slug.com slug.com

4 3

Journalisms paradox: if you make a truly unbiased newspaper, you won't get many subscriptions. But if you make a biased newspaper, you get many subscriptions.

I've been thinking about this recently in terms of the up-and-coming conservative news outlets like The Epoch times or one America news network. Instead of presenting news in an unbiased fashion, for example by voluntarily adopting a fairness doctrine and presenting both side of the issues, they fight the liberal bias in mainstream media by promoting a conservative bias in their media.

One could argue this is fighting fire with fire but I would argue this is learning the wrong lesson from mainstream media. If the argument is that they are liberally bent and thus not presenting the whole story, then the arguement that these news outlets are conservatively bent and thus not presenting the whole story is also valid.

This is why I personally rely on news outlets that do not have opinions, such as the associated press, upi, or Reuters, and just present the facts. Those of us that rely on CNN or fox, The Epoch times or the Gateway pundit, on the other hand, are basically subscribing to other people's opinions. Opinions that we should form for ourselves based on the presented facts.

IMO the responsibility for change lay not on the media but in the public. When the public starts subscribing to more neutral newspapers, when the public starts rejecting CNN and fox, starts rejecting The daily beast and the Gateway pundit, only then will journalism come back to center, be more unbiased, and not have to worry about sacrificing their integrity for subscriptions.

TheMiddleWay 8 June 26
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

4 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Reuters isn't that bad, but can't say I care for the AP. Reason is one of my favorites, and they have no qualms in downing both left and right wing views if the situation warrants such.

0

I know you are smart enough to realize that there an editorial decision as to what facts are reported and the context they exist within, even amongst those 'fact only' sources you name.

@TheMiddleWay Which makes it harder to get to the truth - and I doubt any but the exact persons the focus of what ever reporting is being done know it.

I prefer, knowingly, to see and hear the slanted commentary from BOTH sides...I don't trust any of it, but that doesn't mean that a reasonable person can't discern what it might be. Yes, it takes longer and requires more effort, but "telephone" corrupts even honest actors.

0

I agree that it would be nice to have apolitical news. It's hilarious listening to foreign news anchors covering American politics.

That being said, a Fox fan could say: It's fair game for Fox to cover only Republican topics, because mainstream media floods the airwaves with Democrat topics. It's restoring balance to the force.

When I write a science article, if I put a neutral scientific title on it, nobody reads it. A provocative title is necessary.

0

No, I cannot buy your premise. An unbiased newsie would contain: factual news, comics, ads, sports, and an editorial section wherein the paper can share its viewpoint. I can remember how this was the model back in the 60-70's. Each town had 2-3 newsies and one was liberal, one was conservative, etc. And, most importantly, you could tell that only if you looked into the editorial section. No bias anywhere else. That was called journalism, professional journalism. And, all the newsies sold well.
This changed when the Sales&Marketing Aholes invaded the newsies (like CRT crappola and intersectionality invaded universities) and tore down the wall between the news reporting depts and editorial -- thinking that if they sensationalized everything sales would rise. They did, like a rotting corpse attracts even more flies and the day wears on.
Most businesses only last a few decades, if that much. Outfits that have followed the path above are on the down side of that path, like flushing a toilet -- which you do for obvious reasons. Those outfits, like CNN, that have pushed nothing but lies and hate for years will be the first to finish and be replaced.

@bobbo666

Those were the good old days, where there was no politics in the sports section. It was a safe space from politics. Now the sports section is full of political land mines. There should be trigger warnings. I want to enjoy sports in peace.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:239406
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.