|Perhaps I was mistaken...||BikingViking|
Feb 5, 2002 7:17 AM
|As I am willing to entertain any constructive criticism, it's always tough to air out your own laundry and admit that your opinion may have been wrong.
I found this article on media bias and found it pretty interesting.
Combine this with some of the stories about our current educational problems, it's certainly worth thinking about.
Is the bias is actually toward people who have read a book (without pictures) in the last six months? Perhaps!! :o)
|Sensationalism and conflict||McAndrus|
Feb 5, 2002 7:26 AM
|Burns makes a good point similar to the one I just posted in the original guns discussion. He says that there is a tendency towards sensationalism. I called that a need to create conflict.
That's how a simple story on a zoning law change (a very boring subject) becomes a headline that reads, "Smith Calls Zoning Board Idiots."
Burns' argument about oversimplifying is a bit overdone, though. A good reporter (a good one, mind you) can simplify a story and still get the facts out.
He is dead on right, though, about sensationalism.
|Big Media vs Small Media||McAndrus|
Feb 5, 2002 7:29 AM
|Just have to express an opinion on this one.
Big Media is slanted liberal. Small Media is slanted conservative.
Big Media is the axis of modern media: CBS, NBC, New York Times, et al. Small media is radio, internet, and some magazines.
That's why if you want to find a liberal slant you can and if you want to find a conservative slant you can.
The good news is that this situation is freedom of the press made manifest.
|Big Media vs Small Media||wsexson|
Feb 5, 2002 12:37 PM
|So News Corp. and the Wall Street Journal don't qualify as "Big Media" !?!|
|Not yet and no||McAndrus|
Feb 6, 2002 5:47 AM
|This point is certainly arguable but I'll put it out there anyway.
Newscorp will be Big Media in a few years but it is not there yet. Mind, you I said it will be but at the moment it does not have the influence of even CNN much less CBS, ABC, NYT, etc.
The venerable WSJ? No, I don't think so on that one. I have been a subscriber for years and try to read it every day.
Are you a WSJ reader? Just curious. I divide them into three sections: editorial, opinion, and financial.
Their financial focus is pretty cut-and-dried reporting. Their opinion focus is certainly conservative. Their editorial style (the stories they cover and the tone of coverage) is pretty doctrinaire news media stuff.
Actually, I wish the WSJ was more influential than it is but, alas. The only outside references I see to the WSJ from sources like NYT are "the conservative Wall Street Journal."
As I said, my point is certainly arguable.
|re: Perhaps I was mistaken...||DINOSAUR|
Feb 5, 2002 10:05 AM
|We are all baised one way or the other. The problem with network and local news telecasts is that they are trying to reach the vast audience. People want to be entertained and most aren't willing to sit down and listen to the boring details, especially around dinner time.
Everything is fast paced one line shots, with little or no in depth reporting. If you really want to find out about an issue you have to be willing to listen and read about different perspectives and decide for yourself. I like to watch Newstime with Jim Lehrer on PBS, good in depth reporting without all the bell and whistles..
Then again~ sometimes I feel like I don't really want to know what is going on in the world, and move to Idaho and purchase 40 acres and build a house on a hill and enclose about two acres with an electric fence guarded by a pack of wild Rottweilers. On second thought skip Idaho and make that Hawaii, Idaho is too darn cold, I'll take the rain instead....