reporters can fly as be "objective".
Pretending to be objective is dishonest; making it an editorial standard guarantees you're lying to the audience.
So they just pretend to be objective, we all see though it; and nobody likes being bullshited.
-
A must watch on this topic
-
That only makes sense when the reporter can easily verify the central premise of the controversial issue. For something like climate change at best they can report that there is a very large academic consensus that greenhouse gases released due to human activity are causing an increase in average global temperatures. They can't themselves examine the very large body of data that leads to that conclusion. Public understanding of not only the scientific method but the scientific process is crucial, but the press themselves can't do that.
-
TBH I almost never see relevant experts in the hegemonic news. For example, NPR never interviews palestinians about their experience under the ongoing genocide. Or with AI there's almost never a respectable computer scientist but just con artists. You'll never see/hear an expert on marxism, etc. Etc.
This cartoon gives wayyyy too much credit to these corrupt propaganda outlets.
-
The real job of a reporter is to ask the capitalist who owns the media (eg. rupert murdoch).
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
the press themselves
can’twon't do that.It is extremely possible to explain the evidence for and against an issue, if not for the phony standard of "balance".
-
And that's how the bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe narrative gets pushed and stoked and permeates weak minds everywhere, through sheer repetition.
-
Except the US media usually skips the first part. When was the last time anyone saw someone with a PhD related to what they were talking about being asked something in the media? No they start with something Elon Musk tweeted about H1B visas and then cover what Laura Loomer said in response. The expert on H1B visas is nowhere to be found.
-
You don't have report "both sides" of an argument if one side of that argument is blithering bullshit.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Anybody else remember when fox news interviewed one of the moderators for /r/antiwork which went about as well as you would expect?
-
The US used to have laws that required balanced reporting. Once they were removed, all reporting became 0 effort opinion-based.
There was some value in making them work to lie.
