Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

when and why?


Highwall

Recommended Posts

When CNN and Headline News first arrived on cable TV the wife and I watched it daily. It seemed to be unbiased news with reporting just the facts of the day. But something changed over the years that turned them along with MSNBC to go so liberal. Why? They had such an influence to turn publicity in any direction but why go south of the 

American tradition?  Who influenced these networks to buck the system? I've heard it was the Russian infiltration  but find that hard to accept since they deal with their own civil freedom problems every day. The other suspicion is  that of the Illuminati, do they really exist and if so do they actually control the world and all it's happenings?  

All I can say is thanks to Fox network for bravely displaying my personal opinions along with millions of others with the same set of mind on their network .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve heard that in journalism school, students are told by their professors that it will be their job to‘ shape the opinions of the nation’.

 I say, NO! It is your job to report the unvarnished, factual truth , and let the people of our nation form their own opinions. 
So much for that idea, huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highwall said:

 

All I can say is thanks to Fox network for bravely displaying my personal opinions along with millions of others with the same set of mind on their network .

 

 

I'm surprised to see that Fox was not radically changed after being acquired by Disney.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Highwall said:

When CNN and Headline News first arrived on cable TV the wife and I watched it daily. It seemed to be unbiased news with reporting just the facts of the day. But something changed over the years that turned them along with MSNBC to go so liberal. Why? They had such an influence to turn publicity in any direction but why go south of the 

American tradition?  Who influenced these networks to buck the system? I've heard it was the Russian infiltration  but find that hard to accept since they deal with their own civil freedom problems every day. The other suspicion is  that of the Illuminati, do they really exist and if so do they actually control the world and all it's happenings?  

All I can say is thanks to Fox network for bravely displaying my personal opinions along with millions of others with the same set of mind on their network .

 

The political slant of all "news" programs is most likely a reflection of the political affiliations of the owners (who set policy and hire staff) and of their target advertisers and audience.  Follow the money.

 

LL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

 

I'm surprised to see that Fox was not radically changed after being acquired by Disney.  

Relax.  In March 2019, Disney bought 21st Century Fox while Fox News, Fox Business, and Fox Sports were spun off to become subsidiaries of The Fox Corporation (FC).  FC is 39% owned by the Murdock Family Trust with Rupert Murdock and son Lachlan remaining in key top management positions.  The remaining stock of FC is publicly traded, I think on NASDAQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Highwall said:

All I can say is thanks to Fox network for bravely displaying my personal opinions along with millions of others with the same set of mind on their network .

If FNC presents the news with a conservative slant, is that any better than presenting the news with a liberal slant?

 

It's still not unbiased and is presenting opinions and not necessarily facts.

 

Tell me who, what, when, where and how. 

 

Unless a person doing an action says "why" they did it, it's all supposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chief Rick said:

If FNC presents the news with a conservative slant, is that any better than presenting the news with a liberal slant?

 

It's still not unbiased and is presenting opinions and not necessarily facts.

 

Tell me who, what, when, where and how. 

 

Unless a person doing an action says "why" they did it, it's all supposition.

 

Correct.  Except that some slant is probably inevitable; even Cronkite had his opinion moments.  

 

I dumped two Boston newspapers in favor of the Wall Street Journal; it had more factual reporting than any other that I could find.  And editorials were clearly marked as such.

 

I can't name a TV "news" show whose content I consider factual and trustworthy.  They are all in the entertainment and politics businesses, not news.  When I was in college, many journalism schools were following the Woodward and Bernstein school of investigative journalism; every story had to contain some spectacular disclosures leading to the indictment of some public figure; conspiracies were everywhere, just waiting to be uncovered; and factual support could wait until speculation and accusation "unveiled" the story.  It was the beginning of the end of truthful, verified reporting.  

 

Remember the scene in the Watergate movie where Ben Bradlee is insisting that his reporters must have two independent verified sources before he will publish the story?  I wonder if that kind of integrity exists anywhere in the news business these days.

 

LL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no “unbiased” news in the major media any longer. If you look back in history the big 3, ABC, NBC and CBS and yes, Walter Cronkite, were biased left. They just hid it a bit more than major news outlets of today. 


Fox is biased “right” but, in my opinion, not as far Right as others are biased Left. 
 

As a kid I watched all the news that was available. The two newscasters that I believe were most centered and reported facts without intended bias were Huntley and Brinkley on the NBC show The Huntley-Brinkley Report. This includes the “public broadcasting” news. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Pat says either Fox is biased right but not near as much as the other main stream news stations are biased left or...

 

Everybody but Fox is biased so far left that Fox simply appears to be biased right due to the left's ridiculously far left position on everything under the sun (the sun being the ultimate cause of global warming, btw...). ;)

 

Either way, Fox is the only mainstream news source that can be somewhat trusted.

 

Why did CNN start taking things far left? My guess is to sway power by indoctrinating the uneducated and easily influenced masses. By whom? Soros has a hand in this. Who knows who else.  But take your pick. They don't have to be globalists from another country. Plenty of people within this country hate the United States and its constitution and would love to see it fundamentally changed. Of late remember hope and change for example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same thing going on here in Canada.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, (CBC is funded to the tune of over 1.6+ Billion per year by taxpayer dollars and is blatantly left wing as is much of it's programming.

Another recent hand-out was made recently of $600 million to some newspapers.

Independent Journalism and news gathering in Canada ???

 

LaughingSmiley.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get my NEWS from the only unbiased source I can truly rely on! :P

 

2020_06_21_09_43_32.thumb.jpg.235807c2ca615a0f92929b758816c353.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

 

Correct.  Except that some slant is probably inevitable; even Cronkite had his opinion moments.  


 

 

LL

Cronkite’s statement on Vietnam in 68 after Tet was one of the reasons Vietnam is now a communist country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

Cronkite’s statement on Vietnam in 68 after Tet was one of the reasons Vietnam is now a communist country.

Cronkite was just as biased as the rest of the media 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cronkite, Brokaw, Jennings all hid their bias well for years. And then they had their “coming out” or were exposed in the 90’s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Highwall said:

When CNN and Headline News first arrived on cable TV the wife and I watched it daily. It seemed to be unbiased news with reporting just the facts of the day. But something changed over the years that turned them along with MSNBC to go so liberal. Why? They had such an influence to turn publicity in any direction but why go south of the 

American tradition?  Who influenced these networks to buck the system? I've heard it was the Russian infiltration  but find that hard to accept since they deal with their own civil freedom problems every day. The other suspicion is  that of the Illuminati, do they really exist and if so do they actually control the world and all it's happenings?  

All I can say is thanks to Fox network for bravely displaying my personal opinions along with millions of others with the same set of mind on their network .

Money is what caused the change.  Ratings and website hits determine what a network can charge for advertising.  Tell people what they want to hear and the ratings and website hits go up and more money comes in, some of which goes toward the growing salaries of the talking heads.

 

Fox is no better, they simply have a different demographic base compared to CNN or MSNBC.

 

In addition to the above, I believe there are senior executives that make sure what they want and believe is aired and anyone who doesn't go along with that finds themselves out of a job.

 

On edit: If you exclude their anti US and anti Israel bias and ignore their opinion pieces (which are clearly marked as such) Al Jazeera is a far more responsible news source than most of the ones in the US.   They report the facts clearly and without using emotional buzzwords (tragic, heartbreaking, shocking, disturbing, etc) so common in US reporting.

 

I often go to either Al Jazeera or BBC for international news.  I'll note that mix up between the Indian Army and the Chinese Army along their shared border barely made the "headline" news in the US, you had go search for that story on Fox (and I'll presume the other news sites which I don't visit anymore).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fox has too much celebrity nonsense and clickbait on their website to make it seem legit. Not sure how the channel is.....we don’t have satellite or an antennae.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Henry T Harrison said:

Cronkite was just as biased as the rest of the media 

+10000 he was a left wing liberal hack!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course every broadcaster or network will have some bias. But today the obvious bias is not even hidden at all. It's in virtually every broadcast or publication and the bias is only missing on the most benign topics.

 

They used to present the news and have a special editorial comment or column.  Now nearly every report is essentially an editorial opinion piece. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Now nearly every report is essentially an editorial opinion piece.  "  Quoting Smokin Gator.  I used to think the same thing.  Now I suspect each one is a purposeful

PROPAGANDA piece, carefully constructed and coordinated with other outlets.  Sad to see, and experience.

I grew up with news broadcasts which were like watching Dragnet.....  We got the FACTS, just the facts.  Not told what to think about them.

 

God save the Republic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks need to get over the idea that commercial news sources are supposed to be unbiased.  
 

Study history, or at least read Ron Chernow‘s biography of Alexander Hamilton.  News outlets of any media type, print or video, have always been biased. They are designed for two things. First, to make money for the owners. Second, to express the owners’ views on contemporary events.


Pick yourself a spectrum of news outlets, read thoroughly, and form your own opinions. 


And for the record, this is a screen shot of my news spectrum from the iPhone:

 

C43AD6E6-2B82-42E8-89C0-4181112D4E4B.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Charlie Harley, #14153 said:

Folks need to get over the idea that commercial news sources are supposed to be unbiased.  
 

Study history, or at least read Ron Chernow‘s biography of Alexander Hamilton.  News outlets of any media type, print or video, have always been biased. They are designed for two things. First, to make money for the owners. Second, to express the owners’ views on contemporary events.


Pick yourself a spectrum of news outlets, read thoroughly, and form your own opinions. 


And for the record, this is a screen shot of my news spectrum from the iPhone:

 

C43AD6E6-2B82-42E8-89C0-4181112D4E4B.jpeg

 

You should add the Christian Science Monitor to that list.  As part of a college term paper a few years ago I picked them as an example of bias in the media based solely on the name.  Discovered that my assumptions were WAY off base.

 

From a media bias ranking website called AllSides

 

 

Quote

 

The Christian Science Monitor is an independent international news organization. Its stated aim is to "help you to see news events as starting points for constructive conversations. We seek to cut through the froth of the political spin cycle to underlying truths and values. We want to be so focused on progress that together we can provide a credible and constructive counter-narrative to the hopelessness-, anger-, and fear-inducing brand of discourse that is so pervasive in the news."

The Monitor is owned by a church – The First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston, Mass. Mary Baker Eddy, founder of the church, also founded the Christian Science Monitor in 1908. The newspaper’s inception was, in part, Eddy's response to sensationalist media practices at the time. Baker Eddy said the object of the publication was "To injure no man, but to bless all mankind."

"We are not about promoting any specific set of policies, actions or ideologies," The Christian Science Monitor writes on its About page. "The founder of the Monitor was convinced that what reaches and affects thought ultimately shapes experiences and moves our world forward. News, therefore, should be thought-provoking, trustworthy, and engaging. We seek to give our readers the information and multiple perspectives they need in order to develop their own constructive conclusions."

Currently, the Christian Science Monitor offers coverage via its website, a weekly magazine, daily news briefings and email newsletters. Despite its name, it does not claim to be religious-themed or to promote the doctrine of its patron church, though it does include a daily religious feature on “The Home Forum” page.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charlie. If they are "reporting" it should be unbiased. Opinion pieces, anything goes. It's probably impossible to do a report without some bias revealing itself even if an attempt is made to appear unbiased, but the level of bias today has increased to levels that aren't acceptable and no attempt is made to appear  unbiased.

 

As Bad Bascomb mentioned much of it is intentional, planned and coordinated propaganda today in what passes for "journalism".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brother-in-law was an A.P. writer for something like 40 years. He said it got to the point he did not recognize his writings because of it being edited by the editors. He's retired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unnamed (1).jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who cannot remember history are condemned to repeat it.

 

Our newspapers have never been unbiased. The mega millionaires who own the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC , The Washington Post and others around the country bought them to promote their liberal BS, The Hearst papers even got us into the Spanish American.War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe we are all simply programmed to believe we are “receiving news” when in fact we are receiving commentary. Any media source that supply’s information without facts and an equal presentation from both sides of the story is not news it’s propaganda. The social destruction and thought control began It’s wrath with 24/7 indoctrination periods rather than 3 time slots per day. Social reprogramming that we fund through our support of products and services offered (forced) upon us constantly. So tune out, turn off and boycott these programs and advertisers, money makes the world go round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fox is not perfect but they have a basically conservative point of view. There's a lot of patriots on that channel. They have liberals to "balance" it out and some of them are worse that the idiots on CNN, MSNBC etc. Juan Williams is one example. Fox is the the only channel I watch except for local news and weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.