Jimi

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." First Amendment, US Constitution.

The Constitution of this great nation was given to us by the people who founded the US. Media used to be about getting to the source of any given situtation, and getting fact to the people. It has, in recent times, become a way for certain political parties to campaign through the media, by twisting fact and spreading completely unfactual information. My question is, why do people stand up for this, when everyone knows it happens? I do no want to turn on the news and wonder if the information I'm getting is or is not propaganda. That's what we're getting to. In the Cold War, one of America's biggest problems with Russia was the spread of propaganda. THAT is where we are headed!

I want something with a more neutral, factually based background. I want news media to get back to what it was intended for. I want fact.

schutzenkonig

are you talking about how politicians can lie and there's no censorship that the media can do, nor can they deny one canidate for an office, but not the other? It seems like that's what it is and I agree completely.

Jimi

I'm talking about how the media will half-quote people, or spend more time talking about a particular candidate's good, without stating the bad, when they focus on the other candidate's bad, and don't say the good. It's biased media these days. More so in some cases than the other.... but nonetheless, it's still biased.

schutzenkonig

Ahh...yeah, the meaning is completely changed in a quote if you remove just one word. As for the stating one canidates good and the others bad (only), there are plenty of stations that just state Kerry's good, and Bush's bad, as there are plenty that state it the other way around. It is hard to get the accurate story now.
All that just comes because a lot of them are predominantly democrat or predominantly republican. Like the Washington Post (predominantly democrat, although not as bad as some, still biased that way) wouldn't print an article about the Optimist-Acorns Junior Rifle Club when they made history by being the first Junior team to win even one of the smallbore team matches (there are two) at camp perry in 2003, and the first civilian team to win both. But I guess I'm biased in that respect cause I feel slighted...oh well.

Lorill

I see the problem stemming from where people get their news nowadays. Newspapers are out, talk radio and TV is in. The line is so much more easily blurred in these media between what is news and what is entertainment. Sean Hannity does not have a news show. Al Franken does not have a news show. More people are getting their news from shows like The Daily Show which is on Comedy F'ing Central!!

The fact is that those who want the actual "news" are the minority. People now just want to be entertained and they want to get their news from people that they already agree with.

sillyrabbit

very well said Lorill.....youre 100% correct.

todays people dont want the facts when they turn on the tv, facts are boring. think about it, how many people even buy a television for anything other than entertainment?...none. so the fact is, the media has to entertain people by any means possible. why do you think theres very little "good" news, because the average person doesnt wanna hear about a cat being rescued from a tree, they want to hear about the latest bank robbery, or car hijacking, or natural disaster .

if youre serious about wanting facts about a presidential candidate, youre probably not lookin on the news anyway, right? youd already be smart enough to know that its all bullshit. the news isn't meant to report facts, thats why theyre live on the scene, so they can get comments from random people to make situations out to be somethin theyre not, and then days later come out with a short little comment about the actual truth.....the media today, as good as some of their intentions may be, is just another form of entertainment for our fast paced lives

kgilly

Nice points...I'd liek to stress though that it IS comedy central. It's a great show, but you have to take it as a comedy show and not your source of news. I agree though, Sean Hannity does not have a show at all, and its sad people watch the show looking for valid news. As Jimi was saying, media is getting otu of hand here in the US, why dont journalists start doing research and get tthe facts so that they can prove or disprove a story instead of reporting the way that there owners or corporate wants them to.

AmorMiHombre

I must say, every now and again when i wake up a little too early for my nightly CSi's, i catch the ABC News with Dan Rather and they, during the debates at least, had a fact checker who would go over some of the key points the candidates put forth and debunked them or validated them.

I just wanted to put my .02 before i pass out and to add that i enjoyed the fact checker aspect of their show. The US News should be more like the BBC...informative, interesting and with sexy accents!

nyast

Dan Rather is with CBS News...but I think the most important question is "do you really wake up just before CSI starts in the evening?" I enjoyed my time in college, but that is really maximizing the experience! :rock: