So is the Press the Enemy of the people?
- Thread starter Bruce1
- Start date
Look at FNC demographics... 94% White and probably about that high old. Everything else is split between all the other stations.
A biased press is nothing new. People should go to multiple sources and balance out the media's biases.
Deciding what to report on is the basic job of the press. A free press helps ensure that stories that need to be told get reported.
By the way, the phrase "enemy of the people" was commonly used by the leaders of the Soviet Union..
.
Well, No. 1, using the term "the Press" is problemmatic because the big networks have "news" departments and "opinion" departments/"personalities." It's difficult to separate the two and, for example, I keep reading that the "news" side of Fox does not get along with the Ingraham/Hannity side at all. Fox, of course, has the most viewers among the mainstream media and displays the exact same faults but acts like it's, what? Invisible? Some other industry than CNN? If Fox isn't a monoloth then how in the world can you act like "the Press" is a monolith. Your use of "the Press" appears to be the creation of an artificial target for right wingers to shoot at.
No. 2, the use of "polls" to resolve subjective, loaded questions is highly doubtful in today's world, because the 2016 election revealed a certain amount of doubt about the methodology of how polls are taken. Accurate polls used to be done by calling people on landlines -- not so much now. People ignore phone calls.
No. 3, there is this very loud disruptive factor that distorts all public opinion and renders it at least partially invalid. Imagine if you were a high schooler and the high school principal bombarded you every day with public address announcements saying that the cutest cheerleader was really a disgusting, ignorant dog, and immoral slut with uncountable STDs who also lied, betrayed her boyfriend(s) and killed babies while driving drunk every day for three hours after school (plus wasn't loyal to him, the principal). In a world where too many people freak out if the reading is longer than today's maximum character count on Twitter, there can't be any doubt the results of any poll regarding this cheerleader would be skewed by the blabbing if such a principal.
No. 4, you claimed, " There is a very significant difference in the attitudes of respondents based on party affiliation." This seems to suggest your own bias. Your post doesn't account for other differences in education, geography and economic status.
No. 2, the use of "polls" to resolve subjective, loaded questions is highly doubtful in today's world, because the 2016 election revealed a certain amount of doubt about the methodology of how polls are taken. Accurate polls used to be done by calling people on landlines -- not so much now. People ignore phone calls.
No. 3, there is this very loud disruptive factor that distorts all public opinion and renders it at least partially invalid. Imagine if you were a high schooler and the high school principal bombarded you every day with public address announcements saying that the cutest cheerleader was really a disgusting, ignorant dog, and immoral slut with uncountable STDs who also lied, betrayed her boyfriend(s) and killed babies while driving drunk every day for three hours after school (plus wasn't loyal to him, the principal). In a world where too many people freak out if the reading is longer than today's maximum character count on Twitter, there can't be any doubt the results of any poll regarding this cheerleader would be skewed by the blabbing if such a principal.
No. 4, you claimed, " There is a very significant difference in the attitudes of respondents based on party affiliation." This seems to suggest your own bias. Your post doesn't account for other differences in education, geography and economic status.
You're exactly right, of course, about the history of a biased press, but I doubt if the alleged Pastor has ever read The Federalist Papers, or he would realize that the press was totally biased at the time of the Constitution. Next step for him would be to demonstrate that he understands that the First Amendment applies only to government restrictions and not to private entities -- stay tuned, he may surprise us all.
Stupid that I don't think the reason we have Trump is all republicans are stupid? Okay, then.
Government censorship, which you’re advocating, is the “slipperiest” of slopes you don’t ever want to go down. Book burnings never work.
No, its stupid that you can’t discuss issues with the media that both political parties agree is doing a crappy job without making about one party vs the other. Very immature.
It's not censorship. It's a basic level of regulation that says you can't throw shit against the wall or there will be consequences. I don't understand why that's remotely controversial position to take.
It’s government controlling the message. That’s censorship, and it’s anathema to our republic.
I don't think you understand what "censorship" means.
My view: Don't watch TV news. Of any kind. At all. Including the networks' flagship Sunday news shows. Unless you happen to be curious about which particular bullshit the usual suspects are talking about right now.
Otherwise, a person could actually learn more right here -- or at least there have been times when an ordinary person could learn more right here -- than it's really possible to learn from TV news.
Having said all this, there really is news, and anyone with a lick of sense knows that it solidly resides in mainstream sources like the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Financial Times, and all the other print and digital sources of top flight news and analysis that are easily available to all with the curiosity to care.
The current notion that there's a crisis in the news is mostly a concoction of people determined not to know the truth.
This is the real crisis, and why it's so important for the GOP to be universally rejected until Trumpism is eradicated. We currently have a party that is beholden to a group of people who no longer live in, or even engage, reality. If these modern Know-Nothings cement themselves permanently as one of our two main political wings, society is f*cked.
It's not so much that the news sucks, as much as it is how people are using it.
I'm glad you made that point about the origin of "fake news" -- spurious "news" made up by Russian trolls, then transmitted via social media to rube-heavy districts. Trump took this term -- which described literally faked news created by Russian operatives to help elect him -- and applied it to everything that isn't published on Fox. Ironically, it is that false meaning which has survived, but this isn't even regarded as an absurdity.
VanPastorMan
Hall of Famer
How about all news sources just report what has happened? But they don't if it doesn't fit their narrative. Here is an example. This story was not widely reported. Even if it was reported it was not reported with emphasis. Why? It is because it does not fit the narrative.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/1...gedly-conducted-school-shooting-training.html
If you go here https://www.cnn.com/ we do not see this very important story at all.
WTF are you talking about? That story was very widely reported, including by CNN. In fact, the latest development in the story is currently on the cnn.com front page that you link (but apparently don't bother to read). You know where you won't find that story right now? The foxnews.com front page. Go figure.
So, are you just badly misinformed, or are you lying?
As you know “Fake News” is a term derived by our illustrious POTUS. How about this? Try looking at the original topic from the perspective that this trend has been happening for a very long time, way before Trump. My view is that 50% of the Dems view the press as not doing their job. The Press is not the Frien of the American People. That makes them the enemy.
I was alive and sentient during the relevant period. Your response suggests that perhaps you were not.
You're biggest error is assuming that the American people need to approve of an institution in order to consider that institution a "friend." Sometimes, doing the right thing doesn't come with universal approval.
I believe you have a preference for a dictatorship - as long as the dictator does the things you’d like.
So we will put you in agreement with Hillary that the other side are Deplorables. You already went down this path last election cycle. It’s not a winning path.....
You know, what I have not seen mentioned in numerous threads is when this war with the “Press” seemed to really begin. I think a clear, slow, and deliberate, move towards this Press confrontation has bee been in process for the last 20 years.
The Clinton years the press was drummed on to report the not so pretty underbelly of the Clinton Whitehouse. There was lots there to point at and report. Many believe the press only reported after being dragged there kicking and screaming. It just couldn’t be ignored.
Then came W. The press took their breathe and said, okay we will dig and obloviate just like you wanted. W was labeled a fool, idiot, uneducated, in the press. W mentioned at times or his administration pointed out some of the unfairness they felt in the press. But it continued. W sat through condescending interviews...but we went along with it and kept our heads down as Americans do and focused on ourselves until Obama came on screen.
Obama and the love affair of the media. The war with the media amplified during his Presidency. He chose not to do interviews with Fox News and I believe limited his administration appearances. He even commented on Fox News credibility. Hmmm..... the you have James Rosen being investigated. Wow. That is a pretty big issue right there. Sweep sweep sweep.....that is a rug best left lying.
Now we have the next step of outright verbal war with the media. What is the answer? Who knows for sure. I personally don’t look at any of the cable news guys as actual Press..... their fast breaking news coverages around the world is impressive and very much worthy of being labeled Press credentialed reporting. But what about the other 23 hours of the day on the networks? I think you need separate networks for the other 23 hrs and should not be aloud to be called News Stations or journalists on the shows. That’s a start. I mean the news portion of the shows are boxed between partisan shows before and after. It’s like they are doing their best to wipe out what was previously reported.....
Anyway, my point is this current dust up in the press has been coming for a long time. I didn’t even mention the changes in Journalism since the Clinton years the internet has played. Journalists are worried about employment and putting food on the table like everyone else. Obviously, traditional outlets have downsized considerably. They write and report for a living and until what “sells” changes, we are gonna continue to get this regardless......
The Clinton years the press was drummed on to report the not so pretty underbelly of the Clinton Whitehouse. There was lots there to point at and report. Many believe the press only reported after being dragged there kicking and screaming. It just couldn’t be ignored.
Then came W. The press took their breathe and said, okay we will dig and obloviate just like you wanted. W was labeled a fool, idiot, uneducated, in the press. W mentioned at times or his administration pointed out some of the unfairness they felt in the press. But it continued. W sat through condescending interviews...but we went along with it and kept our heads down as Americans do and focused on ourselves until Obama came on screen.
Obama and the love affair of the media. The war with the media amplified during his Presidency. He chose not to do interviews with Fox News and I believe limited his administration appearances. He even commented on Fox News credibility. Hmmm..... the you have James Rosen being investigated. Wow. That is a pretty big issue right there. Sweep sweep sweep.....that is a rug best left lying.
Now we have the next step of outright verbal war with the media. What is the answer? Who knows for sure. I personally don’t look at any of the cable news guys as actual Press..... their fast breaking news coverages around the world is impressive and very much worthy of being labeled Press credentialed reporting. But what about the other 23 hours of the day on the networks? I think you need separate networks for the other 23 hrs and should not be aloud to be called News Stations or journalists on the shows. That’s a start. I mean the news portion of the shows are boxed between partisan shows before and after. It’s like they are doing their best to wipe out what was previously reported.....
Anyway, my point is this current dust up in the press has been coming for a long time. I didn’t even mention the changes in Journalism since the Clinton years the internet has played. Journalists are worried about employment and putting food on the table like everyone else. Obviously, traditional outlets have downsized considerably. They write and report for a living and until what “sells” changes, we are gonna continue to get this regardless......
This is not hard...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That was in the first bullet point of our list of rights for a reason. Trump can get pissy about the press (I do, I think they are full of shit quite often) and he can vigorously disagree with them. However, the government has zero business in regulating what the press has to say. Personally I think the incestuous relationship between the Press and the Government is half of the issue we have today.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Have you seen The Death of Stalin? It’s one of my fave movies I’ve seen in the last year or two. It’s hilarious and your use of “committee” made me think of it.
So, the regular folks are beneath you elite liberals, eh? That's what's gotten your brains beaten out since 2010. Regular folks are through with you extreme liberal elites thinking you should control their lives.
HL Mencken was prophetic: On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
I’m glad to hear you’re regular. Just keep fiber in your diet, and you’ll likely stay that way.
This is absolutely right. One must have a list of reputable sources. Unfortunately, the reality is that in the 21st century the average consumer is increasingly reliant on social media/internet for their news. Why? Because of speed and velocity. Traditional media is usually last to the punch on breaking news. People demand instantaneous feedback. This then leads to the exploitation by nefarious actors, which is a whole other can of worms.
The press is a unique institution. Everybody pretty much agrees that the press is important, even vital, but we don’t treat it as we do other important and vital institutions. The press is unlicensed and not regulated. Think about that for a second. We license and regulate every important occupation from lawyers to doctors, from plumbers to teachers, to cops to real estate agents. Licensing carries standards. So that’s point number 1, the press has no enforceable standards.
Point number 2, is that the press has the freedom to lie about people and events and have no civil liability unless the lie is.not about an issue of public concern or is done with deliberate malice. While only a few in the press will lie, many will deliberately misrepresent an issue.
The first amendment is seen to require the above two points. The press takes full advantage of both. Not all the press all the time, but all of the press some of the time. On any given day there will be reporting that is slanted, biased, inaccurate, mistaken,or irrelevant. That goes along with the frequent good quality reporting.
The press is run by people. People are often emotional and reactive. The press is the same. The same emotions that caused Sarah Sanders to leave the Red Hen, are present in thousands of news rooms. The press is highly influenced by bandwagons. It survives by advertising, ratings, and nowadays clicks. To survive it must give consumers want they want. What consumers want is to know about Trump is far different from what they wanted to know about Obama.
Is the press the enemy of the people? I don’t think it matters. Ideally the press should provide us complete and objective information. That is way too much to expect. Why should we be told that China is caving to Trump’s trade war when it is more lucrative and fun to talk about Brennan?
I think.calling the press the enemy of the people is a nothingburger and the press indignation about that is an exploding head. The GOP has been climbing all over trial lawyers for decades and we don’t do anything about that other than keep on working.
The press needs to STFU about themselves. They are not victims and criticizing it does in no way threaten the First amendment.
No, I have not. I will add it to my to watch list.
I did enjoy getting a rise out of the usual suspects in this thread. After all, the thread started with someone calling the press the "enemy".
I recommend this:
https://www.pbs.org/video/our-man-in-tehran-part-one-p9eu3w/
<sigh>
What is different about what people want to hear about Trump vs. what they want to hear about Obama?
So you don’t agree that the purpose of the Press is to provide the American people with fair and accurate data? That seems strange to me. Doing the right thing would be to report accurately without bias! Are you suggesting that it I not?
The press in America has always been a disorganized mess but that’s why it’s great. Heck we a lot of sensational tabloids posing as real news that no one seems to be concerned about the National Enquirer. I don’t understand why we are now so suddenly worried about the fairness and correctness of what is being reported by the press. I would say it is better than it was during many other times in the history of this country i.e. the Spanish American war which came about mostly due to the influence of the American press.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
What the hell are schools supposed to do to stop the war in Gaza- Latest: BradStevens
-
-