5 ms·

They don't care about bias, they just want the bias to be in their favor. See: Fox news.

by davidw 8y ago

adventured 8y ago
They care about the bias precisely because it's not in their favor, as all politicians would.
- davidw 8y ago
  "all politicians". Nope. They are not all the same in how they handle the press. Obama, for instance, once said some things indicating he was 'irritated' with Fox News. Trump thinks the press - the one mentioned in the 1st amendment of the US constitution - is an "enemy of the people" and has said so loudly. So no, they're not all the same. I mean, I'm sure they'd all love it if the press fawned over them 24/7, but there are big differences between a Trump, Erdogan or Maduro, and, say, an Obama or McCain.
  - mc32 8y ago
    The prev admin prosecuted more leakers than any prev admin, current admin believes “ fake news” rather than “the press” are the enemy of the people. Now, I know they have their biased method to classify unbiased press from biased, but your assertion just reinforces their claim because you’re conflating one with the other, as most news are wont to do. Doing themselves little favor. A fair question is to ask whether biased news or a biased press are preferable over a more neutral (non partisan) press. If a biased press is not an issue, then “interference” from foreing interests are less of a problem, unless they are for reasons, categorized differently —-however, they would seem to be overarchingly about bias, except one is domestic and one is foreign.
    - s73v3r_ 8y ago
      "current admin believes “ fake news” rather than “the press” are the enemy of the people." But they also define "fake news" to be any outlet that isn't praising them constantly.
      - mc32 8y ago
        Yes, that’s pretty much true and of course it’s regrettable. But on the other hand even news that like to think themselves as neutral, say NPR, will, when interviewing a partisan follow the pattern thus: When interviewing liberals, don’t follow forcefully up on omissions or questinsble assertions. When interviewing a conservative (regular, not Trumpist) will bring up omissions or will follow up on questionable assettions more forcefully. Regarding campaiging, they will embed more with liberal candidates and follow progress more than with conservative candidates. I’d be happy to know I’m wrong, but this is my take listening to NPR regularly.
        s73v3r_ 8y ago
        I can't say I can agree with that in the slightest, especially regarding NPR. I would say that they refuse to follow up on those assertions with conservatives quite often. As far as embedding, I believe that is at the discretion of the campaign.
      - oh_sigh 8y ago
        No, they don't - I think they define 'fake news' as any outlet that only runs 100% negative analysis and opinion on the administration.
        s73v3r_ 8y ago
        Which is clearly an incorrect definition of the term. Fox News was only negative on Obama, yet I never heard him say they were the enemy of the people.
nil_pointer 8y ago
Why does everyone on here always just call out Fox? Are you not aware that CNN, MSNBC and others do this same thing?
- josefresco 8y ago
  Fox News is in no way "the same" as CNN/MSNBC. It's straight up GOP/conservative propaganda that in some cases dictates official policy.
  - nil_pointer 8y ago
    "My news source tells the truth, yours is propaganda". Try to not be so partisan. They both push propaganda.
    - calgoo 8y ago
      While they both push BS, if you compare them to the rest of the worlds news sources you will see that most news align with CNN/MSNBC. Or let me put this way: The rest of the (educated) world laugh at the people that watch Fox News.
      - vuln 8y ago
        It's sad that the 'educated' laugh. You'd think with all their wisdom they would be able to reach out and save the feable minded. Instead they just laugh from the ivory tower. It's a sad world we live in. Even sadder that it's widely accepted as okay, even lauded.
        fzeroracer 8y ago
        The problem is that you can't save those that don't want to be saved, especially when there's an entire business and market pandering specifically to them. If you've ever had family or friends that delve deep into conspiracies, there's no amount of rational argument, logic, data or facts you can bring up that help them.

They don't care about bias, they just want the bias to be in their favor. See: Fox news.

by davidw 8y ago

They don't care about bias, they just want the bias to be in their favor. See: Fox news.

adventured 8y ago

They care about the bias precisely because it's not in their favor, as all politicians would.

davidw 8y ago
"all politicians". Nope. They are not all the same in how they handle the press. Obama, for instance, once said some things indicating he was 'irritated' with Fox News. Trump thinks the press - the one mentioned in the 1st amendment of the US constitution - is an "enemy of the people" and has said so loudly. So no, they're not all the same. I mean, I'm sure they'd all love it if the press fawned over them 24/7, but there are big differences between a Trump, Erdogan or Maduro, and, say, an Obama or McCain.
- mc32 8y ago
  The prev admin prosecuted more leakers than any prev admin, current admin believes “ fake news” rather than “the press” are the enemy of the people. Now, I know they have their biased method to classify unbiased press from biased, but your assertion just reinforces their claim because you’re conflating one with the other, as most news are wont to do. Doing themselves little favor. A fair question is to ask whether biased news or a biased press are preferable over a more neutral (non partisan) press. If a biased press is not an issue, then “interference” from foreing interests are less of a problem, unless they are for reasons, categorized differently —-however, they would seem to be overarchingly about bias, except one is domestic and one is foreign.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    "current admin believes “ fake news” rather than “the press” are the enemy of the people." But they also define "fake news" to be any outlet that isn't praising them constantly.
    - mc32 8y ago
      Yes, that’s pretty much true and of course it’s regrettable. But on the other hand even news that like to think themselves as neutral, say NPR, will, when interviewing a partisan follow the pattern thus: When interviewing liberals, don’t follow forcefully up on omissions or questinsble assertions. When interviewing a conservative (regular, not Trumpist) will bring up omissions or will follow up on questionable assettions more forcefully. Regarding campaiging, they will embed more with liberal candidates and follow progress more than with conservative candidates. I’d be happy to know I’m wrong, but this is my take listening to NPR regularly.
      - s73v3r_ 8y ago
        I can't say I can agree with that in the slightest, especially regarding NPR. I would say that they refuse to follow up on those assertions with conservatives quite often. As far as embedding, I believe that is at the discretion of the campaign.
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      No, they don't - I think they define 'fake news' as any outlet that only runs 100% negative analysis and opinion on the administration.
      - s73v3r_ 8y ago
        Which is clearly an incorrect definition of the term. Fox News was only negative on Obama, yet I never heard him say they were the enemy of the people.

nil_pointer 8y ago

Why does everyone on here always just call out Fox? Are you not aware that CNN, MSNBC and others do this same thing?

josefresco 8y ago
Fox News is in no way "the same" as CNN/MSNBC. It's straight up GOP/conservative propaganda that in some cases dictates official policy.
- nil_pointer 8y ago
  "My news source tells the truth, yours is propaganda". Try to not be so partisan. They both push propaganda.
  - calgoo 8y ago
    While they both push BS, if you compare them to the rest of the worlds news sources you will see that most news align with CNN/MSNBC. Or let me put this way: The rest of the (educated) world laugh at the people that watch Fox News.
    - vuln 8y ago
      It's sad that the 'educated' laugh. You'd think with all their wisdom they would be able to reach out and save the feable minded. Instead they just laugh from the ivory tower. It's a sad world we live in. Even sadder that it's widely accepted as okay, even lauded.
      - fzeroracer 8y ago
        The problem is that you can't save those that don't want to be saved, especially when there's an entire business and market pandering specifically to them. If you've ever had family or friends that delve deep into conspiracies, there's no amount of rational argument, logic, data or facts you can bring up that help them.