CNN Just Lost All of Its Credibility

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You really believe that? All news media are biased in some fashion. There's none that is perfectly objective, and I don't think it is possible.

You can put a spin by the arrangement of information, what goes into the headline, etc.

Yes, I do believe it because I practice what I preach at work. It's when I'm not at work that I can afford to put into words my feelings on things — this forum is an example of that. It's almost like forbidden fruit: "Finally, I can just be a person and *write* what I think, even if it turns out to be mistaken later!" I can also post articles and comment on them — such as my interest in scientific, archaeological, astronomy and history — while at work I just post and/or edit them w/o commentary. I can't insert op/ed stuff at work, and never would. My co-workers are the same way. News pages are for news, and op/ed pages are for opinions, letters and whatnot.

Of course I can only speak for myself and my co-workers. And perhaps the fact that our newspaper is a tight-knit, almost "family-like" atmosphere to it (despite being part of an international newspaper/Internet firm) plays a role in the whole thing. Perhaps it was the way I was raised, as well, that plays a role in how I approach my work.

But, yes, no human is perfect. The existence of the tabloids is proof enough that not even some self-described journalists are what they claim to be.

Gatekeeper

[Gatekeeper]

Markusf:

**shrug** I just perused through the Science/Medical section and quickly scanned the Commentary part ... the online edition of the Independent looks like a nicely-designed site. At least in the Sci/Med section, it looks like they picked up wire copy and added their own personalized touch to the stories in question (i.e. "localization," or expanding on points not looked at in-depth in the wire articles).

Gatekeeper

[TCO]

trib sucks

[markusf]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Markusf:

**shrug** I just perused through the Science/Medical section and quickly scanned the Commentary part ... the online edition of the Independent looks like a nicely-designed site. At least in the Sci/Med section, it looks like they picked up wire copy and added their own personalized touch to the stories in question (i.e. "localization," or expanding on points not looked at in-depth in the wire articles).

Gatekeeper

I find it one of the best sites around. They never tell just one side of the story and they always have a lot of information in the articles you never see anywhere else. The articles with opinions in them are really good to.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You really believe that? All news media are biased in some fashion. There's none that is perfectly objective, and I don't think it is possible.

That's true in an absolute sense, but most reporters and editors will make a strong effort to be objective. What they think is objective, however, is subjective.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by GP
Gatekeeper, et al.

I would think journalists would expect very little from TV news. A lot of times they just use the wire services and the papers to decide what to cover anyway. It's all about what the face looks like on the set.

It's a little bit of both. If CNN is covering a story, that in itself will influence an editor's decision about the top story of the day.

The wires will also send out lists of what other newspapers are putting on their front pages.

There's also the influence of pack journalists. I've covered events where a big name columnist will announce what he thinks is happening, and sure enough, a lot of reporters will take shape their stories to reflect that viewpoint.

Originally posted by GP
If you want some good journalism read The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. 2 are liberal, 1 is conservative, but all are both more honest and more diligent than puffy stuff like NPR or CNN or Fox.

The news articles in the WSj are great, the editorials suck big time. Same thing with the Economist.

[TCO]

So read the news...liberal boy!!!

[Tingkai]

Hey, you can call me a left winger, socialist, even a commie, but don't be calling me no goddam liberal.

[Tolls]

GP:
"Was waiting for someone to not(e?) this..."

Ted lost any say over CNN with the merger with Time Warner. He has been taken back on in some fashion at AOL-Time Warner again recently, but I don't think it involves anything important.

It mentions all this in the Guardian interview...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4435731,00.html

(I know this was put up earlier...)

And the full quote from the article is:
-- "But right now, aren't the Israelis and the Palestinians both terrorising each other?" he says, as Pritchard starts scribbling furiously on his notepad. "It looks to me like they're both doing it. When the Brits retaliated for the Germans, for the, awwww, Krauts... for the Nazis bombing London by bombing Berlin, weren't you both terrorising each other? The rich and the powerful, they don't need to resort to terrorism... The Palestinians are fighting with human suicide bombers; that's all they have. The Israelis... they've got one of the most powerful military machines in the world. The Palestinians have nothing. So who are the terrorists? I would make a case that both sides are involved in terrorism." --

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
CNN has credibility?

I don't trust any American media company. They're all part of the evil conservative conspiracy Besides, the BBC is so much better.

With all the smilies being used here to obviate the need for writing I am surprised that you forgot to add the sarcasm smiley after your last sentence.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by markusf


Of course Israel is conducting terrorism. The only difference is that isreal has the bigger stick and its a master of propaganda. Every time the the pals commit a act its all over the news, everytime israel does something they never show pictures.. I am betting we don't even hear 99% of whats going on.

Well, I'm certainly willing to be you don't know 99% of what's going on.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Arrian, not just Europe--Canada, Mexico, much of Central and South America, and a good deal of Asia are left of the U.S. The only places more right seem to be Islamic countries and Third-world African despots.

Shouldn't that tell you something, Fez? And since I didn't call you a Nazi (you like to make up arguments, don't you?), I hope to not see any accusations of being a Stalinist.

I'd also have that narcolepsy checked out if I were you. Replacing intelligent discourse with the smiley wears thin quickly.

To be fair to the foreign kid, the discourse really wasn't all that intelligent.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by markusf


Bush is in bed with the oil companies so even though the internal combustion engine has been obsolute for 50 years it won't be replaced any time soon. The ballard fuel cells etc could easilly be used to replace the internal combustion engine The problem is the economy relies so heavilly on oil it would result in massive layoffs. These workers then have no useful skills and need to be trained etc etc etc. Think of driving your new car and all it uses is water... You'd never buy gas, oil, etc again

Your boundless paranoia has overwhelmed your limited intelligence. So all those companies which make up perhaps 90% of our economy and who would stand to gain hugely with a switch to a cleaner, more reliable and cheaper alternative to the gasoline powered automobile are powerless before the oil lobby of a country which imports most of it's oil from unfriendly regimes? Is this your scenario? Yea, that's the ticket! Bush is an oil man, and there are no other powers in the country capable of standing up to "Big Oil". I mean, how much money do those guys make a year anyway? It has to be in the billions!

[Sikander]

Originally posted by markusf
uhm GP, that is net importer Others are all net exporters.

As long as we're the biggest. USA! USA!

[Zevico]

Israel isn't a master of propoganda. If so, Europeans these days would be pro Israel as opposed to Pro Palestinian. One factor in this is the language used-ie.they call terrorists militants both on the news and etc, and this really hurts Israeli PR i think. And Israel doesn't commit acts of terrorism AFAIK.