Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Media Issues
 The media problem
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2005 :  12:51:17  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3626796/

quote:
Facing mounting U.S. casualties, an increasingly skeptical public, and a growing chorus of criticism (even within his own party), a confident and resolute President Bush last night directly tied the situation in Iraq to 9/11 and the war on terrorism. To illustrate this renewed focus, he made five direct references to 9/11 and two references to Osama bin Laden. But in both his inaugural and State of the Union addresses this year, he never mentioned Bin Laden. And although he did mention 9/11 in that State of the Union, he didn't do so until more than half way through the speech.


(emphasis added)

To me, this is the primary problem with the US media. They don't present how Bush "tied" the Iraq situation to 9/11, they don't even question the claim that he did! No questions asked, they take what the president said and repeat it along with the spin/talking points they release to the media before presidential speeches.

Just repeating what a person says is only doing half the job of objective reporting. If they get facts wrong, or fail to provide enough details to support claims, these things should be pointed out as well. It is entirely possible to do such in an objective way.

Pisses me off that it isn't done anymore.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2005 :  14:34:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
I am beginning to suspect that there are too many millionaire journalists, and I use that last word with some hesitation. I further suspect that the best way to become a millionaire journalist (choke) and stay that way is to do what you're told and keep your stupid gob shut until told what to say. Or write, whatever...

As seeing and listening to Bush lowers my already unimpressive IQ and gives me flaming migrains, as well as acidic gut rot and bleeding 'roids, I read about his speech on the blogs. Iraq and 9-11-we're-gonna-win-same ol'-same ol'-different-day.

Say, did he talk to his necktie this time? Did he have a suspicious-looking, square 'tailoring fault' under his $3,000 suit? Inquiring minds want the important details, yeah.



"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

trishran
Skeptic Friend

USA
196 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2005 :  16:24:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send trishran a Private Message
I think a huge part of the problem is that Bush & Co have somehow convinced the press pool that they are running such a cool frat house on Pennsylvania Ave that the pressies are afraid to be left out. So they just publish verbatim the administration's claims, and ask totally softball questions of administration officials.

You'd think national news organizations have enough employees that if the Bushies throw one out of the press pool, another would be ready to take his seat.

And, if Bush is too angry to let you ride with the other reporters in Air Force One, aren't there commerical flights?

I notice that John Stewart is still alive and appearing regularly on TV.....

trish
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26009 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2005 :  18:06:24   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
Jon Stewart did a great bit on exactly this problem back during the late summer (2004). The Republicans were going on and on about how September 11th "changed the equation," and they'd offer that choice soundbite up at every criticism. So, Stewart showed the world the new, changed equation:
9/11/2001 + [Whatever We Say] = Shut the fuck up.
It's that simple, really. Especially since any criticism leveled at anything even remotely to do with the U.S. response to 9/11 means you're an unpatriotic terrorist sympathizer.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

trishran
Skeptic Friend

USA
196 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2005 :  20:31:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send trishran a Private Message
Totally, Dave. To say that "liberals wanted to offer therapy and understanding" after 9/11 goes far beyond just misrepresenting the other side for political advantage. It's implying that liberals = traitors. After all the support and cart blanch they gave Bush? This wasn't even targeted at true "opponents" so much as at their rivals.

And, I might add, rivals who have not called them on their failures: bin Laden, peace in Afghanistan, peace in Iraq. Oh, and wasn't one of the fallback reasons for removing Saddam [when it was becoming more obvious that there were no WMDs] from his own country the fact that he tortured Iraqis?

The one thing that keeps me going is memories of how people kept sticking up for Nixon for the longest time. Yet, when the most stubborn citizens realized he was, for sure, up to no good, they were madder than the people who distrusted Nixon all along. Nixon was re-elected and didn't last. I'm hoping this is a precedent.


trish
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 10/03/2005 :  23:22:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message
Ok. Here is another one.

The mation's air traffic control system has holes in security that a knowledgable person could use to cause harm. Their system is hackable.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9503338/

It seems to me that this should be more important news. It has barely recieved attention. A passing mention one day on a couple of news shows....

While OJ's 10th anaversary of hacking his wife to death gets more coverage and print.

The "honeymoon murder mystery" of the guy dissapearing/dieing on the cruise ship is getting more media attention.

It makes me want to scream.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 10/04/2005 :  00:44:23   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dude

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3626796/

quote:
Facing mounting U.S. casualties, an increasingly skeptical public, and a growing chorus of criticism (even within his own party), a confident and resolute President Bush last night directly tied the situation in Iraq to 9/11 and the war on terrorism. To illustrate this renewed focus, he made five direct references to 9/11 and two references to Osama bin Laden. But in both his inaugural and State of the Union addresses this year, he never mentioned Bin Laden. And although he did mention 9/11 in that State of the Union, he didn't do so until more than half way through the speech.


(emphasis added)

To me, this is the primary problem with the US media. They don't present how Bush "tied" the Iraq situation to 9/11, they don't even question the claim that he did! No questions asked, they take what the president said and repeat it along with the spin/talking points they release to the media before presidential speeches.

Just repeating what a person says is only doing half the job of objective reporting. If they get facts wrong, or fail to provide enough details to support claims, these things should be pointed out as well. It is entirely possible to do such in an objective way.

Pisses me off that it isn't done anymore.



Indeed. More and more, I've come to regard today's mainstream, big-name journalists[sic] as stand-up comics without the talent, and the corporations they serve merely another set of businesses with no goals or principles beyond bolstering their bottom lines. At the moment, those bottom lines are best served by sucking up to the Republicans and their dog, even though that dog has only three legs, no nose, and can't hunt. But let ratings and sales fall enough and they'll turn their coats like the cravens they are; faster than Benedict.

But it's worse than that. Today, we have the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, and O'Rilley, and others of the ilk posing as journalists. These are amusing to a certain faction of the public and preach unimpeachable gosple to another faction, and thus, the mainstream trys to initate them, albeit a lot more subtly.

Judy Whasserface, Of the NY Times, freshly released from jail, is a prime example. Virtually everything she writes she spins and gets wrong, yet she's regarded as something of an heroine and is rumored to have signed a book deal worth 2 mil and change. Big cheerleader for the Iraq war, our Judy. As her testimony is probably worth little more than her integrety, had it been up to me, she'd still be in the can.

But "This too shall pass," although what might replace it could be worse.

I well remember listening to Walter Winchell on the radio. The man talked like a machine gun yet every word was clear and concise, and in those days, they employed fact-checkers who did nothing but make sure that what Winchell passed along was accurate.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.39 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000