That would be nice. It would be nice to see reporters learn how to ask questions
and use follow-up questions to clarify the answers. It would be nice if said
reporters actually researched background. It would be nice if there was no
influence from the media suits but then again it's what the Kardasians are
doing that pays the bills isn't it.
That isn't how some people vote.Some people vote out of
"emotions".How they "feel"."Benghazi"
is a perfect example of this.
In a highly charged political environment, news is treated in the context of how
it reflects on the political party supported by the news outlet. The New York
Times is the prime example of an unvarnished political agenda. In the US it is
difficult to receive unbiased reporting. The Economist from the UK comes closest
to unbiased reporting.
You can actually find good reporting, but you have to search for it. If you try
to put "good" reporting in a daily newspaper like The Deseret News,
readership will virtually disappear. The vast majority don't want to be
bothered with details that requires you to pay attention. So don't blame
reporters or the newspapers.
The best source for unbiased International reporting -- AlJazeera
America -- hands down.
You get what you pay for. Question for those who are reading this comment:
When was the last time you paid for your news? When I was young, my parents had
a subscription to the daily newspaper and it was delivered to a box nailed to
the side of our mailbox. Today I subscribe to on-line versions to a couple of
publications that provide me with in-depth information on specific narrow
subjects but for daily news, I get it for free just like everyone else.