General Discussion

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts) Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:30 PM Jan 2020

Why does the US media pretend to present balanced reporting?

We know that FOX is basically a propaganda outlet. It was crested as such. Murdoch and Ailes agreed that FOX would present a right wing viewpoint.

But most US corporate media shows will claim to be balanced, or to present views from both sides. My question to the media managers would be,

Is it balanced reporting to balance the truth of an issue with a right wing lie? As examples:

Human influenced climate change is a fact. Claiming that there is no evidence, or that scientists are unsure, is not an alternative fact, it is a lie.

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016, and did not win an unprecedented number of electoral votes. To claim otherwise is a lie.

Trump threatened Zelensky by linking the release of aid to Ukraine with the mere announcement of an investigation against the Bidens. To claim otherwise is not an alternative fact, it is a lie.

Every time the US corporate media presents a right wing lie as a fact, or as a serious opinion, the media is enabling the GOP to destroy language.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why does the US media pretend to present balanced reporting? (Original Post) guillaumeb Jan 2020 OP

They do that because most Americans won't call them on it. Jamastiene Jan 2020 #1

True. And there is no real threat of them losing their licenses to make money. guillaumeb Jan 2020 #2

Why? Money. Hermit-The-Prog Jan 2020 #3

Channel 9 in Chicago is the same. guillaumeb Jan 2020 #4

They seem to see only giving treestar Jan 2020 #5

I agree. guillaumeb Jan 2020 #6

Exactly treestar Jan 2020 #8

$$$. $$$$ $$$$$$ NRaleighLiberal Jan 2020 #7

I agree with you cyclonefence Jan 2020 #9

I agree, in part. guillaumeb Jan 2020 #10

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)

1. They do that because most Americans won't call them on it.

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:34 PM

Jan 2020

Most Americans won't call them on it. Why? I don't know. Those of us, who do take the time to tell them they are not balanced, get routinely ignored.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)

2. True. And there is no real threat of them losing their licenses to make money.

Reply to Jamastiene (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:37 PM

Jan 2020

My guess is that many US voters, if they watch any news, watch local news that focuses on accidents, shootings, celebrities, and sports.

Hermit-The-Prog

(33,510 posts)

3. Why? Money.

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:37 PM

Jan 2020

Sensational horse races sell everything from drugs to SUVs. The wealthy behind the industry like the control they have over GOPers. GOP is now the oligarch/kleptocrat party -- they've fostered a symbiotic relationship with the ultra wealthy for decades, each depending upon the other's power to add to their own.

Last night, the overnight news on ABC spent more time reporting celebrity gossip than on the trial. I didn't bother checking the other broadcasters.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)

4. Channel 9 in Chicago is the same.

Reply to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:40 PM

Jan 2020

Sports, weather, celebrity news, and shootings comprise 99% of what they call news. It is not really news, it is entertainment.

treestar

(82,383 posts)

5. They seem to see only giving

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 12:58 PM

Jan 2020

Both sides what they claim with no further analysis. So they let Dotard’s claims be a side, and never consider the truth of the claims. They are lazy.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)

6. I agree.

Reply to treestar (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 01:01 PM

Jan 2020

If I say 2 plus 2 equals 5, that is not an alternate fact, it is a lie. Or it is evidence that I am mathematically deficient.

treestar

(82,383 posts)

8. Exactly

Reply to guillaumeb (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 01:05 PM

Jan 2020

Dems say 2+2=4 and Repubs say 2+2=5. The media then proceeds as if there is an actual issue about whether it is 4 or 5. As of the answer 5 is actually a possible answer and just a different view.

NRaleighLiberal

(60,027 posts)

7. $$$. $$$$ $$$$$$

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 01:03 PM

Jan 2020

cyclonefence

(4,483 posts)

9. I agree with you

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 02:34 PM

Jan 2020

I'm so tired of hearing that there are two sides to every story, but that doesn't mean that both sides are worth listening to. Do we give equal time to climate scientists and back-country preachers about global warnings? Pretending to be "neutral" in cases where there's clearly fact on one side and self-serving lies on the other doesn't do anything to assist the public debate.

I think the clear partisanship of Fucks News has increased the pressure outlets like CNN feel to present "both sides."

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)

10. I agree, in part.

Reply to cyclonefence (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 24, 2020, 02:37 PM

Jan 2020

One of my children is a journalist. And she feels that the media should present both sides, but that assumes, as you said, that both sides are dealing with fact.

There are facts, and there are lies. Calling lies alternative facts is Orwellian.

Reply to this discussion