Look at the threads on the front page, and tell me who is doing 'real news'

VivaRevolution

Banned
Banned
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
34,002
Reaction score
0
Look at the threads on the front page here, or go to yahoo or MSN, and tell me who is doing real news.

Editorializing is not real news, and it is 90% of what we see presented as real news.

Investigative journalism is real news, and it represents less then 10% of the so called news.

Yes, reporting that lizard people have control of our government is fake news, but so is a talking head in a box, whose greatest accomplishment in the media is being attractive, and being able to read from a teleprompter.

Read what is in the Podesta emails, and DNC leaks, and you will read a description about how 25 year old know nothings are fed fake news by party members, in a quid pro quo propaganda for access trade.

I have been hearing a bit of talk lately from the MSM on how they can recover their legitimacy in the eyes of the public, and how they don't seem to be coming up with many ideas. Well I have one....,..how about the MSM starts doing investigative journalism again, and stops presenting 90% of their content in the form of editorial.
 
Well, I think once Fox News started winning the ratings war other news stations tried to keep up with the Joneses and now it has all turned to shit.

I like Vice News.. but i suspect it will get corrupted too if it keeps growing.
 
If people started to question the crap their retard Facebook friends are sharing, we might not even have this discussion
 
Sherdog War Room = bearer of Real News

Brb, sharpening my sword for war against the Nephilim.
 
Well, I think once Fox News started winning the ratings war other news stations tried to keep up with the Joneses and now it has all turned to shit.

I like Vice News.. but i suspect it will get corrupted too if it keeps growing.

This can't be understated.

Note that i'm actually not condemning Fox, but just noting their influence. I don't think there's any debate that Fox is partisan, but their "Fair and Balanced" tagline stifled many discussions as to their partisanship even pre rise of Trump.

Well, it worked, so Fox became the baseline for a great deal of the country for news. The rest of that, as you said, is a feedback loop stemming from Fox's success.
 
Well, I think once Fox News started winning the ratings war other news stations tried to keep up with the Joneses and now it has all turned to shit.

I like Vice News.. but i suspect it will get corrupted too if it keeps growing.
Fox news is way less biased than the left wing news stations.
 
Well, I think once Fox News started winning the ratings war other news stations tried to keep up with the Joneses and now it has all turned to shit.

I like Vice News.. but i suspect it will get corrupted too if it keeps growing.

I think it happened when the corporate media was taken over by bean counters who decided it cost too much to do investigative journalism.

I remember very clearly when ABC, NBC, and CBS announced the closing of overseas investigative news operations to cut costs.

HBO vice is good, the vice website is ran by critical race theorists.
 
Fox news is way less biased than the left wing news stations.

I dont really watch much of it, but thought that was because in this past election in didn't feel like they had a horse in the race like elections prior. Regardless, I think they really changed "the news" in what sold as they realized people didn't want unbiased reporting of facts as much as they wanted narrative / arguments.
 
I think it happened when the corporate media was taken over by bean counters who decided it cost too much to do investigative journalism.

I remember very clearly when ABC, NBC, and CBS announced the closing of overseas investigative news operations to cut costs.

HBO vice is good, the vice website is ran by critical race theorists.

What are your thoughts on the last part?
 
This can't be understated.

Note that i'm actually not condemning Fox, but just noting their influence. I don't think there's any debate that Fox is partisan, but their "Fair and Balanced" tagline stifled many discussions as to their partisanship even pre rise of Trump.

Well, it worked, so Fox became the baseline for a great deal of the country for news. The rest of that, as you said, is a feedback loop stemming from Fox's success.

This sounds like a description of how editorializing became hyper partisan, not why investigative news stopped being the dominate form of news.
 
What are your thoughts on the last part?

That you are already partially right. VICE news website used to be a quality news source.

I think vice news on HBO will continue to be quality as long as the current people running it stay running it.
 

Oh I forgot about the half hour show HBO runs. Pure garbage.

I guess this shoots somewhat of a hole in my bean counter cutting investigative news journalism narrative, as the half hour Vice news show does investigative journalism, but it is a bunch of social issue nonsense.

I guess this is as much of the problem as anything with the MSM today. It isn't just hyper partisan editorializing, and a lack of investigative journalism, but also a focus on click bait, which elevates social issues over, economic, foreign, and domestic policy.
 
If people started to question the crap their retard Facebook friends are sharing, we might not even have this discussion
Thats not it at all. "Fake News" only has a niche because the MSM has done nothing but deliver shallow, biased, slanted, and incomplete news for decades.
 
This sounds like a description of how editorializing became hyper partisan, not why investigative news stopped being the dominate form of news.

Investigative journalism has never been the dominant form of news, and has always been a small niche for broadcast news.

The majority of news output comes in the form of watchdog journalism. "Abe visited Pearl Harbor - this is what happened". "Carrie Fisher has died, here's some stuff about her life".

Agencies, newspapers and freelancers still do plenty of investigative journalism, but those stories aren't always taken up by the rolling news channels. Certain stories such as the war in Syria are absolutely dominated by investigative pieces as investigating is the primary way of finding reliable information in stories that have lots of conflicting sources.

Rolling news channels are cram packed full of editorializing, but that's mostly because they're trying to fill air-time. Generally they've never been the best source of news, and their best pieces are often copy-pasted directly from the news agencies they bought them from.
 
Back
Top