L.A. TIMES EDITOR WARNS: Rise of 'Pseudo-Journalism' in America...

[conjur]

Yeah...I think if McCain had stuck his tongue in his cheek any harder it would have poked a hole in his face!

 

[josphII]

the irony is just too funny. the la times doesnt just misreport the news, they straight make it up. who here remembers the gropping allegations against govenor shwartzeneggar one week before the recall election? and lets not forget that the la times endorsed gay davis...

 

[conjur]

Wow, such an intelligent reply, josphII. How will the liberals go on?

 

[ryzmah]

After looking at those numbers (both for Fox and CBS), I would say all this reflects is the fact that the general populace doesn't pay attention to the news. The average channel flipper whose news concern is "do I need an umbrella?" is likely to list their "primary news source" as Fox, CBS, NBC, or ABC - they flip right past public news and don't listen to NPR, who has a market of people who really want to know the news (not to say that the major networks don't have some of that traffic too - it's just that their traffic isn't exclusively the "pay attention" crowd).

I think the number of people who don't pay attention can be more obviously shown by asking "What's your primary news source?" and seeing how much of the result is SNL, the Daily Show, Leno, Letterman, etc.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: conjur
Wow, such an intelligent reply, josphII. How will the liberals go on?

Think it doesn't happen?

Jayson Blair: faking it

What can you say about a trusted professional who makes stuff up and publishes it as fact?

Last week, New York Times reporter Jayson Blair joined Janet Cooke, formerly of the Washington Post, the New Republic's Stephen Glass, the Boston Globe's Patricia Smith, and Jay Forman in Slate as journalists who got caught embellishing, exaggerating, and outright lying in print. The will to fabricate cuts across disciplines, with academics and scientists inventing data, too. Last year, Emory University history professor Michael A. Bellesiles resigned following an investigation of charges that he concocted evidence to support his book Arming America, and Bell Labs fired researcher Jan Hendrik Schon when it discovered he made up scientific data and published it.

The Jayson Blair Project - How did he bamboozle the New York Times?

 

[Buz2b]

Checking back to see how bad I was "roasted" by some libs, (which I wasn't by the way, thank you!) I came across this misrepresentation of the facts.

and don't listen to NPR, who has a market of people who really want to know the news

If I take this as I think it was meant, the author is saying that the listeners of NPR are those that really want to know the "real" news. The problem is, NPR has a habit of leaning so far to the left that it's almost a joke that they are considered "public" anymore and given government funding. I think representing NPR as a source of the "real" news is just as bad as saying the LA Times is a credible source of unbiased news or Michael Savage is a true voice of conservatives. I kinda like Savage at times but he goes beyond what I think most conservatives would go, in the interest of entertainment. Cheers! :beer:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Checking back to see how bad I was "roasted" by some libs, (which I wasn't by the way, thank you!) I came across this misrepresentation of the facts.

and don't listen to NPR, who has a market of people who really want to know the news

If I take this as I think it was meant, the author is saying that the listeners of NPR are those that really want to know the "real" news. The problem is, NPR has a habit of leaning so far to the left that it's almost a joke that they are considered "public" anymore and given government funding. I think representing NPR as a source of the "real" news is just as bad as saying the LA Times is a credible source of unbiased news or Michael Savage is a true voice of conservatives. I kinda like Savage at times but he goes beyond what I think most conservatives would go, in the interest of entertainment. Cheers! :beer:

I think you're confusing the NPR news reports with the NPR news commentary programs.

NPR news is rather to-the-point and factual, much like listening to the BBC.

Commentary programs, though, do tend to lean to the left (but, look at Juan Williams...what do you expect?)

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I watch Fox News and I read their web site (among numerous others) and as long as you ignore/avoid the commentators they're not really that bad. Anyone who listens to Rush or Hannity or Air America, or anyone who simply tells you what they think about what's going on, is sadly mistaken if they think they're being informed about the issues.

I prefer my news to be more about the who/what/where/when/how and less about the talking head's opinion of the matter.

Agreed; I've found their actual news reporting to be fairly impartial (about what you'd expect from CNN), but their commentators are patently conservative.

 

[ryzmah]

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Checking back to see how bad I was "roasted" by some libs, (which I wasn't by the way, thank you!) I came across this misrepresentation of the facts.

and don't listen to NPR, who has a market of people who really want to know the news

If I take this as I think it was meant, the author is saying that the listeners of NPR are those that really want to know the "real" news. The problem is, NPR has a habit of leaning so far to the left that it's almost a joke that they are considered "public" anymore and given government funding. I think representing NPR as a source of the "real" news is just as bad as saying the LA Times is a credible source of unbiased news or Michael Savage is a true voice of conservatives. I kinda like Savage at times but he goes beyond what I think most conservatives would go, in the interest of entertainment. Cheers! :beer:

You misread my meaning. My point was NPR doesn't catch "channel surfers", but a specific audience who wants to stay informed - not that they represent the entire audience. I could make a similar comment about Wall Street Journal readers - it's a specific audience that is trying to stay informed but not the entire audience. I mentioned NPR because the article addresses those who list their primary news resource as "public".

I would say most of the major news networks and papers represent "real news" - how much of it they show is dependant on editorial staffs, but the content is largely the same because none of them want to be left out of a story. The differences are in editorials - for television I would say Fox is largely conservative, MSNBC is a mixed bag (not that it matters - no one watches), CNN is somewhat left of center (haven't watched in a while), and the major networks notable editorialists are liberal (John Stossel being a notable exception). I know the perception of NPR but I won't really discuss it, as I don't listen to radio news other than traffic reports and wouldn't want to prejudge them based on second/third hand knowledge.

 

[Buz2b]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Checking back to see how bad I was "roasted" by some libs, (which I wasn't by the way, thank you!) I came across this misrepresentation of the facts.

and don't listen to NPR, who has a market of people who really want to know the news

If I take this as I think it was meant, the author is saying that the listeners of NPR are those that really want to know the "real" news. The problem is, NPR has a habit of leaning so far to the left that it's almost a joke that they are considered "public" anymore and given government funding. I think representing NPR as a source of the "real" news is just as bad as saying the LA Times is a credible source of unbiased news or Michael Savage is a true voice of conservatives. I kinda like Savage at times but he goes beyond what I think most conservatives would go, in the interest of entertainment. Cheers! :beer:

I think you're confusing the NPR news reports with the NPR news commentary programs.

NPR news is rather to-the-point and factual, much like listening to the BBC.

Commentary programs, though, do tend to lean to the left (but, look at Juan Williams...what do you expect?)

(And here I said I wasn't going to get involved in this p1ssing match; LOL!) Actually I was just going to edit my comment to include a disclaimer of sorts to the author of the remark I quoted, in case I missunderstood his remark. However, since you "caught me" before I could do that, let me first mention that referring to the BBC as "rather to the point and factual" is one of the funniest things I've heard this year. Have you really listened to them?!?!? They go out of their way to report anything to support their left-leaning agenda. True, they don't spend a lot of time "commenting" on the news, as we are used to here in the states but their method is just as effective; flood the airwaves with negatives to discredit those that disagree with them. I purposely watched them a few times and compared what BBC deemed top international news stories with what we see here and it was horribly evident that they were even more left than CNN in their reporting.
Again though, if I didn't interpret your comment correctly, accept my apologies.

 

[Buz2b]

Originally quoted from ryzmah:

I would say most of the major news networks and papers represent "real news" - how much of it they show is dependant on editorial staffs, but the content is largely the same because none of them want to be left out of a story.

The "story" they don't want to be left out of is just that; LEFT! To say "most of the major news networks and papers represent the real news" is absolutely NUTS!! How can you be serious about this??!! Well, never mind, it's like trying to educate the blind with eyeglasses; it doesn't work. When folks allow themselves to be influenced by these type of rantings, it is difficult to "break through" and convence them otherwise.
Look, I'm not saying that Fox doesn't tend to lean a bit to the right; the simple fact that they don't promote the left agenda gets them branded that way no matter what. However, with their ever increasing ratings it is obvious that what they are doing is working. Hard to argue with that.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Originally quoted from ryzmah:

I would say most of the major news networks and papers represent "real news" - how much of it they show is dependant on editorial staffs, but the content is largely the same because none of them want to be left out of a story.

The "story" they don't want to be left out of is just that; LEFT! To say "most of the major news networks and papers represent the real news" is absolutely NUTS!! How can you be serious about this??!! Well, never mind, it's like trying to educate the blind with eyeglasses; it doesn't work. When folks allow themselves to be influenced by these type of rantings, it is difficult to "break through" and convence them otherwise.
Look, I'm not saying that Fox doesn't tend to lean a bit to the right; the simple fact that they don't promote the left agenda gets them branded that way no matter what. However, with their ever increasing ratings it is obvious that what they are doing is working. Hard to argue with that.

Please provide links to left-leaning news articles at either CNN or the BBC. Thanks.

Zephyr

 

[ryzmah]

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Originally quoted from ryzmah:

I would say most of the major news networks and papers represent "real news" - how much of it they show is dependant on editorial staffs, but the content is largely the same because none of them want to be left out of a story.

The "story" they don't want to be left out of is just that; LEFT! To say "most of the major news networks and papers represent the real news" is absolutely NUTS!! How can you be serious about this??!! Well, never mind, it's like trying to educate the blind with eyeglasses; it doesn't work. When folks allow themselves to be influenced by these type of rantings, it is difficult to "break through" and convence them otherwise.
Look, I'm not saying that Fox doesn't tend to lean a bit to the right; the simple fact that they don't promote the left agenda gets them branded that way no matter what. However, with their ever increasing ratings it is obvious that what they are doing is working. Hard to argue with that.

Could you provide an example? What news is available in some sources but not in others? Most of the news I get is from either the WSJ or the Washington Post - the differences in the papers' markets and political slant are apparent, but when reading the articles they cover the same material, with almost all of the "news" coming from the Associated Press (with the Journal having some more depth in economics and the Post having more depth in locally important issues for me) and I don't feel like I'd be grossly misinformed if I missed either one of the papers for a few weeks.

While I don't have any problems with Fox, I wouldn't view ratings as the ideal unless you think news shows should be used as propoganda - start thinking that way and those "Dateline" ratings would imply the real news of importance are TV show finales like "The Apprentice", "Friends" or "Frasier", or you would think there is some huge importance to book releases covered on "60 Minutes" without thinking about the fact that Viacom might be trying to make a profit on what they're publishing.

On a someone separate note, do we know if this study referred to Fox News Channel viewers, or Fox viewers in general?

 

[Buz2b]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: Buz2b
Originally quoted from ryzmah:

I would say most of the major news networks and papers represent "real news" - how much of it they show is dependant on editorial staffs, but the content is largely the same because none of them want to be left out of a story.

The "story" they don't want to be left out of is just that; LEFT! To say "most of the major news networks and papers represent the real news" is absolutely NUTS!! How can you be serious about this??!! Well, never mind, it's like trying to educate the blind with eyeglasses; it doesn't work. When folks allow themselves to be influenced by these type of rantings, it is difficult to "break through" and convence them otherwise.
Look, I'm not saying that Fox doesn't tend to lean a bit to the right; the simple fact that they don't promote the left agenda gets them branded that way no matter what. However, with their ever increasing ratings it is obvious that what they are doing is working. Hard to argue with that.

Please provide links to left-leaning news articles at either CNN or the BBC. Thanks.

Zephyr

Like I really have to prove this point?!?! Ok, just to humor you, just go to the BBC home page and take a look. Take a look at all the articles listed there and tell me where ONE OF THEM gives any impartiality to the issues. Instead what you see is nothing but articles that put the current government in a defensive position, because of these accusations and innuendoes. Sure there are exceptions to this but they are few and far between. You will of course say that because the accusations are there, they MUST be deserved. That is the latest method of the left; accuse, accuse, accuse...............sooner or later, you might find something that sticks. The problem is, that hasn't happened. That is why they have gotten even more desperate lately with the accusations.
If you need any more specific examples, I would happily provide them on Monday or Tuesday; as I am happily giving my wife and mother a really nice brunch (earlier) today. I really need to give more attention to the wife at this point; note the time PST. Most husbands and fathers would wonder what the heck I am doing for her at this point. :shocked:

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/05/07/409bbfc0d5b00

"Don't be lured by the money or the big name of the employer," he said, adding that journalists should not allow their integrity to be compromised by unscrupulous employers.

"Don't be a piano player in a whorehouse," he said.

hey, SOMEONE's got to play the piano in the whorehouse

I usually read the BBC...they've proven to be a pretty good news source.