Do you dislike the mainstream media?

[Chinballs]

For 95% of the population, blind trust of relatively reliable sources is, in fact, a MUCH better guide to truth than selective skepticism of the same sources. It would be great if everyone was as smart and consistently rational as they think they are and had access to original sources and the time to do the work of discovering relevant facts themselves, but that's simply not the world we live in.

The current pattern for most WRers at least is, "when the MSM reports something that is good for my tribe, it's accurate; when it reports something I don't like, it's probably lying, and Breitbart or Prison Planet are more accurate."

I respectfully disagree. If one is at that level, being uninformed and ignorant is much better than blindly swallowing what MSM tells you. I would maybe agree with you if MSM hadn't literally helped start phony wars in the past based on false information.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree for the most part. Time is the ultimate thing at play, IMO. Who has time to do all that work? Which is why we should question things. It's about us, and how we read things, rather than who reports it. We should be looking out for each other.

Well, that's the thing, right? If you don't have the time or resources to check out everything individually, you're much better off trusting reliable sources. "Questioning things" sounds like sound, mature advice, but if people don't know how to question effectively (and almost everyone overestimates their ability), the results of it are not going to be better than trust. Of course, the MSM makes mistakes (and then corrects them when people point them out) and has its own blindspots (not referring to the comical "liberal media" CT, BTW), etc. But it's overall a better guide to truth than the "trust when I like it, don't trust when I don't like it" approach.

If you get this test wrong, you should seriously question your truth-detection skills:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...uick-puzzle-to-test-your-problem-solving.html

 

[Jack V Savage]

I respectfully disagree. If one is at that level, being uninformed and ignorant is much better than blindly swallowing what MSM tells you. I would maybe agree with you if MSM hadn't literally helped start phony wars in the past based on false information.

The problem with this is that no one just accepts being uninformed and ignorant. People *think* they know and think they are good at finding the truth, and they end up being swayed by much, much worse sources than the MSM in the process.

 

[all caps]

Well, that's the thing, right? If you don't have the time or resources to check out everything individually, you're much better off trusting reliable sources. "Questioning things" sounds like sound, mature advice, but if people don't know how to question effectively (and almost everyone overestimates their ability), the results of it are not going to be better than trust. Of course, the MSM makes mistakes (and then corrects them when people point them out) and has its own blindspots (not referring to the comical "liberal media" CT, BTW), etc. But it's overall a better guide to truth than the "trust when I like it, don't trust when I don't like it" approach.

If you get this test wrong, you should seriously question your truth-detection skills:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...uick-puzzle-to-test-your-problem-solving.html

That's why I think us discussing things on this forum, and others, is just as important. As I said in the original post. Which is why im against all censorship, regardless of the words said.

 

[andnowweknow]

Best is to get your news from a variety of sources, including the mainstream outlets. The problem is that you need a certain level of intelligence to parse it and come to a foggy yet generally good understanding of the truth. It's a big problem.

Anyone on this forum fronting as if this or that is perfectly identifiable bullshit from any mainstream outlet is giving off the impression that any of this is black and white. Facts are facts, but thinking one outlet or another is the arbiter of truth is a high order of naivete.

The people who sit in pure echo chambers are the real problem.

 

[Chinballs]

The problem with this is that no one just accepts being uninformed and ignorant. People *think* they know and think they are good at finding the truth, and they end up being swayed by much, much worse sources than the MSM in the process.

Hehe yea I'm not going to argue that point. But my phony war point still stands. War of information and fake news is less dangerous and claim less lives than bullets though.

edit: I also think proof becomes more valuable in this climate and it will benefit all in the long run.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That's why I think us discussing things on this forum, and others, is just as important. As I said in the original post. Which is why im against all censorship, regardless of the words said.

Meh. I've seen how discussions on the forum go. For the most part, the most misinformed posters only get more misinformed discussing things or at least are immune to reason. And they don't even have to be idiots to fall into that. Just recently had a discussion with @Jackie Blue, who is generally a decent poster, where he revealed that he believed a number of wild fantasies about a politician he was taught to dislike.

 

[HomerThompson]

Well, that's the thing, right? If you don't have the time or resources to check out everything individually, you're much better off trusting reliable sources. "Questioning things" sounds like sound, mature advice, but if people don't know how to question effectively (and almost everyone overestimates their ability), the results of it are not going to be better than trust. Of course, the MSM makes mistakes (and then corrects them when people point them out) and has its own blindspots (not referring to the comical "liberal media" CT, BTW), etc. But it's overall a better guide to truth than the "trust when I like it, don't trust when I don't like it" approach.

If you get this test wrong, you should seriously question your truth-detection skills:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...uick-puzzle-to-test-your-problem-solving.html

That was a waste of an article for me, bud. I only have 4 left his month, dammit!

 

[Jack V Savage]

Hehe yea I'm not going to argue that point. But my phony war point still stands. War of information and fake news is less dangerous and claim less lives than bullets though.

edit: I also think proof becomes more valuable in this climate and it will benefit all in the long run.

If you're talking about the Spanish-American War, that was a long time ago. If you mean Iraq, that was a matter of garbage in, garbage out.

 

[all caps]

Meh. I've seen how discussions on the forum go. For the most part, the most misinformed posters only get more misinformed discussing things or at least are immune to reason. And they don't even have to be idiots to fall into that. Just recently had a discussion with @Jackie Blue, who is generally a decent poster, where he revealed that he believed a number of wild fantasies about a politician he was taught to dislike.

So you dont see trying to get as many people informed and discussing things as a positive? Genuinely curious. I learn things and have my mind opened everytime I come here. And the idea that i could do that for another person seems like.. it should be a good thing.

 

[Jack V Savage]

So you dont see trying to get as many people informed and discussing things as a positive? Genuinely curious. I learn things and have my mind opened everytime I come here. And the idea that i could do that for another person seems like.. it should be a good thing.

Trying is a good thing, but I think there's going to be a low success rate (TBF, telling people they're better off trusting the MSM is going to also have an extremely low success rate).

 

[Limit Smasher]

Their purpose isn't to report the news. They serve to make money and push a political agenda. Anyone getting their information from CNN is an idiot.

 

[IDL]

Hehe yea I'm not going to argue that point. But my phony war point still stands. War of information and fake news is less dangerous and claim less lives than bullets though.

edit: I also think proof becomes more valuable in this climate and it will benefit all in the long run.

They aren't necessarily phony wars, but the reasons used to generate public support for them are usually phony I'd say.

 

[Wingslaught]

The problem with this is that no one just accepts being uninformed and ignorant. People *think* they know and think they are good at finding the truth, and they end up being swayed by much, much worse sources than the MSM in the process.

You don't know what you don't know.

It's pretty clear that Fox News is pro-Trump and nearly every other news outlet is rabidly anti-Trump. Personally, I like watching the MSM stations now in small doses because they cover Trump's actions in the way I think they should have covered Obama for eight years but they had a massive blindspot, imo.

For example, so far I've seen Trump referred to as a Mad King, Despot, Narcissist, Dictator, and more by reputable pundits and analysts in the MSM who say he openly abuses his power. These same outlets heaped praise on Obama for eight years and didn't hold him to account for anything which was their job after all.

 

[curryjunkie]

the term mainstream is almost irrelevant since you have half the country getting their "news" from douchebags on youtube, but its possible to criticise the media without descending into the blanket statement that every single thing they put out is fake and has to be viewed with suspicion.










except for Fox...................everyone who aint a moron knows thats shit tier....

 

[InternetHero]

Yes, but my complaint is more about us - people, humanity.

We feed on entertainment and empty rivalry.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You don't know what you don't know.

It's pretty clear that Fox News is pro-Trump and nearly every other news outlet is rabidly anti-Trump.

Clear to you because any reality reads as "anti-Trump" bias to you because of your own bias, no?

Personally, I like watching the MSM stations now in small doses because they cover Trump's actions in the way I think they should have covered Obama for eight years but they had a massive blindspot, imo.

For example, so far I've seen Trump referred to as a Mad King, Despot, Narcissist, Dictator, and more by reputable pundits and analysts in the MSM who say he openly abuses his power. These same outlets heaped praise on Obama for eight years and didn't hold him to account for anything which was their job after all.

But Obama and Trump are different people who have acted extremely differently in office. Surely you can see that, can't you?

 

[Fluffernutter]

The MSM is a living example of why finding a market and doing whatever you need to to sell as many commodities as possible to that market (aka, capitalism) is not a sound basis for a healthy society.

Until the public realizes that TV news exists to sell anything from boner pills to automobiles, rather than educating the masses, they will spend their time complaining about "news bias".

 

[badascan]

Do you dislike the mainstream media? Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, I just want to know where normal people stand. I watch Fox News and it makes me cringe. Then I watch CNN and it makes me cringe.

The Daily Show was my #1 news source for like 10 years because Stewart made fun of everyone. Now South Park is my unbiased news outlet.

Anyone that doesnt vote is fake news.

is the daily show the one with trevor noah? Thats got to be the worst piece of racist shit on television... he's an enormous tool and the writing is atrocious and predictable. It's just embarrassing...

 

[Fluffernutter]

What I have learnt from this subforum is the amount of negative people that do resides here.

Where do you get the news? Or are you all experts in source criticism?

Please give me some example of good english news sites(tv, streaming) where both sides can agree.

Or the viewer can accept that no news source is unbiased. Rather than fighting about the depth of bias, just get your news from multiple sources.

People are not insane if they watch Fox News on their TV, but listen to NPR on their commute to work.