Is there a news media left?

Chris Losinger

Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Yes, but the facts would include Bush’s explanation and an article from one who thinks differently with their explanation. Rather than the newsperson doing most of the interpretation the only 'fact' there is that someone wrote an article. if you step down into that article, you're going to find a whole new mess of citations, quotes and points-of-view. it would take years to find the "truth" about anything. -c

When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.

Bobber!

Michael A Barnhart

Agreed. I can just imagine the size of a newspaper if all the sources were printed in their entirety :) ""

Chris Maunder

You need to dig deep and find out who owns or controls the media outlets - then you'll get an idea of which way to set the trim on the ailerons of reality. To me it seems that the Nightly News in the US is a high rating piece of TV entertainment - no more, no less. The tone and content reflect that which is most likely to keep viewers tuned to that station in order to watch the ads presented. cheers, Chris Maunder

David Wulff

I am instantly wary of any news source that replies entirely on commercial profits and sponsorship to tell the news; I can't name any that haven't published distinctly one sided views at one point or another. Find a part-public funded and internationally monitored news source with a royal charter to strictly enforce the accuracy and any slant of it's media, and you'll be at least two thirds of the way there... [^] The rest is in your interpretation and willingness to read around. FWIW, the talkback parts of the BBC News web site are a great way of getting a great selection of views from just about every country in the world, and they certianly seem to open them up for any topic that is likely to need one. It's not perfect, but as Chris L said news has to be made into a story else only a select few sadists will watch it.

David Wulff

"David Wulff can't live without me, so you shouldn't either" - Paul Watson

Paul Watson

Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Do you think the news profession has lost much of its professionalism The other night I was at a photographic club and they had the chief photographer from South Africa's largest newspaper. Apart from being very interesting on the photographic side, it also showed us a lot about the workings of the paper itself. Photographs are very carefully thought about before the editor puts it in the paper. What was interesting was that 80% of the photographs the guy showed us never made it into the paper. Not because they were rubbish, but because they simply were too contentious, too close to the reality and truth of the day. He showed how this incredible photo of a child hanged by a gang was rejected in favour of another photo showing a fit voleyball woman doing her thing. Reason, the voleyball photo would sell more papers. That also meant the gang killing story was relegated a few pages back rather than on the front page. The editor also ruled that the gang killing photo was simply too disturbing for Joe on the streets. That edition of the paper, with the voleyball woman on the front, sold very well. I just thought it was an interesting expose on how consumer demand rules. What the public wants they report on.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Macbeth muttered: I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er DavidW wrote: You are totally mad. Nice.

Member 96

Since I started working from home I've become a bit of a news 'junkie'. I have a satellite dish and get far too many channels that is probably good for me, but every morning I brew up a latte and surf through the news channels. I absolutly never read a newspaper any more except the front page when I'm waiting in line at the coffee shop. I do read a lot of news on-line though and gravitate towards the Washington post and NY Times. They seem to have a very high fact to analysis ratio. I think that the television news profession has completely lost it's professionalism in the U.S., is mixed in Canada and the only other example I have to go on is the BBC World news channel which is the most professional of any I've seen. I flip through many different news sources but primarily: CNN - The long winded one, not the one that just cycles through the "top stories" Completely advertising funded. CBC Newsworld - "Trusted, connected - Canadian" Publicly funded. Advertising. BBC World news - Publicly funded, no advertising. I flip to CNN to get the hype from the U.S. for the day (or to see whats burning today - literally), then I flip to BBC to get the actual facts about what's happening in the world, then I flip to CBC to get the "what canada has to do with it" perspective. CNN seems to be too amateurish to be capable of being biased one way or the other. And even more so when they make a very obvious point of trying to not appear to be biased. They rely heavily on outside sources for almost all of their reporting, in particular for "breaking" news stories. It seems likely that if CNN's own building was on fire they would turn to station "WXYZ in Atlanta for the latest pictures" CNN is the anemic bubble-boy poster child of unprofessional journalism. On a near hourly basis they make some stupid new pun related to the most serious of news stories. (mostly in the "ticker" that runs across the bottom). Their on screen text is daily filled with simple spelling mistakes. The only reason to watch CNN is for purely entertainment purposes. The CBC tends to report quite well on domestic matters with a very leftish bias: If a person had a wildly successful new business, they would spend 10% of the time reporting on that and 90% reporting on whatever nut was protesting against that business. Strangely though, they rarely take a politician of any persuasion to task when interviewing them. I would tend to believe most facts they report in Canadian news stories as being true. The BBC is definitely b

Anna Jayne Metcalfe

Can you get the BBC News via cable? ;) Anna :rose: www.annasplace.me.uk

"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch

Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++

Nitron

Michael, Unlike mathematics and "hard sciences", when it comes to politics and other "soft sciences", there is no such thing as an undisputed "fact". No one evaluates soft evidence objectively. I say this because everyone looks at these facts through "rose colored glasses" so to speak. These "rose colored glasses" are what I will refer to as their world view. This is the view of the world based on people's environment and experiences. The world view then distorts "facts" and forms a biased or blurred image to the one evaluating the "fact". Interestingly enough, these foundations of the world view are usually traced in circular reason, back to a faith assumption. I like to use the example of God and religion to frame this concept. Assume two groups of people (for sake of argument), Bible-Believing Christians and Secular Athiests. Now, put a "fact" on the table and watch the evaluations... - The resurrection of Jesus. Athiest: The Ressurection of Jesus did not happen because science denies the possibility of such a thing. Christian: The Ressurection of Jesus was a miracle and proves the diety of Jesus. Ok, why do they evaluate the event in the way they do? The athiest denies the ressurection because all there is in the universe is molecules in motion, and the very thought of ressurection and supernatural beings is absurd. Ok, how does he know that? How does the athiest know there is no supernatural being? The truth is, he doesn't. Based on his education and experience (his world view), he assumes, on faith, that all there is in the universe is matter. An un-provable, faith assumption. Now consider the christian. His evaluation waters down to the fact that the ressurection is true because the bible says so. And as a bible-believer, he assumes, also by faith, that the bible is the inerrant word of God. Also an un-provable assumptionn and the reasoning stops at the faith assumption of the bible. So you can see how this world view affects everything, not only the way the news is presented, but also the way the news is evaluated. - Nitron

"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb

Michael A Barnhart

Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: Can you get the BBC News via cable? Yes but it is "BBC America" version. It has been influenced. My best option is mostly Web Connections and then throw away those segments that look predetermined. At least that is what I have been doing. I agree with the comments on BBC. I do have it book marked. Just my frustrations with what many around me take as the “NEWS” ""

Michael A Barnhart

I agree with much (all) of what has been said here. My point is that most (all) of the news people spend more time telling me what they feel rather than convening what was said. Now yes that is going to be edited but do not quote to me what Mr. XYZ said and then give me a psychoanalysis of it. Just tell me the pieces you have extracted along with the counter position if meaningful to the report and be done with it. DO you want to try to get a CPIAN dinner set up locally? ""

Anna Jayne Metcalfe

That's a shame. I have to say the mainstream news channels in the UK (BBC and ITN) largely come across as unsensationalist and balanced. It's a pity you can't get them as we do - after all...CNN Europe is heavily "Americanised" so why shouldn't BBC America be "Anglicised"? ;) Anna :rose: www.annasplace.me.uk

"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch

Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++

Nitron

Michael A. Barnhart wrote: DO you want to try to get a CPIAN dinner set up locally? sure! lemme know when. - Nitron

"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb