?

Log in

No account? Create an account

arhyalon

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
08:45 am: Nearly Three In Ten...

 Normally, I'm not particularly sensitive to media bias, but the following headline really amused me:

Nearly Three In Ten Say Fox Is Too Tough On Obama
 
Really, guys, 'nearly three"? Isn't that, like: 2? Or 2 1/2? Or even 2 3/4?  Shouldn't that have read:

Less Than Three In Ten Say Fox Is Too Tough On Obama


I have a friend who used to do a lot of media interviews. She reports that 90% of the papers and TV networks she dealt with just published her press release. They did not do any reporting or check facts. They just published what she sent them. She no longer trusts the news because she feels they are doing this all the time -- just publishing the propaganda of anyone who sends them stuff. This is not a matter of political bias, according to her, but of laziness.

There were two exceptions:

CNN -- According to my friend, CNN was much, much worse. They would come having already decided what they wanted her to say. They would ask her "Do you believe XYZ?" If she said no, they would re ask the question in a dozen different ways. If she said, "I do not agree with XYZ" They would only use the part where she said XYZ and not the part where she disagreed.

The Christian Science Monitor -- my friend reported that the Monitor had old fashion reporting. The reporter asked, questions, had an open mind, and wrote a real article...basically did what we expect reporters to do.

Kind of scary, really.

Comments

[User Picture]
From:juliet_winters
Date:April 29th, 2009 07:04 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I would say much of the media has turned into the Obama public relations team.

It reminds me of how they did as they were told in World War II.
I doubt if they would use the word national security to describe their modern day actions but you know that's basically the excuse they give. They don't want "our guy" to fail.


[User Picture]
From:arhyalon
Date:April 29th, 2009 08:15 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I was just reading the Irregulars, a book about Roald Dahl's time as a spy trying to get America to throw in with the British war effort. Apparently, the press was much more divided back then than I had realized, at least before we really joined up. There was a large Anti-New Deal group who were quite vocal. I was surprised.
[User Picture]
From:juliet_winters
Date:April 30th, 2009 10:11 am (UTC)
(Link)
I suppose I was really thinking more of war time than pre-war time. I know that Roosevelt was widely considered "a traitor to his class."
But once the war got rolling, I'd say criticism was scarce. Of course, censoring war reporting had a lot to do with that.
Can you imagine that we will ever be up for another war like WW II? Where not thousands but millions of men died? Then there were the Japanese internment camps. Somehow, those do not get glued to Roosevelt's legacy.


[User Picture]
From:arhyalon
Date:April 30th, 2009 07:39 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Not knowing what the future will bring, I'm so grateful that we have not faced anything like that in my life time.
[User Picture]
From:madkestrel
Date:April 29th, 2009 08:56 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Really, guys, 'nearly three"? Isn't that, like: 2?

Bwaaaahahahahahahaha!
Powered by LiveJournal.com