Opinion Former CBS reporter says that journalists have lost their objectivity and become political activists

[BearGrounds]

He also didn't seem to realize that the term "MSM" includes both right and left leaning sources. It was just a straw man post worth ignoring.

 

[Mr Holmes]

She's 100% right. Its all obvious propaganda. This is why so many people are turning to alternative media sources.

 

[woodguyatl]

She's 100% right. Its all obvious propaganda. This is why so many people are turning to alternative media sources.

Honest question. What news source do you like that provides unbiased fact-based news without any political leanings?

 

[Mr Holmes]

Honest question. What news source do you like that provides unbiased fact-based news without any political leanings?

They pretty much don't exist, but Bloomberg would be the most unbiased source I use.

 

[Bamboozled]

Would smash for a long long long time (30 seconds)

 

[vengeful]

Is MSM and "The media" the same thing? If not, then your post failed.

 

[58miles]

she's absolutely right.

I except the Left to viciously attack her, because they have little to no scruples.

She's absolutely right? Complain about MSNBC, NY Times, CNN, Washington Post? Fox News is the biggest joke in tv Journalism and Fox News viewers are the least informed news consumers, hell only 43% of Republicans believe in evolution.

 

[IndyCovaHart]

whoa she’s hawt

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

She's absolutely right? Complain about MSNBC, NY Times, CNN, Washington Post? Fox News is the biggest joke in tv Journalism and Fox News viewers are the least informed news consumers, hell only 43% of Republicans believe in evolution.

Dude, I dont like fox news either

 

[spin]

everyone agrees on this idea of the media.


the disagreement is that your team, which ever team you're on, is the one being mistreated the most as a result.


yes the media is shit. no, that doesn't prove your victim complex is more than a complex.

 

[waiguoren]

Is MSM and "The media" the same thing? If not, then your post failed.

In common usage, the two terms are equivalent. Spend more time around American English speakers?

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

The news media has been destroying itself over the past 20 years, and just like some cancers, we've not detected it until its too late.

An analogy I like to use to describe this country is HVAC.
Back in the day if you needed an AC repairman, they would come over and fix your AC, because that was what they were trained to do.
Now they're trained on how to milk the consumer.

Its the same thing with everything these days. Zero honesty and integrity. Its all about money.

Journalists aren't necessarily taught how to deceive the reader/viewer in school (anybody have any idea how many of our journalists even get degrees in journalism these days?), but very few seem to have any real journalistic integrity these days. Its seems as if their editors have trained them to milk the consumer rather than do the job they are needed to perform.

The truth is in America the people who “make it big” have lied and cheated and stepped on others to get theirs. No one does it straight up. Bill gates during the 90s, Wall Street during the 80s. Whether it’s athletes, famous stars etc etc Someone didn’t something you get ahead.

We teach children to be honest and they can make it but everyone who made it big has cheated others on their way to The top.

That’s america.

 

[xcvbn]

"Mostly liberal"

Except when discussing the military or overseas conflict then it's straight up 1930s Italy. And considering the largest percent of our budget goes to the military/DoD, I'd say that really balances out the "liberal bias."

 

[vengeful]

In common usage, the two terms are equivalent. Spend more time around American English speakers?

No, "Mainstream Media" refers to traditional media sources such as NBC, CBS, Fox if we're talking broadcast, it will also refer to major cable news networks like CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, CNBC, etc. Whereas "The Media" refers to MSM, and additional outlets of the media that aren't even "news" sources, local news outlets, bloggers, and all other non-mainstream sources.

 

[moreorless87]

It's more than just bias. Most "journalists" are just lefty political activists.

I would say exactly the opposite, hardly any genuinely left wing people are employed in the mainstream media. A lot of people with liberal views on certain subjects are employed these people generally also tend to support the current economic status quo and indeed foreign policy.

The link between "left wing" and "liberial" is I think not just a leftover of the cold war but actually something all sides of the media promote, on the conservative side it equates the two meaning that someone who might disagree with a liberial view will be led into disagreeing with economic ones, on the liberial side these people wish to give themselves the appearance of being economically progressive when in reality their nothing of the sort.

I mean look at the stance of the likes of CNN, NBS, NYT etc on someone like Bernie Sanders, none of them were very positive about him preferring Hilary.

 

[SBJJ]

For the most part the well known Jewish Americans and Organizations are only leftist when it comes to advancing progressive ideals in White gentile society, they are very ethnonationalist / rightwing when it comes to Israel.

Yes. Hence the Neoliberals.

And a progressive tax rate is laughable. What tax rate do you think the Hollywood bigwigs pay? They don't give a fuck that small businesses get fucked by their progressive tax plans as long as it doesn't affect them

 

[58miles]

I would say exactly the opposite, hardly any genuinely left wing people are employed in the mainstream media. A lot of people with liberal views on certain subjects are employed these people generally also tend to support the current economic status quo and indeed foreign policy.

The link between "left wing" and "liberial" is I think not just a leftover of the cold war but actually something all sides of the media promote, on the conservative side it equates the two meaning that someone who might disagree with a liberial view will be led into disagreeing with economic ones, on the liberial side these people wish to give themselves the appearance of being economically progressive when in reality their nothing of the sort.

I mean look at the stance of the likes of CNN, NBS, NYT etc on someone like Bernie Sanders, none of them were very positive about him preferring Hilary.

Yes most members are liberal, yes most vote Democrat but what matters most are ratings and clicks, that's why when Trump first announced for President he was basically given a free ride. He was good for ratings and clicks.

As for preferring Hillary I think you are remembering a history that never occurred. the media, Hillary or the Republicans never laid a finger on Bernie Sanders. While he was given a pass Hillary's email server was being covered like a 21st century Watergate to the exclusion of almost everything else.

 

[moreorless87]

Yes most members are liberal, yes most vote Democrat but what matters most are ratings and clicks, that's why when Trump first announced for President he was basically given a free ride. He was good for ratings and clicks.

As for preferring Hillary I think you are remembering a history that never occurred. the media, Hillary or the Republicans never laid a finger on Bernie Sanders. While he was given a pass Hillary's email server was being covered like a 21st century Watergate to the exclusion of almost everything else.

I think actually what you saw most of with Bernie Sanders was simply ignoring him and that's a lot of the reason why Trump was picked up on, so that he would take the role of the "breakthrough" candidate during the primary's and indeed because they wrongly thought he'd be easy for a right wing establishment candidate like Hilary to beat.

You did also have plenty of negativity directed an Sanders though, implications for example that his supporters were sexist, that he was a "self hating jew" from being critical of Israeli policy, etc. The Hilary server hack was naturally reported negatively by the likes of Fox news but you look at CNN, etc and yes they obviously had to report it but rarely did they do so in a negative fashion, it was mostly painted as an invasion of pirvacy and a Russian attempt to influence US politics.

The mainstream media does definitely go after easy money but I think your blind if you think it doesn't have a political agenda as well and that agenda is almost always pro establishment or pushing things economically further to the right. Any left wing movements they get behind tend to be small and superficial at best.

I mean its pretty logical isn't it? media outlets owned by billionares and with strong links to various other wealthy interests dependant on the status quo are not likely to be in favour of a shift towards the left are they? do turkeys vote for thanks giving?

 

[FIMN]

Perhaps re-read both sentences if you are confused.

 

[ocean size]

That aside, do you disagree with what she's saying in the OP?

It's the same argument as 'everyone is doing it' when someone gets caught juicing. She fucked up reporting so bad, CBS worst scandal in about a decade, that they asked her to take leave. They had multiple chances to vet the Benghazi source and it was already known he lied to his employer. He also had a book deal with someone under CBS parent company. She was also making speeches advocating for government to take action against Al Qaeda for the attack, when they weren't responsible and she was still reporting on it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/27/...-lara-logan-after-flawed-benghazi-report.html