Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Facts verses Opinion and Journalism.Follow

#1 Nov 16 2010 at 7:54 PM Rating: Good
***
3,053 posts
Ted Koppel talks about how T.V. news shows have gone from just giving factual stories about what it was thought important by the news show Editors for the public to know as a public service to the one sided opinions touted as news today.

When T.V. was new, the networks were thought of a public trust that would lose money for each of the networks, but fill requirements set by the FCC in 1927 for Radio Stations.

Then the Bean Counters realize with 60 Minutes, that they could News shows could make money.

One of the first things they did was cut the number of foreign bureaus each network kept. Most foreign news is supplied by floaters who speak English and can work with a producer and camera man sent from London. Even all but a few newspapers now have foreign bureaus and news facts are ignored over opinions of those on the far ends of the political spectrum,. This can only lead the public to take whatever side they are drawn to as factual over the other news shows that cater to those they disagree with. Center ground is rarely found without agreement over the facts of the stories in the news. Instead every story is colored by our politics and no one side can afford come to the center and agree with the other side.

Years ago it was easy to talk to people who you may disagree with and not end up frustrated and angry at them. Now i find getting someone to actually think about the facts and not the opinions they hear given by whoever they listen to, the hardest part of trying to have an educated conversation about world and national events.

Edited, Nov 16th 2010 9:01pm by ElneClare
____________________________
In the place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the Morn! Treacherous as the Seas! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth! All shall love me and despair! -ElneClare

This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
#2 Nov 16 2010 at 9:04 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
It may be that the two are necessarily intertwined, but I don't believe the addition to opinion to news is as damaging as intellectual dishonesty in reporting it. Choosing not to report certain relevant information, not performing due diligence, winking and nodding at certain rumors or repeating speculations to give them credibility ("Isn't it interesting that..."), and deliberately misquoting or misstating information all seem far more damaging than just "I believe gay marriage is a basic-human-right/abomination-of-marriage."

Perhaps it is the leniency to interject more opinions that leads to a lack of honesty in reporting factual information, but I don't think the opinion aspect alone is the source of harm. Heck, sound bites have probably done more to destroy honesty in the news than anything else.

I also think it's important to understand the psychology of the audience, and how it plays a roll in being intellectually honest. Repeating a rumor several times and running an article or spot that soundly disproves it once may not be technically dishonest, but it will have the effect of increasing the number of the people who believe the rumor. Repetition over rational logic plays a strong part in the information we believe to be true.

Edited, Nov 16th 2010 9:15pm by Allegory
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 379 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (379)