4 ms·
It is identifiable as locally recognizable, as oppose to the "pink slime" creeping into our neighborhood. Content is still going to be beholden to the master o
by egberts1 4y ago
It is identifiable as locally recognizable, as oppose to the "pink slime" creeping into our neighborhood.
Content is still going to be beholden to the master of bias; but we would then know whose bias is beholden to.
Good ol' days would have two, three or more competing newspapers of which different folks can buy from: now it is just one newspaper (or none) which is THE problem (of a different kind than what OP is asserting about).
Thankfully, we usually have at least two local broadcast newscasters (of different affiliates) in nearly all local communities.
- pessimizer 4y agoIt's not about abstract "bias," it's about your local newscaster not being local at all, but one of the brands of a giant national (or multinational) company.
- egberts1 4y agoThat's the definition of "pink slime", pretending to be a local newscaster when it is not. This is a separate definition from ones in national broadcast news and one who pretend to be a national broadcast newscaster, which is a mute point when it comes to freedom of press. Back to "pink slime", it is critically important to organically raise local newscasters as a local business.