sex scandal Obama Admin

[knapplc]

Agreed, Comish. We frequently see prominent news sources completely ignore an inconvenient story.

 

However, this is only a problem if you get all your news from one source. Radio, the internet, TV, various channels and sites on each, is the only way to go. You'll get a grasp of the important issues of the day and the slant from various sources is readily apparent if you check several.

[sd'sker]

I find it equally important to note what differing sources decide is NOT news.

 

That skirts the issue of providing facts, opinions, etc.

 

But, never-the-less...................If somethings are ignored by INTENT..........that is equally odious and certainly just as biased as issuing a slant on "facts"

i agree and i think that is where a lot of bias lies. msnbc is biased by ideology. fox news is biased by party. network news is biased by ratings and sensationalism. all news is flawed. that is what makes it such a complicated issue and it demands a lot of the consumer of the information.

[Junior]

Agreed, Comish. We frequently see prominent news sources completely ignore an inconvenient story.

 

However, this is only a problem if you get all your news from one source. Radio, the internet, TV, various channels and sites on each, is the only way to go. You'll get a grasp of the important issues of the day and the slant from various sources is readily apparent if you check several.

 

I get all my news from you, I assumed you had it covered....

[sd'sker]

Agreed, Comish. We frequently see prominent news sources completely ignore an inconvenient story.

 

However, this is only a problem if you get all your news from one source. Radio, the internet, TV, various channels and sites on each, is the only way to go. You'll get a grasp of the important issues of the day and the slant from various sources is readily apparent if you check several.

 

I get all my news from you, I assumed you had it covered....

huskerboard or bust.

[BigRedBuster]

My main point in this thread is that it is dangerous when the population gets their "news" from these types of programs. I have stated several times that even if you are stating the facts and they are technically true but one sided, the conclusion that can come from that story can ultimately be false.

 

Now, sd has stated that he gets his news from more than just one source. I forgot to state it earlier but I applaud him for that. The problem is, there are many people who don't.

 

I personally choose to find people who (even though technically stating the truth) put themselves out there as a source for information when they tell one side of the story or only put out enough "facts" to lead the viewer in one direction.

[knapplc]

You're all doomed to boredom if you wait for me to disseminate news. I think I've started 20 threads in this forum in five years, and ten of them were this week in response to mountains of derp.

[sd'sker]

My main point in this thread is that it is dangerous when the population gets their "news" from these types of programs. I have stated several times that even if you are stating the facts and they are technically true but one sided, the conclusion that can come from that story can ultimately be false.

 

Now, sd has stated that he gets his news from more than just one source. I forgot to state it earlier but I applaud him for that. The problem is, there are many people who don't.

 

I personally choose to find people who (even though technically stating the truth) put themselves out there as a source for information when they tell one side of the story or only put out enough "facts" to lead the viewer in one direction.

this is a really good point and says a lot. i think we agree a lot more than we disagree (especially regarding the dissemination of information). and i do agree that it is best for there to be no conclusions drawn by the reporter. but that is almost impossible for a lot of reasons. like i said, television news is flawed. i do hold people like maddow and hannity to a different standard than newspaper journalists or network nightly news because they are not true journalists. they have to make the stories compelling and let us know why they are important. but it is important to let the information form the narrative, rather than the other way around.

 

that is why i like maddow. she provides a lot of context to her stories. they are well researched, make a point, i usually i am convinced why i should be interested in these stories. obviously she is not perfect. i watch it just as much for entertainment as i do for news. is that bad? depends on the viewer, i guess.

[BigRedBuster]

A while back you asked me where I get my news.

 

Your response there is why I don't watch these shows. I don't want them leading me in whatever direction they want me to be lead.

 

I used to be addicted to Fox News. That was maybe 7-10 years ago. Then....I got sick of it. I absolutely couldn't believe some of the crap they were trying to get me to believe. Soooo...I switched over and started watching MSNBC. It didn't take me long to find the exact same thing on almost all of their shows only the other direction.

So, I banned all from my TV.

 

Now, that is with one caveat. I did like Morning Joe. Why? Because I felt that they had both view points on the show and treated both with the same respect. Then I simply got tired of them and stopped watching them too.

 

I will watch CNN in the morning when getting ready for work. I try my best to block out Solidad Obrian's obvious left lean and simply watch it to get an idea of what is happening in the world. Sometimes I'll switch over to headline news in the morning. I then spend a lot of time reading on the Internet. I would prefer to read a story. When something is written, it is obviously thought out and it is the intent of the writer to put that quote in writing. That is contrary to some statement that is just blurted out on TV or the radio and then goes viral. I will sometimes also watch Anderson 360 in the evening. That is usually to get my wife to go to sleep so I can watch Monday Night Football.

 

Then, if I find a story that I feel is important, I will read from a number of sources. If I find a source on line that I get a feeling is obviously for one side, I don't trust their story.

Then....for the most part, I sit back and say...."does this make sense"? Good Lord I wish more people would do that.

[knapplc]

CNN used to be a good source for news. Back in college we used to have Headline News on almost 24/7 as background noise. Now I can't stand either of them. It's saddening to see what they've become.

[sd'sker]

Then....for the most part, I sit back and say...."does this make sense"? Good Lord I wish more people would do that.

could not agree more. that is what it all comes down to. you are right about herds and sheep. we are not a free-thinking nation, far from it. and this is not an ideological issue. it is a laziness issue. news reporters are lazy, viewers are lazy, everyone is lazy. i used to watch a lot of fox news. i have never really watched much msnbc. i would listen to maddow's podcast on my commute, so when she got her television show i would watch it, but she can be redundant. comish made a great point about deciding what not to cover. maddow often has a limited scope. i used to be a news junkie, then i restricted myself greatly. i check huffpo (and i agree that it deserves a lot of criticism. it has even gotten worse. it is just a convenient jumping off point to find out some of the big stories. but most of it is crap). and then i will catch maddow or daily show. (i have not been watching either lately because i have been busy).

the best place for me to get news is my twitter feed. follow a diverse group of people and read the stories you find intriguing. we have so much information mis and disinformation should be extinct. but we have so much information that anyone can find anything to prove everything. so, it comes back to you having to ask, 'does this make sense?'

[sd'sker]

CNN used to be a good source for news. Back in college we used to have Headline News on almost 24/7 as background noise. Now I can't stand either of them. It's saddening to see what they've become.

headline news was great. but now it is like watching tmz.

[BigRedBuster]

I used to love headline news and I would have it on as background noise also.

 

Then, they decided they needed to have shows like Nancy Grace. Now, there is a pathetic human being in my eyes. Here is how much I despise that woman. I would watch Maddow over her.

[sd'sker]

I used to love headline news and I would have it on as background noise also.

 

Then, they decided they needed to have shows like Nancy Grace. Now, there is a pathetic human being in my eyes. Here is how much I despise that woman. I would watch Maddow over her.

do you see what i see? common ground.

 

nancy grace is about as bad as it gets.

[BigRedBuster]

sd and Knapp....

 

Here is how I view most people I disagree with politically. It is like the old story of the blind men describing the elephant by the part they happen to be touching. Everyone has experiences in their life that makes them view the world from their point of view. I think that is probably where we are.

[sd'sker]

sd and Knapp....

 

Here is how I view most people I disagree with politically. It is like the old story of the blind men describing the elephant by the part they happen to be touching. Everyone has experiences in their life that makes them view the world from their point of view. I think that is probably where we are.

it is a big and diverse world. differing minds should exist and reasonable minds can differ. these conversations are good for me. it is easy to surround yourself with information you find agreeable, create caricatures out of those you oppose, and assume everyone who disagrees with you is one of those caricatures.

 

however, i also think if we stripped away political labels and ignored politicians' promises and the whole political construct, we would agree on just about everything. and the things we disagreed on we would probably have a healthy respect for the other's opinion. we all want the same thing: a strong america.