So much of what is billed as "news" isn't really factual news at all. Is it possible to legislate the media in such a way as to require SOME standard of truth in reporting? I guess we'd still have to allow opinions, but why can't we require a separation of fact and opinion?
2
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
8 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.So mail in your complaints of fake news and biased censorship because EQUAL TIME was repealed by Reagun 1984
GreenAtheist
Level 8
Dec 30, 2018
0
FCC licenses since 1933 require "public inspection files" of viewer/listener complaints that can contribute to evidence to deny renewal lcenses
GreenAtheist
Level 8
Dec 30, 2018
0
Yup, just what we need, federal regulations controlling what we get to read, hear, see.......
AnneWimsey
Level 9
Dec 29, 2018
0
Looking more for something similar to truth in advertising (not that that is so effective). Let's stop reporting false things as facts. Let's make it possible to find a fucking fact.
@itsmedammit READ your news, then you can pause, digest, reflect. All news always has some bias because it is produced by humans. When you watch/hear news you are listening for the next words, so you cannot think critically at the same time.
@AnneWimsey I do read it, except for PBS Newshour. But you may have a point. In the documentary, "The Brainwashing of My Dad", it shows how people are agitated while listening to the the hate mongers.
I've just been so tired lately, and frankly fearful of where our country is headed. It is dangerous to incite violence. I fear widespread deadly consequences.
The people reporting the news have changed and it seems most of them have a political agenda be it one way or another way or other ways. You have to take everything now-a-days with a huge grain of salt. I don't watch the major news channels anymore because of the political agendas. I'm not a fan of any of them either.
Aggy
Level 4
Dec 29, 2018
1
Yeah, I avoid news as much as possible, but I'd like to know what is going on in the world. I am nowhere near stupid and I find it exhausting to sort it all out. I think a lot of people just decide to stop thinking and have decided to let someone else do their "thinking" for them.
Aggy:
@itsmedammit I still watch my local channels as they just report the news like in the old days. It's a sad world now a days. Hopefully a change will come........
I'm curious. What is your premise based on? Local TV news? Cable news? Newspapers? Which?
jwd45244
Level 7
Dec 29, 2018
1
I guess I was thinking in terms of anything that claims to be a news source, sot hat would be all of the above and then some. I have no problem with the source offering opinion as well, as long as it is made clear which is opinion and which is stated is fact.
@itsmedammit So, most of Fox News, MSNBC, CNN are pundits and it is obvious. There are news programs on each of those outlets
@jwd45244 Pundit may be generous as I think it implies knowledge or expertise.
There's only one way to turn them off . . . Turn them off. I stopped going to the circus years ago.
beenthere
Level 7
Dec 29, 2018
1
I pretty much avoid any news. Still I would like some information. Where can I find anything reliable?
@itsmedammit Everybody has an angle which makes it difficult.
Probably because most people don't have a high opinion of state run media. As previously mentioned the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution covered this idea already. Unfortunately I can't come up with an alternative to just using your gray matter to filter the facts from the bullshit from multiple conflicting sources in your news intake.
A helpful tool that I implement when I absorb news from any professional source is to remember that; no matter what slant to the news you prefer (they all have a slant), always remember that they are first and foremost a business. They are in business to make money for their shareholders by selling advertising to their sponsors. Any facts, value, and/or entertainment that you get from what they provide is purely secondary to their bottom line. (No matter what they tell you in their tag line.)
As such they have researched what manner of "news" output brings in the most ears & eyeballs. They collect this data, then sell it to their advertisers based on how many ears & eyeballs their data suggests will hear & see their ads. Facts are provided in just the right dose to appear to have some credibility. But the facts can not be allowed to get in the way of a "good story." Because these "good stories" are geared towards inspiring your fears and outrage. Scientific data shows that these emotions control most peoples interest and decision making. That means that you will eagerly consume their media to find out more information about what teased fear or outrage activated your interest.
Of course PBS is mostly state funded media, they are supposed to be objective. But that doesn't mean squat if they can't keep the lights on. So they are smart enough to only implement the methods described above to the minimum that they can get away with.
The only way that I could see an purely objective news source succeeding in this world; would be if it were independently funded by some philanthropist billionaire that was obsessed with objective facts and the truth. If this news source could produce with no need for advertising or profit for that matter, it just might have a chance. Turns out though, that the truth is mostly not entertaining and it rarely confirms anyones biases. It would be the least heard or seen news source out there.
Even then though, you would have to consume this media with skepticism too. After all, who watches the watchmen?
AndrewInVail
Level 6
Dec 29, 2018
1
I am fully aware that everything produced by humans is biased and my best way of coping of late is to just turn it all off. Unfortunately we still need information. Where can a person actually get something factual?
Yes, facts are boring. Still I'd like some access to them. I can turn to the government for info on, say medical stuff, but they have nothing to offer for politics.
@itsmedammit "Where can a person actually get something factual?"
That's what I'm trying to say; no such place exists that I have found. I have been searching for such a source for several years. I would love to have an "easy button" for objective factual news. If you find a place, please let me know.
Just be aware, that even allowing slant into a story removes some factual basis in order to confirm the biases that the editor and viewer/listener desires. Despite most people claiming the opposite, people really do want their biases confirmed at the cost of objective truth. There really isn't a market for anything else. That was the point that I was trying to make about the slant.
Thus if your goal is objective facts, you and you alone have to do the dirty work of filtering out the bullshit from where ever you get it. All that I can tell you, is that introducing force into the equation, under the pretext of legislation; is not going to give you that desired result.
The media is already legislated - it's called the first amendment.
GwenC
Level 7
Dec 29, 2018
1
We had the Fairness Doctrine once. I was thinking of something along those lines, except more meaningful.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.