3 ms·

Counterpoint (as someone married to a journalist): most news outlets do not have the time, resources and intent to further any special interest agenda except f

by oezi 5y ago

Counterpoint (as someone married to a journalist): most news outlets do not have the time, resources and intent to further any special interest agenda except for their front page and op-eds. To achieve Murdoch-level disinformation is hard work. It requires so much work, that most news outlets cannot compete. There just isn't enough time and money in the news business. Remember this isn't science where there is time for research. Many news outlets have individual journalists contribute 3 to 5 articles per day. Do you think this allows for a lot of spinning an agenda? No, the reality is different. Lots of news is just repeating what others report (news agencies to online news to news papers) because there aren't that many original sources anyway. I believe what you think is (malicious?) agenda, is really just news outlets trying to survive. Murdoch/Springer/FoxNews to the contrary, but these are easy to avoid.

BoardsOfCanada 5y ago
I think the argument here is more about what journalists know that they can cover, what goes onto the front page and in headings, rather than journalists themselves writing with a hidden agenda. Also who is promoted, Greenwald wrote about a particularly bad example: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/cnns-new-reporter-natasha-bertrand https://greenwald.substack.com/p/cnns-new-reporter-natasha-b... In addition, no news outlet seemed to be in enough of a survival mode to report on the Hunter Biden story for example.
6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
> Remember this isn't science where there is time for research. Many news outlets have individual journalists contribute 3 to 5 articles per day. Do you think this allows for a lot of spinning an agenda? I always thought of this as exact the problem. There isn’t time for a journalist to do their research (and the bar is low enough), so instead of reporting the truth, you get what they already thought and already wanted to say, sprinkled with a tiny bit of new info. Maybe agenda is the wrong word, but it’s close.

by oezi 5y ago

BoardsOfCanada 5y ago

I think the argument here is more about what journalists know that they can cover, what goes onto the front page and in headings, rather than journalists themselves writing with a hidden agenda. Also who is promoted, Greenwald wrote about a particularly bad example: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/cnns-new-reporter-natasha-bertrand https://greenwald.substack.com/p/cnns-new-reporter-natasha-b... In addition, no news outlet seemed to be in enough of a survival mode to report on the Hunter Biden story for example.

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago

> Remember this isn't science where there is time for research. Many news outlets have individual journalists contribute 3 to 5 articles per day. Do you think this allows for a lot of spinning an agenda? I always thought of this as exact the problem. There isn’t time for a journalist to do their research (and the bar is low enough), so instead of reporting the truth, you get what they already thought and already wanted to say, sprinkled with a tiny bit of new info. Maybe agenda is the wrong word, but it’s close.