GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently December 7 19, 12:02 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: May 2 19, 5:13 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
Posts: 17183
Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
How much funding does NPR get from federal sources - any? I always thought there was some. Is it significant enough that they might feel obliged to let the Trumpers speak uncontested?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: May 2 19, 5:43 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 37225
Location: Huis Clos
ThatGuy wrote:
Freed Roger wrote:
Haven't listened to NPR lately, (skipping the daily kick in the nuts). But listened last night going home from work to hear about Barr testimony.

They had some awful senator Trumper from TN -Marsha Blackburn(sp?). I really do not see the point in giving her airtime. There isn't enough time for NPR to ask follow ups or provide context (like what other crazy [expletive] this lady says -ask the creationism climate change denier if she believe Jesus rode around on dinosaurs ffs).
the interviewer tried to ask, if investigation of Trump should be considered closed , why then do you investigate Mueller investigation source. ? Her reply was about holding govt.agencies accountable and searching out bad actors blah blah blah. Then interview ends -no question about Trump bad actors like Manafort Flynn and their Russian oligarchs etc etc etc.

Clearly you can tell she is bat [expletive] crazy, but still what is the point of spreading it, normalizing her fascism. ?

In effect NPR trolling the listeners.

Marsha Blackburn fancies herself as a female Trump. She is awful. Her opponent in last year's election was a pretty moderate Democrat who served as Tennessee's governor from 2003-2011 (he was popular - reelected with 70% of the vote for his second term), and a lot of people were hyping up his chances of scoring an upset. He was beaten very easily. I've lost all hope when it comes to Tennessee politics.

Same here in Mo.

Btw i was hanging out w my cousin who grew up and lived near entire life in/near Nashville and desperately avoided political talk bc i didn’t want to find out he was a Trumper. He broached the topic and thank goodness he thinks Trump is a turd. Otherwise very moderate right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: July 3 19, 11:58 am 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 24875
Location: St. Louis
Google news headlines (not signed in to an account now fwiw):
Quote:
Military chiefs have concerns about politicization of Trump's July 4th event
CNN

3 Reasons Not to Worry About Trump’s Fourth of July—and 1 Big Reason to Worry
POLITICO

Trump's 2.5 million July Fourth event
Washington Post

Trump’s hijacking of the Fourth of July just got a lot uglier
The Washington Post

Welcome to Donald Trump’s Big Dumb Fourth of July Festival of Narcissism!
Chicago Tribune
Opinion


It's a prime example with how in Post-FAct GOP Trump ERA, how useless our news info is, with how it's transmitted received.

Can't really blame the op-ed writers for going to town on this, obviously I agree with the most of them. But with the algorithm and feeds, that's all we get. I'm not naive -we'll never go back to old ways to get our news. And nope, I'm not finally waking up to the perils of 24/7 news cycle here blah blah.

...if a Trump story would ever come thru with just the facts and context - Trump parade, costs this. IT is this much more than prior years, tanks etc. never happened before like this, especially peace time - would more people just size up the info and decide how stupid, and ridiculous and scary it all is? I'm actually wondering here.

That the vast bulk of our news comes thru in Op-ed columnist form, people see that it's opinion -and we are either inclined to be outraged yet again, or supportive (if the opinion is Fox etc. ) , or more commonly for people - we take it as just another Trump-controversy opinion riff for the day, and people mad on both sides -so I'm-just-going-to-sit-it-out again, and what good can I do anyways.... Then when it comes time to vote - I don't know, there's something about those emails...

And just about everything absurdly fascist and awful that happens in Trump-GOP regime - there is almost always at least some precedent, even if it's a far-fetched reach- a former president abusing power of the office, we've had many a prior "National Emergency", or immigrants being abused or the Wall during the Obama era etc etc. all the way to Lincoln suspending rights like habeas corpus.

When the news is mostly delivered/received in opinion form, the counter-opinion is game to include these ridiculous equivalencies, parsings, and flat-earth arguments.

What's happened in the past is never a clear unbiased view, but with the way it's pooped upon now, people are evolving to have no clear frame of reference from the past. There is no norm.

I guess we are way past point of getting news in a form of facts and context -then letting them speak for themselves (yeah this era probably never fully existed)

This is just a random musing, carry on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: July 3 19, 12:37 pm 
Offline
GRB's obsessive compulsive baseball poster
User avatar

Joined: October 12 07, 12:28 pm
Posts: 25325
Location: Raptured
Just some normal stuff here.





Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 1:54 pm 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 24875
Location: St. Louis
I tend to scroll news headlines in google news. Not signed into a google account.

Fox, Washignton Examiner, NY Post get way more than there fair share of the main ledes. Thus, currently the Epstein story headers promoting conspiracy ala their dear Orange leader. But only the fox news byline is smaller print.

I wonder how Fox grabs so many Google news ledes? Is it just by creating so many clickbait ones and they get the clicks, and the authoritative sounding ledes?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 2:43 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 8114
Location: Chicago, IL
Freed Roger wrote:
I tend to scroll news headlines in google news. Not signed into a google account.

Fox, Washignton Examiner, NY Post get way more than there fair share of the main ledes. Thus, currently the Epstein story headers promoting conspiracy ala their dear Orange leader. But only the fox news byline is smaller print.

I wonder how Fox grabs so many Google news ledes? Is it just by creating so many clickbait ones and they get the clicks, and the authoritative sounding ledes?


Same with Real Clear Politics home page. So many links to Washington Examiner, NY Post, The Hill, FOX. I assume it’s like that CNN thing where they think they have to put a bald-faced liar like Jeff Lord on the panel so the conservatives don’t think they’re biased. CNN needs to realize that either way, the conservatives are going to accuse them of bias, and just do away with the liars, much like Google News and RCP.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 3:48 pm 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 24875
Location: St. Louis
Yeah, but isn't it the algorithms. For instance, using this Epstein death. All the headlines that say "Epstein dead apparent suicide" With details about irregularities below, won't get the clicks that headers do that insinuate foul play in them. Thus via all the clicks, conspiracy leads the google news, and becomes real.

I will look for some other news story examples , but it happens a lot. Captain Obvious- There is bias in all media. But unabashedly right wing-cuckoo biased clickbait ones, are more prominent in news pages than i expected.

I am fully aware that GOP accuses Google of favoring the algorithms to dems. More Complete utter bull [expletive] and gaslighting by the GOP.

Another problem with news home page is that OP-eds are not their own section and come thru as news.

Of course, not sure how they would segregate actual news story from OP-eds. I.e Reason.com from the few i read on GRB are essentially one person's OP-ed piece (with a few establish able factoids) without the op-ed disclaimer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 4:30 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 8114
Location: Chicago, IL
A great solution to this IMO is to pay the $10-20/mo to subscribe to a place that delivers news. NYT, LA Times, your local paper, WaPo, Mother Jones, The Atlantic. Allowing Google or another aggregator to spit a stew of what's popular online at you as a form of news is a great way to go completely insane. You also, via subscription, get the benefit of supporting real journalism and ensuring they have the means they need to do their jobs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 4:57 pm 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 24875
Location: St. Louis
33anda3rd wrote:
A great solution to this IMO is to pay the $10-20/mo to subscribe to a place that delivers news. NYT, LA Times, your local paper, WaPo, Mother Jones, The Atlantic. Allowing Google or another aggregator to spit a stew of what's popular online at you as a form of news is a great way to go completely insane. You also, via subscription, get the benefit of supporting real journalism and ensuring they have the means they need to do their jobs.
Great reminder.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Media bias?
PostPosted: August 12 19, 7:46 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
Posts: 17183
Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
Freed Roger wrote:
33anda3rd wrote:
A great solution to this IMO is to pay the $10-20/mo to subscribe to a place that delivers news. NYT, LA Times, your local paper, WaPo, Mother Jones, The Atlantic. Allowing Google or another aggregator to spit a stew of what's popular online at you as a form of news is a great way to go completely insane. You also, via subscription, get the benefit of supporting real journalism and ensuring they have the means they need to do their jobs.
Great reminder.

Right. Back in the day we always paid for the paper subscription and a few magazines we wanted. A couple hundred a year. Double that for inflation and that's what you should not blink an eye at to get your news online.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group