Media Bias

Guy Chamberlin said:
Problem is, a lot of the people keen to discredit the liberal media for shoddy reporting, immediately promote their own media sources with even shoddier reporting. In way too many cases, flat out insane reporting. 

There are still news sources that do a consistently solid job of research and vetting, and choose their headlines carefully. You might accuse them of a liberal bent, but  maybe that's where the facts are bending. Hopefully you can understand that in a post-Trump and QAnon world, the "two sides" of misdeeds and conspiracy theories may not be equal, and the "whole pile of crap" doesn't absolve you from seeking out a range of better news sources.  
Click to expand...


One person's better is the next person's garbage.  People dictate truth based on the facts they want to hear.  And the media, no matter how shoddy or reputable anyone wants to perceive them, can now do whatever they want.  Because people will either chastise them regardless or praise them regardless.  Meanwhile people who want real context either don't know where to turn because of bulls#!t "fact checking" or they don't have time to play 7 degrees to Kevin Bacon to find the true context.  And typically by the time the truth comes out, the world has moved on and anyone who wss wrong to begin with can mildly shrug it off and focus on the new thing.

Context and Information control is the real pandemic

 




Yahoo, Fox News, LA Times, Newsmax, Newsweek, CBS, The New York Post, Daily Mail, RealClearPolitics, Breitbart and others are all national news outless who have had something to say. 

 


Or.......the national news outlets reported the baseball player claiming he heard the N-Word, followed by millions of social media mavens and pundits replaying the clip and weighing in -- often stupidly -- and within 24 hours the national news outlets confirm the mistake and the embarrassing rush to judgement.

And then when a woman in a gorilla mask throws an egg at a black candidate for governor, the national news outlets report on it, followed by millions of social media mavens and pundits replaying the clip and weighing in -- often stupidly.

Poor victimized Stephen L. Miller.  I'm betting he's not a bastion of egalitarian media coverage. 

 
chamrocck said:
Why media silence when a black candidate Larry Elder has a gorilla mask wearing goon throw eggs at him?

Why media silence when Hunter Biden admits losing his laptop while naked with a hooker?

Now in the above replace Larry Elder with Stacy Abrams and Hunter Biden with Donald Trump Jr.  What does the media coverage look like then?
Click to expand...
LOL....dude.....stop listening to crap media.

 
Redux said:
One person's better is the next person's garbage.  People dictate truth based on the facts they want to hear.  And the media, no matter how shoddy or reputable anyone wants to perceive them, can now do whatever they want.  Because people will either chastise them regardless or praise them regardless.  Meanwhile people who want real context either don't know where to turn because of bulls#!t "fact checking" or they don't have time to play 7 degrees to Kevin Bacon to find the true context.  And typically by the time the truth comes out, the world has moved on and anyone who wss wrong to begin with can mildly shrug it off and focus on the new thing.

Context and Information control is the real pandemic
Click to expand...


Yeah, I've noticed that people who believe what they want to believe have also been busy trying to discredit independent fact checkers who show their homework, admit what remains unverified, and correct as new information becomes available. They're pretty good at providing context. They've stopped me from spreading liberal myths, too. 

That still leaves us with a huge false equivalency. You can make a case that CNN is the flip side of Fox. But a stunning number of people are getting their worldview from Newsmax, OAN, Brietbart, InfoWars, Trump tweets, and yeah, straight from QAnon dispensaries. There actually isn't a liberal equivalent of those "news" sources beyond the bipolar guy shouting on a Berkeley street corner. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fact Checkers are the same thing as media bias now, you can't believe all of them.  Believe almost none of them if it's social media algorithm based.

And there doesn't need to be a "liberal equivalent" to Qanon.  Most of those fallacies are already accepted as real by the general public.  How else could Rolling Stone convince people that we have an Ivermectin overdose problem.

 
Redux said:
Fact Checkers are the same thing as media bias now, you can't believe all of them.  Believe almost none of them if it's social media algorithm based.

And there doesn't need to be a "liberal equivalent" to Qanon.  Most of those fallacies are already accepted as real by the general public.  How else could Rolling Stone convince people that we have an Ivermectin overdose problem.
Click to expand...
Most people who claim a certain fact checker site is biased only base it on...."OH MY GOD....That one reporter for them used to work for MSNBC and is a registered Democrat."  Or something like that....which is BS.

 
Lorewarn said:
Yahoo, Fox News, LA Times, Newsmax, Newsweek, CBS, The New York Post, Daily Mail, RealClearPolitics, Breitbart and others are all national news outless who have had something to say. 
Click to expand...
I noticed you didn’t say CNN, MSNBC, NYT, HuffPo, DailyBeast, WaPo……………….You remember, all those who breathlessly spread a lie about a fan in a baseball stadium. 

 
Archy1221 said:
Or they didn’t and continued on with their narrative.  
Click to expand...


Or within 24/48 hours, everyone who originally covered the story realized the Colorado Rockies mascot was named Dinger and that's who the poor fan was yelling at. 

It was a Black Florida Marlins player that made the shocking accusation, and the Colorado Rockies rushed out an apology to the fans and media. So the immediate coverage was arguably "news." 

The only narrative I saw  two days after the incident was a  cautionary tale about rushing to judgement. And "Dinger" made it vaguely comedic. Real face palm stuff. 

If you can find a legitimate news source that continued to promote the story of a racist Colorado Rockies fan, I'd love to see it. 

 
Archy1221 said:
I noticed you didn’t say CNN, MSNBC, NYT, HuffPo, DailyBeast, WaPo……………….You remember, all those who breathlessly spread a lie about a fan in a baseball stadium. 
Click to expand...


Why do you make other people do your footwork for you?

Seriously. Go find someone who covered the Dinger story, and then see if they followed it up accordingly.

I did. They did. You're lazy. 

 
I guess "media and news organizations don't cover everything in the world and make choices about what they think are newsworthy while others make different choices" isn't nearly as compelling a narrative as "the media are silent about the things that really matter and discriminating against us"

 
Lorewarn said:
I guess "media and news organizations don't cover everything in the world and make choices about what they think are newsworthy while others make different choices" isn't nearly as compelling a narrative as "the media are silent about the things that really matter and discriminating against us"
Click to expand...
Correct.  Major liberal media orgs have no issue spending days upon days discussing, dissecting, and discussing more any hint of racism pointed toward the side they are against, but when a story comes out about a Black Republican, well like you said, they choose it to not be newsworthy. 

 
Back
Top