So much for freedom of the press. They better keep there arms folded and stay in
line if they ever want to work.
I find this line of thought most irritating. Either people have selective
memories, or just can't remember the past very well. And that kind of
fits the mold here... how exciting would it be to report that things in
Washington are the same as they have always been, going back over 200 years.There never - ever - was a day where the White House Press Corp had free
reign at press conferences. They have always been orderly affairs. For example, in an interview in 1988 for the book "On Bended Knee" ,
Bejamine Bradlee, exec editor of the Washington Post said of the Reagan
administration "we are known-though I don't think justifiably-as the
great liberals. So, [we thought] we've got to really behave ourselves here.
We've got to not be arrogant, make every effort to be informed, be
mannerly, be fair. And we did this. I suspect in the process that this paper and
probably a good deal of the press gave Reagan not a free ride, but they
didn't use the same standards on him that they used on Carter and on
Nixon."So the story stays the same, just the names of the actors
The President needs to answer questions from a group that isn't totally on
his side from time to time. See if he can dodge a shoe thrown his way.
Keeps him on his toes (instead of assuming he's got the press in his pocket
and he can do antyhing he wants and they won't ask tough questions or
express any displeasure).The anti-war heckler at yesterday's
news conference was kinda funny. After showing it on NBC news this morning, the
only question or response the reporter covering the story had was, "How did
she get in there"?
News used to be about information, about fostering the common good. Information
which may give viewers or readers uncomfortable and unpleasant truths. Over the
past decade, however, corporate monopoly of the media has rendered traditional
news irrelevant. In matters of war and foreign policy, news has become
ineffectual and in some cases, propagandistic. Reporters now walk in
lockstep, relying on government briefings and "official" statements from
the White House instead of doing their own extensive independent investigations.
They toe the line or lose their jobs.Presently, whether you're
getting your information about current political events from a major news outlet
on the internet or by hard copy, you're likely to find that more opinion
than fact is being communicated and that any debates in the press have withered
to minor differences among the power elite. In large part, what passes for
"news" is whatever plays on public emotion while important issues are
Our press corps makes the Stepford wives look independent by comparison.
exploding cigar? more like another GOP dud.
I've noticed more lately that all 3 networks cover the exact same stories,
in the exact same order, exact same vidio_clips, etc. I flip
channels a lot and I've noticed at 10:00 they are all reporting the exact
same storys, in the exact same order, at the same time. So I'm getting
the same story no matter which channel I'm on. Kinda weird. Like
everybody's getting the same story, no matter what news they watch (like
Pravda).Sounds spooky, but I think it's just coincidence.
I'm sure they all prioritize the news and they all end up prioritizing them
in the same order.Bottom line... it doesn't matter a bit which
news you watch now days. You will get the exact same thing no matter which one
you watch.That's why I read the opinions. It's the only
thing not cookie_cutter arranged so we all get fed the same thing. The only
content not arranged to lead us and assure we all come to pre-determined
conclusions that fit the approved narrative.Used to be Networks
dared to rock the boat from time to time.
To me it seems like reporters run back and forth between the democrat press room
to the GOP press room looking for the most explosive sound bites trying to gain
readership/viewership not report.
So which is it?People blame the media for not being tough enough,
yet when they attack their 'preferred' party they're being too
'political' and 'harsh'...So which is it?Tolsty: I agree it's a 'rat race' for gossip oriented
stories that produce ratings. Most reporters are interested in the advancement
of their careers, not the advancement of truth.
I agree with Tolstoy that a lot of this is because we are no longer into in
depth reporting, but who is going to produce that sound bite teaser for the next
hour on 24 hours "news". The Jerry Springer effect on news has been
that we don't want real answer or thoughtful debate - but rather have the
"did you hear that" moment/The other piece is that it used
to be print media that did the in depth reporting - multiple pages on a subject.
But print is suffering with massive layoffs and with the wire services
contributing most of the content you see. And when it is "fresh"... it
is usually just a young reporter reiterating what was said in another piece -
the DN does this a lot. Saves money, but depth is lost.And I am
not sure it is the media's fault. News has just become another for of
reality tv - a band filler for sports. That is why I end up reading a dozen or
so periodicals a day... because it seems to be the only way you can get more
than a column or twos worth of content.
A more fair way would be to draw straws or use some other lottery system so that
all have an equal chance to be called on to ask questions, and not just the
chosen few as determined by White house lackeys.
the press today, for the most part, is NOT a free press at all or a watch dog
press as they are intended to be. Today you have so-called news organizations
that are in reality nothing more than propaganda organizations which promote,
serve and provide cover for their candidate ... it all depends on the
organization and what their ideology is. So people are NOT getting anything
close to the 'real story' but instead are getting nothing more than a
political slant which is mostly a mixture of half truths and out right lies. CNN - probably 85% liberal slant ABC-CBS - probably the same as
CNNNBC - probably 98% liberal slant FOX - probably 60% conservative
slant and therefore the most balanced of all. I suspect this is why FOX has the
highest ratings by far. Remember that Hannity and OReily are commentators and
NOT news men...they have their own political slant. We are talking about the
news here and not commentators. **MSNBC is not a news organization.
100% far left propaganda.As can be seen - Obama has a pretty cotton
candy ride from the press other than FOX.
UtahBlueDevilI agree with your observation. I usually tune into the
national news in the morning to see what's going on. I've noticed
they cover news for the first 15 minutes, but after the first break... all you
get is news about celebrities, hollywood, fashion, etc (nothing of substance).
I hit the road after the first segment.It's a shame that with
everythign that's going on in the World (and especially with what's
going on with our government in Washington DC)... that they can only find 15
minutes of news to report... and then have to go to hollywood news. It's
sad.The networks can't find more than 15 minutes that's
news worthy. The Cable channels are so full of bias they aren't worth
watching. It's getting difficult to stay informed without being brain
washed by Cable News or dummed down by Network News.
I get all my news from the Deseret News.Right-slanted I know, but I
like the coverage of the LDS church.The sad irony is that the LDS
Church leans Left-of-Center in almost every Social issue, including gay rights,
poverty, Healthcare, and war -- whilst the local politicians and LDS
members are uber-far-right-wing and ignore most of what is said over the
pulpit.[Which is why I make the posts I do these threads...and come across
as a "liberal-lefty"]Can you say "rejecting the words of
Only the potted plants can change whether they are potted plants...
Yes, with the 24 hour news cycle, news is largely presented as an entertainment
venue which uses current events as the script. Much different from the days of
Murrow and Cronkite. With all of the available news, we should be the most and
best informed people on the planet, but somehow even with all the information
available, we as a society seem to be less well informed. Too much distraction
with other complications of life. Quite ironic.
@Samuel the Liberalite When you declare in your screen name that you are
liberal, you can't complain that people accuse you of being liberal.
@luke.... being branded as a liberal in Utah is just not that hard. Unless you
follow the most rigid definition of "conservative"... and only adhere to
some self proclaimed truism of the original founding fathers intent... you are
not a conservative but a socialist liberal to many in the great state of
Utah.For example... in the town I live in now, to most I am a
conservative. To my friends in Lehi, I am a flaming liberal. I am pro civil
rights, pro school voucher, gun owning, pro national defense, in favor of
leveling the tax system, but feel government should play an active role in
keeping our cities, states and country economically competitive with the likes
of China and India... and not through exploiting the lower class. I am all
over the place politically...... as are most people.If you were to
get an honest answer from most people on how they lean politically the correct
answer should be it depends on the issue.Just my 2 cents worth.
The press, under Obama, has actually done the world a favor: no rational person
actually buys into the belief that the press is unbaised any longer - and
knowing the truth, even disappointing truth, is a good thingon that
note - it seems the DN has moderators in the day shift, regulating civility, and
censors at night, silencing content