3 ms·

You say "media" as if it's a singular entity. It is not. It encompasses Fox News (which I don't watch but I gather is a cesspool), The London Review of Books, V

by mfukar 10y ago

You say "media" as if it's a singular entity. It is not. It encompasses Fox News (which I don't watch but I gather is a cesspool), The London Review of Books, Vogue, Infowars, YouTube, etc. A set of _competing_ companies. Not all of them support or supported (the Iraq) war. Like so many others that refer to "the media" in the same way, I have to ask: Are you sure you're not falling into the trap of "I didn't see it, so it doesn't exist"?

xupybd 10y ago
The "media" has a major problem. Its main driver is its entertainment value. News is more entertaining when sensationalised and heavily biased. I don't think there is a conspiracy or negligence causing this. Just simple economic drivers. It's the same thing we see with fast food. Yeah it's bad, but it's exactly what the market demands.
- mfukar 10y ago
  Despite what anyone will claim, good journalism still exists. I am not going to discuss obviously false generalisations.
  - xupybd 10y ago
    Good journalism still exists, yes I couldn't agree more. But I don't think it's rewarded as much as poor journalism. This is the problem.
    - EdHominem 10y ago
      I think that's precisely the trump issue... "Reality" TV costs peanuts and gets more views, even if everything in it is staged.
      - xupybd 10y ago
        Yeah politics has had this issue for a while too.