The writers try not to expose their own biases, but ultimately fail as evidenced the the utter lack of any exploration of the role that the corporate media has played in its own loss of credibility.
The things that the right wing pundit states- that anyone who challenges the approved narrative of the majority of the entertainment and news outlets is dismissed and derided - is true.
Lately, more and more of the information that much of the media have proclaimed as immutable truth have been debunked- Russia collusion, the origins of COVID-19, the Biden laptop as a manufactured piece of propaganda-many items on global warming.
The information they suppress is just as bad- the real environmental cost of clean energy is an important one. Reporting half a story, or gossip masked as news, or failing to independently verify facts can be blamed on the 24 hour news cycle or the need to scoop the competition or to get "eyeballs" and clicks, but real journalists must do more to protect the integrity of their profession. They are not. They are bullied into silence and compliance out of fear of being canceled or fired. Like Eileen.
The press has lost the trust of the people because it has shifted from objective reporting to what its supporters call "advocacy journalism" or, as it is more honestly known- propaganda. They've become lazy and careless, failing to provide context or background on important stories that impact our lives.
While I agree with Eileen's last statements about the crucial role of free and fair press in a democracy, she only seems to view the more conservative side as a threat. The press in the USA is expected to protect the people from the excesses of government- and others in power- not regurgitate press releases and talking points from it.
But it's not the conservatives who are spearheading the movement against free speech. They are not "canceling" people. They are not demanding that those who disagree with them need to be silenced. They are not the ones who consistently apply double standards to how news is reported or if it's reported at all.
The Sovietization of our media- in which everything is viewed through a strictly political lens, and those individuals and institutions which are deemed to be politically "unreliable" and thus must be neutralized or destroyed- is terrifying.
If something is right, it should not matter what political beliefs those involved have. Same thing if something is wrong.
Reporters, and anyone who wants to be intellectually honest, should ask themselves this before drawing conclusions:
Would you feel the same if the subject of the story was from the other side?
If not, you are not being objective.
The things that the right wing pundit states- that anyone who challenges the approved narrative of the majority of the entertainment and news outlets is dismissed and derided - is true.
Lately, more and more of the information that much of the media have proclaimed as immutable truth have been debunked- Russia collusion, the origins of COVID-19, the Biden laptop as a manufactured piece of propaganda-many items on global warming.
The information they suppress is just as bad- the real environmental cost of clean energy is an important one. Reporting half a story, or gossip masked as news, or failing to independently verify facts can be blamed on the 24 hour news cycle or the need to scoop the competition or to get "eyeballs" and clicks, but real journalists must do more to protect the integrity of their profession. They are not. They are bullied into silence and compliance out of fear of being canceled or fired. Like Eileen.
The press has lost the trust of the people because it has shifted from objective reporting to what its supporters call "advocacy journalism" or, as it is more honestly known- propaganda. They've become lazy and careless, failing to provide context or background on important stories that impact our lives.
While I agree with Eileen's last statements about the crucial role of free and fair press in a democracy, she only seems to view the more conservative side as a threat. The press in the USA is expected to protect the people from the excesses of government- and others in power- not regurgitate press releases and talking points from it.
But it's not the conservatives who are spearheading the movement against free speech. They are not "canceling" people. They are not demanding that those who disagree with them need to be silenced. They are not the ones who consistently apply double standards to how news is reported or if it's reported at all.
The Sovietization of our media- in which everything is viewed through a strictly political lens, and those individuals and institutions which are deemed to be politically "unreliable" and thus must be neutralized or destroyed- is terrifying.
If something is right, it should not matter what political beliefs those involved have. Same thing if something is wrong.
Reporters, and anyone who wants to be intellectually honest, should ask themselves this before drawing conclusions:
Would you feel the same if the subject of the story was from the other side?
If not, you are not being objective.
