3 ms·
>having processes to avoid editorial bias from impacting the end result >like CNN, WP, NYT Um... really? Are you saying those three specifically aren’t puttin
by SlowRobotAhead 8y ago
>having processes to avoid editorial bias from impacting the end result
>like CNN, WP, NYT
Um... really? Are you saying those three specifically aren’t putting out very biased results? You could be left of Marx and know that isn’t true for those three specifically. Esp CNN!
The only explanation here is a different topic, that you yourself are so biased that you think CNN is putting out good journalism.
- throwaway5752 8y agoYes. All of those outlets attempt to put out unbiased news. CNN is "left of Marx"? I sincerely hope you are being sarcastic. ps: instead of downvoting, why don't you do something more effective, and post an example of biased reporting by CNN (and something that isn't a story about a biased article that resulted in reporters being disciplined or fired)
- sincerely 8y agoThe person youre responding to isnt saying CNN is “left of Marx”, they’re saying a reader to the left of Marx politically could tell that CMN is biased
- cm2012 8y agoCNN, WP, and NYT basically do just present the facts in their reporting. To the extent that it's a big deal when they put out a falsehood and people have gotten fired. Opinion sections are obviously different.
- crazynick4 8y agoCNN constantly uses loaded words in their reporting, along with more subtle things like condescending smiles when a person is talking who does not hold a left-wing opinion. The news is almost all factual but is meant to swing a person's opinion in just about every way without actually citing false facts (unless the subject is WMDs in Iraq). It is probably the best TV news source we have in the US but it still sets a fairly low bar in terms of objectivity. Oftentimes, just leaving out certain facts while including others can have just as much of an influence as citing false facts outright, especially when done repeatedly. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/
- kingofhdds 8y agoWe all know that even a composition of words used (or avoided) to report a fact may be very loaded. And it just how it happens in all media, big and small, because apparently journalists are humans, and editors are humans. There are worse, and better cases, but there's no such thing as 100% neutral reporting.
- monocasa 8y agoAt least during the 2016 primaries, they were basically just mouthpieces of the Clinton campaign.
- cm2012 8y agoThat's just not true.https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-donald-trump-hacked-the-media/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-donald-trump-hacked...
- monocasa 8y agohttps://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/ https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaig... The Clinton campaign specifically asked the news media (including CNN, WP, NYT) to increase coverage of Trump (as well as Carson and Cruz). This is so that they'd either have someone easier to beat in the case of these 'pied piper' candidates, or pull a stronger opponent farther right come the general. Nate Silver didn't know about this in March of 2016 when he wrote that article.
- SlowRobotAhead 8y agoThis is the most inconvenient truth of the entire 2016 Campaign. Hillary requested Trump to be propped up as someone she "knew" she could beat. If she had just played fair, she might have actually won against Jeb who the GOP actually wanted. Don't like Trump? Thank Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and the media for playing along.