News Media Distortion Examples

RambleTamble said:
The problem with that statement is, you can't back it up with facts. There is no equivalent to Fox "news" propaganda except for maybe something in N. Korea or Russia, but nothing in the U.S.
Click to expand...
This is from Wikipedia:

Daniel Okrent, former Times ombudsman admitted to bias in the Times coverage of the Duke lacrosse case. He said, "It was too delicious a story. It conformed too well to too many preconceived notions of too many in the press: white over black, rich over poor, athletes over non-athletes, men over women, educated over non-educated. Wow. That's a package of sins that really fit the preconceptions of a lot of us."

I find this true of a lot of NY Times coverage. It's written from a particular viewpoint and doesn't always reflect the real world.
 
Let's not forget that MS Now was home to such wonderful folks as Keith Olbermann, Martin Bashir, Joy Ann Reid, Chris Matthews, Mehdi Hasan and Al Sharpton, all fired for a variety of sins ranging from homophobia to anti-Semitism to espousing 9-11 conspiracy theories to sexual harassment to, well, you name it.
 
Our closest TV broadcast mainly covers St Louis. I live 50 miles from there.
To see any news around me I have to look on our e-newspapers. I try desperately
not to travel into St Louis so, frankly, I don't bother with it.

The biggest articles in our paper are Highway accident reports usually. The protests
about a datacenter did keep the front pages and more filled for a few weeks. They
once again canceled the meeting whether to allow it here because somehow every time
the County goes to vote on it for the ballot, word gets out and the County Courthouse
gets bombarded with protestors.
 
Irishdude said:
This is from Wikipedia:

Daniel Okrent, former Times ombudsman admitted to bias in the Times coverage of the Duke lacrosse case. He said, "It was too delicious a story. It conformed too well to too many preconceived notions of too many in the press: white over black, rich over poor, athletes over non-athletes, men over women, educated over non-educated. Wow. That's a package of sins that really fit the preconceptions of a lot of us."

I find this true of a lot of NY Times coverage. It's written from a particular viewpoint and doesn't always reflect the real world.
Click to expand...
Daniel Okrent did not admit to ideological bias in the paper’s Duke lacrosse coverage. As the New York Times's first public editor (ombudsman), he investigated the paper's handling of the story in a 2007 column, concluding that most reporting flaws stemmed from journalistic lapses and sensationalism rather than ideological bias.
The critical distinction in his assessment included these specifics:
  • Journalistic Lapses over Ideological Bias: Okrent concluded that most of the reporting flaws were the result of bad judgment and sensationalism, not a liberal ideological bias driving the newsdesk.
  • The "Right-Thinking" Narrative: Okrent did note that the story possessed elements ("white over black, male over female, jocks over a nonstudent, rich over poor") that made it irresistibly attractive to the media.
  • Exclusion of Columnists: Okrent's review of the news coverage explicitly did not cover opinion writers or sports columnists, who he acknowledged were fiercely critical of Duke.
 
Word spread tonight that the shots near the White House were from 2 shooters when in fact apparently from only one suspect. A wackado with an existing restraining order not to come near the WH.
 
It is all of so called "journalist or media" bait and switch click bait because ........ no drum roll needed ..... clicks and ratings equal $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
just like half of the most sensationalized headlines look in the bottom corner. ........yep, says sponsored meaning AD. photos of main stars of a show or movie with headline of one of the cast of ( insert name popular show or movie) has died ....................only to find it was a d list actor that appeared as an extra on said show and was in 2 scenes for a total of 1.5 minutes.

CNN a month or two ago wrote " remembering Michael J Fox" ....... did he die? NOPE either a person jumped gun and ran with it or they knew people will read it.... saw the same thing just 2 days ago on another living celebrity.... this is not accident just so many clicks for money.

Story that was an April Fool's joke still being reran by idiots who never read original to the bottom where it said April fools.... maybe a few of you saw this or the many, many recycled versions after that failed to NOTE this is not REAL.
it was all about TSA requiring transparent luggage so they can see everything and if you get to airport without it they will hand you large clear garbage bags 🙄


we could write a book on all the misinformation and plain ole BS in financial articles.
 
WhatInThe said:
Word spread tonight that the shots near the White House were from 2 shooters when in fact apparently from only one suspect. A wackado with an existing restraining order not to come near the WH.
Click to expand...

A man who was already known to the U.S. Secret Service approached the White House complex on Saturday evening, took a gun out of a bag and opened fire before being shot and fatally wounded by Secret Service police officers.

Sounds like suicide by cop.
 
RambleTamble said:
Daniel Okrent did not admit to ideological bias in the paper’s Duke lacrosse coverage. As the New York Times's first public editor (ombudsman), he investigated the paper's handling of the story in a 2007 column, concluding that most reporting flaws stemmed from journalistic lapses and sensationalism rather than ideological bias.
The critical distinction in his assessment included these specifics:
  • Journalistic Lapses over Ideological Bias: Okrent concluded that most of the reporting flaws were the result of bad judgment and sensationalism, not a liberal ideological bias driving the newsdesk.
  • The "Right-Thinking" Narrative: Okrent did note that the story possessed elements ("white over black, male over female, jocks over a nonstudent, rich over poor") that made it irresistibly attractive to the media.
  • Exclusion of Columnists: Okrent's review of the news coverage explicitly did not cover opinion writers or sports columnists, who he acknowledged were fiercely critical of Duke.
Click to expand...
As a lacrosse fan, I followed the case very closely. The Times' coverage (and most media coverage) was insanely biased against the lacrosse players and in favor of Duke and the prosecutors. The same was true of media coverage of the phony rape scandal at the University of Virginia. Saying the coverage wasn't biased doesn't make it so.
 
I'm guilty of being lured into opening an article on line because of the intrigue of the headline. Kills me to admit falling for the bait and switch only to find that the real article is just another form of click bait.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
The way certain stories, i.e., do we or do we not have an agreement, seem to change every few hours, it would amaze me if any media could reliably know what to report.
Click to expand...
Carefully verifying all the facts takes time. Journalism today probably weighs accuracy against being the first to report, but I still believe some real journalists are out there, sometimes rushed by editors wanting to be the first to break an important bit of news. And even after verification and authenticity there is still room for spin. Spinning has always been present. When I was still in elementary school, learned my home town newspapers all had political underpinnings. The Chicago Tribune was clearly Republican, and the Daily News was Democratic, even if they both had their facts straight.

Of course, today things are much more politically flagrant than what I remember as a youngster, and there's a lot of good spellers and articulate writers that care not one whit about facts or truth.
 
JustDave said:
there's a lot of good spellers and articulate writers that care not one whit about facts or truth.
Click to expand...
I agree with your larger points. This is just a comment on the part above. There are also elected people in public office "that care not one whit about facts or truth." Sometimes articulate writers in the media call them out, and should.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top