5 ms·
That book argues that mass media are biased because they are beholden to for-profit corporations, advertisers, and large-entity sourcing. I didn't read it, that
by stvswn 11y ago
That book argues that mass media are biased because they are beholden to for-profit corporations, advertisers, and large-entity sourcing. I didn't read it, that's just in the outline that's in the link you provided.
I think Noam would prefer if they were government mouthpieces instead of corporate mouthpieces, as he's socialist.
Regardless, I don't think "Noam Chomsky wrote a book" is an argument with evidence. It's rather an appeal to authority. But if it were, the book should actually be about the argument you're making.
- huac 11y agoThe book is about the argument. One example from the book is the 1984 Nicaraguan general election (Wikipedia notes this), where US media sources took the White House press secretary's words as gospel, ignoring the atrocities on the ground. Also, thinking that socialists are willing to blindly trust government sources is pretty wrong as well. Far left and far right both share a distrust of the state.
- mirimir 11y agoUS mass media exhibit both government bias and corporate bias. And it can be hard to distinguish them, because US government is also subject to strong corporate bias. That was very much so during the Regan and Bush years. The Democrats are more subtle, and reflect a power base that's far more covert.
- br_smartass 11y agoSuggestion: try reading on stuff you want to critique before commenting about them instead spouting malformed ideas that you patched up from internet comments, Facebook posts and other distortion prone medium. People who do read up on stuff can clearly see you don't know what you're talking about.