5 ms·

I think putting the Hannitys and Carlsons on the same level as the Maddows and the Lemons implies a false equivalency. Everyone has an agenda, yeah, but one of

I think putting the Hannitys and Carlsons on the same level as the Maddows and the Lemons implies a false equivalency. Everyone has an agenda, yeah, but one of those groups is deliberately misleading its viewers.

chiefalchemist 9y ago
Um. They're all pretty deliberate. They're all gainfully employed based on one key KPI: ad revenue. They have a target market. They have a narrative. And they work that to the tune of ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. Death by cancer is still death whether it's Red State death or Blue State death. That's about as equal as it gets. None of the four you listed quality as news or journalism. One another day we can discuss what they really are, but news and journalists they are not.
- bradleyankrom 9y ago
  What qualifies as news or journalism?
  - jsgo 9y ago
    From what I've seen, and I could be wrong, David Muir seems to deliver in a way that doesn't seem heavy in bias. Admittedly, I don't watch ABC a lot so I don't see a ton of him, but his content seems pretty impartial.
    - chiefalchemist 9y ago
      Perfect example. He's nothing more than a talking head. He's reading a script off a teleprompter. He's there - and Katie Couric isn't - because he tests well and the rating are strong. That doesn't make him a journalist. Nor does it make what falls from his lips news.
      - jsgo 9y ago
        Will have to agree to disagree on that one. And I think he's there and Couric isn't is due to Couric at a certain point trying the Barbara Walters track pivoting into the talk show side of things. But I think him being fairly interchangeable with another journalist is an indicator that his role isn't personality driven like the previously mentioned: he's there to deliver the news and that's essentially it. I think his Gaza Strip/Haiti/etc. work qualifies him as a journalist and from what I've seen of him, has delivered factual news (with varying levels of importance, but realistically, it is unlikely to have hard hitting items daily).
        chiefalchemist 9y ago
        If you have links to the segments mentioned I'd like to watch. Tia
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    Funny enough, my term papers in grade school come to mind. We were required to take a subject, investigate it, present both / all arguments, and then draw a conclusion as based on the investigation. Journalists ask questions. Tough question. The hard questions. Taking the narrative of a rumour and/or a "press release" is not journalism. When there's an over-use of "power words" and heavy handed adjectives that manipulate the interpretation, that's not journalism either. That's the tip of the iceberg. Maybe it's kinda like porn? I'll know it when I see it?
  - specialist 9y ago
    Verified sources, citations, quotes on the record. Otherwise it's gossip, heresay, agitprop
- sp527 9y ago
  This is such a terrible argument, I'm just flabbergasted. If you were to rate Carlson/Hannity on aggregate truthfulness vs Lemon/Maddow, it's just not even a close comparison. It almost seems Red State agenda-driven to even imply the barest hint of an equivalency. It's the same sh*tty logic that made Hilary and Trump look like equally bad options in the minds of much of the public. I'm fairly cynical about the political system and media myself, but people like you, who insist on exercising an overly reductionist dismissiveness, are why our country is now being systematically defrauded and run into the ground by a lunatic con man.
lainga 9y ago
Maddow spins the news just as hard, whether you can/want to see it or not.
- bradleyankrom 9y ago
  Spins news as hard as Hannity and Tucker Carlson?
  - pnw_hazor 9y ago
    Yes.
- metamet 9y ago
  Maddow definitely creates a narrative out of the current events. Hannity is on another level, though, making dishonest use of every logical fallacy in order to push the state directed agenda. He is one of the "allies" Trump pushes his propaganda through: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/382993-white-house-telling-allies-to-attack-rosenstein-on-tv-to-build-case http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/382993-white-hous... > Trump also urged supporters to watch Fox News host Sean Hannity's show on Wednesday, during which Hannity called for Rosenstein to be fired.
jsgo 9y ago
While I agree they're not all the same or approaching the median at the same rate, my statement was in their propensity towards editorializing. Whereas people view them (well, typically if they agree with them) as newspeople. I was going mostly by personalities that seem to have the largest viewerships, purely anecdotal though, admittedly.

chiefalchemist 9y ago

Um. They're all pretty deliberate. They're all gainfully employed based on one key KPI: ad revenue. They have a target market. They have a narrative. And they work that to the tune of ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. Death by cancer is still death whether it's Red State death or Blue State death. That's about as equal as it gets. None of the four you listed quality as news or journalism. One another day we can discuss what they really are, but news and journalists they are not.

bradleyankrom 9y ago
What qualifies as news or journalism?
- jsgo 9y ago
  From what I've seen, and I could be wrong, David Muir seems to deliver in a way that doesn't seem heavy in bias. Admittedly, I don't watch ABC a lot so I don't see a ton of him, but his content seems pretty impartial.
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    Perfect example. He's nothing more than a talking head. He's reading a script off a teleprompter. He's there - and Katie Couric isn't - because he tests well and the rating are strong. That doesn't make him a journalist. Nor does it make what falls from his lips news.
    - jsgo 9y ago
      Will have to agree to disagree on that one. And I think he's there and Couric isn't is due to Couric at a certain point trying the Barbara Walters track pivoting into the talk show side of things. But I think him being fairly interchangeable with another journalist is an indicator that his role isn't personality driven like the previously mentioned: he's there to deliver the news and that's essentially it. I think his Gaza Strip/Haiti/etc. work qualifies him as a journalist and from what I've seen of him, has delivered factual news (with varying levels of importance, but realistically, it is unlikely to have hard hitting items daily).
      - chiefalchemist 9y ago
        If you have links to the segments mentioned I'd like to watch. Tia
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  Funny enough, my term papers in grade school come to mind. We were required to take a subject, investigate it, present both / all arguments, and then draw a conclusion as based on the investigation. Journalists ask questions. Tough question. The hard questions. Taking the narrative of a rumour and/or a "press release" is not journalism. When there's an over-use of "power words" and heavy handed adjectives that manipulate the interpretation, that's not journalism either. That's the tip of the iceberg. Maybe it's kinda like porn? I'll know it when I see it?
- specialist 9y ago
  Verified sources, citations, quotes on the record. Otherwise it's gossip, heresay, agitprop
sp527 9y ago
This is such a terrible argument, I'm just flabbergasted. If you were to rate Carlson/Hannity on aggregate truthfulness vs Lemon/Maddow, it's just not even a close comparison. It almost seems Red State agenda-driven to even imply the barest hint of an equivalency. It's the same sh*tty logic that made Hilary and Trump look like equally bad options in the minds of much of the public. I'm fairly cynical about the political system and media myself, but people like you, who insist on exercising an overly reductionist dismissiveness, are why our country is now being systematically defrauded and run into the ground by a lunatic con man.

lainga 9y ago

Maddow spins the news just as hard, whether you can/want to see it or not.

bradleyankrom 9y ago
Spins news as hard as Hannity and Tucker Carlson?
- pnw_hazor 9y ago
  Yes.
metamet 9y ago
Maddow definitely creates a narrative out of the current events. Hannity is on another level, though, making dishonest use of every logical fallacy in order to push the state directed agenda. He is one of the "allies" Trump pushes his propaganda through: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/382993-white-house-telling-allies-to-attack-rosenstein-on-tv-to-build-case http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/382993-white-hous... > Trump also urged supporters to watch Fox News host Sean Hannity's show on Wednesday, during which Hannity called for Rosenstein to be fired.

jsgo 9y ago

While I agree they're not all the same or approaching the median at the same rate, my statement was in their propensity towards editorializing. Whereas people view them (well, typically if they agree with them) as newspeople. I was going mostly by personalities that seem to have the largest viewerships, purely anecdotal though, admittedly.