user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
What's a "good job?" Is it factual, objective, and free of political biases? If that's a proximate definition of "good," then the answer is no, and it continues to get worse with the shrinking of sources of new by consolidation.
The monopolies now own the news. We are, in short, dead.
Hell no, news outlets like Newsweek, the Washington Post, even Time magazine, they are more interested in MAKING news than reporting it. The media wants to find the next Deep Throat so they are always pushing conspiracy theories and reporting on anything they think might stir the public up, yellow journalism at it's worst.
The only news magazine that really tries to stay unbiased is U.S. News and World Report
Why do people jump to the FREAKING BIAS issue???? I SPECIFICALLY said REGARDLESS of BIAS. Answer the freaking question!
Cathexis called it infotainment, and I think that is a good term.
Latest news: some white bitch hasn't had her period!!! Is it late!!~!Has it been abducted!!!The white bitch is keeping hope alive that her period will be found alive!!!
Note to newspeople: I don't give a damn about missing priviledged white girls. And I don't know why the whole world has to force fed this shiit.
LOL ^ Exactly.
by mojo on Wed Jun 15, 05 7:42am
[+]
{steps up on soapbox}
Deinitely. IMO, the Corporate Media Entities (formerly known as News Agencies) have decided that obtaining real news is neither cost effective nor worth marketing.
It used to be that every news outlet had their own staff of reporters. Now ... everyone recycles the same wireline stories (from AP and Reuters, usually). Some major outlets still have a (diminished) staff, but that number dwindles every day.
In addition, the Marketing heads have decided that The Masses don't want "news," they want gossip. Celebrities and "human interest stories" take over. They stretch ever further downward in their attempts to "reach" the greatest number of consumers.
And make no mistake, "News" is officially a product, to be shaped and packaged so as to make the most money.
{hops off soapbox}
For the most part I have to agree. I care about some of the issues but WOW! the can run some of the stuff into the ground, while other things go unreported, I think that is one of the reasons blogging & sites like Druge are so popular now days.
Fiddle the reson some people jump to bias is that you really can't report the actual "news" if you give only half the story & some stories will get overlooked if they don't feed into that specific reporters or channels (or papers) agenda. So without stating which bias I think you do have to consider that too much gets overlooked because of bias (of any kind).
Yeah, I agree everygirl. I try to specifically got to biased sites of both sides so that I can get a full picture.
|
|
