Conspiracy against the media?

When I look around the boards in general, I see a lot of people who act as if the media is to blame for a part of the hatred, fear and ignorance in the whole "war on terrorism" area.
Sentences like "don't trust everything the media throws at you" have been repeated numerous times, yet I don't get it.
What is so bad about our media?
They are fairly objective most of the time and I can't remember the last time that the media was plain lying to us.

When the media talks about the Israel/Palestinians conflict, both sides are quoted, even though the palestinians are known for their false casualty-info after Israels "revenge-attacks".

Let's sort this out once and for all, what exactly is the role of the media in the war on terrorism? Are they objective enough?
Can we base our opinion on what they tell us?

Proof positive of the worthlessness of ALL U.S. media comes from pre-invasion Iraq coverage. Even newspapers considered staunchly liberal did not dispute the claims made by our government and other sources concerning the Iraq WMD/Al Qaeda issue despite warnings from multiple sources. The New York Times even admitted its failure and also threw the blame around to the rest of the media.

Okay, so mistakes were made...
Were these mistakes that had to do with subjective journalism? or with plain false info?
And were these mistakes result of sensationalistic journalism only? Or was it something from "higher hand".

Just because of such mistakes, you can't say that the media is worthless.
Mistakes point at a need for improval, which is usually a healthy and important proces...

I think at the deep and dark core of the news affliates we have here in the states, such as NBC, CNN, ABC, etc... there truly is a desire to inform the public - where things go awry is when journalists push the boundaries of acceptable and unacceptable forms of interrogation and biased reporting. Watch Dan Rather or Peter Jennings on the 6 o'clock news - they don't tell it like it is, they have faint tones of irony and opinionated viewpoints that are attempts at making Americans tune in for the next 24 hours....another interesting development in news....it's all day now...

"Oh wait, now it's 3 gunmen...now we're hearing it may be 5...they're heading towards Atlanta...wait no...this just in, they've been thru Atlanta and are now heading to..." - What's the goal here? They want you to know what's going on, but they also don't want you to change that channel - we all know what it's like to be glued to a "Breaking News" event, and in some way the media has had such a hystery of hyping things up to absurd levels that we suddenly crave the next "Breaking News" event...What ever happened to people waiting for a solid lead and news-worthy information before submitting their opinions to the rest of the world? Oh, that's right...they do exist, but you just have to have eyes like a hawk to prevent being mislead by some guy who thinks he can sway your opinions...

There's thousands of newspapers and TV channels that have some politcal sway and often they will let it be known in some fashion...but for the most part, I would go online, look for the same story in several different reputable news websites and then listen to the story later that evening on the news - you'll hear and see the difference...not to mention the fact that US press' coverage on world events is bleak and always a failed attempt....go overseas, or if you have a satilete, flip the channel to BBC, or SkyOne...now that's more like WORLD news

BBC has recently been attacked and is undergoing a restructing of sorts - requiring all of their reporters to have a formal degree in journalism so they can increase the quality of their broadcasts - now that's a step in the right direction for news

IMO

"Mainstream Media" is pulling themselves in tighter with Political groups. This is not New news, but they tend to report it from the side of...Dems...Repubs...etc..
It is also a known fact that People are turning to the Net and alternative News sites for their news, putting a decline in TV news viewing. You can not turn on the news and see an in depth analysis of the Nick Berg Beheading, you would not have heard of the Aussie Bloke Hoax, you do not hear of the "Good Things" happening in Iraq, they are even banned from covering the arrival of caskets.

Whether news is true or a hoax, most of it does not make it on Prime Time News. They seem to report what "They" think you want to see. I have seen more coverage of Britney Spears canceling her tour because of knee surgery than I have on the possibility of Israel attacking Iran. Also because of internet communities such as ATS, who question everything in search of truth, we have more access to "Around the World" events. Even though we do not have people inbeded in Iraq, we do have members who are serving their country over there. I used to flip between The Big Three (CNN, MSNBC, FOX) whenever I was home, but it has come to the point, especially with their commentators, that it is the way they say it is, or it is not true.

In Dave Chapelles stand up special "Killing them softly", he was talking about Police brutaltity and the fact white people did not tend to believe it was true until it was printed in "Newsweek". I think the Majority of people believe what the News Networks tell them, whether it is "Their" opinion or not. Thus if so and so reported it, it must be true.

I wish they would concentrate on the "Facts" rather than their opinions as the basis of "Facts".

But doesn't this really depend on what station you're listening to?
What I see, is that in their attempts to compete with other channels, news networks often try to offer that bit more than the regular facts.
Opinion from different sides and people, polls, the news turns into a half talkshow sometimes.

But besides this, I think a channel like CNN does really well in their attempt to present news in an objective and neutral way.
It's not perfect, but when you look at these boards you sometimes get the feeling some people are extremely paranoid towards big news networks.
As if it's all crowd control and opinion manipulation.
I don't think it's that bad...

Originally posted by Jakko but when you look at these boards you sometimes get the feeling some people are extremely paranoid towards big news networks.
As if it's all crowd control and opinion manipulation.
I don't think it's that bad...

Well - I don't think extreme paranoia is quite the word to describe how most people feel...but rather "skeptical" - some people only read their news from one source and swear by it - others, kind of like me, read it from all different sources and I draw my own conclusions...

And has anyone noticed how in between news breaks we are bombarded with Rx drug commercials?!! lol - it's hard (maybe that's not the best word...) to go from a viagra commerical to Dan Rather sitting stoicaly upon his thrown - lol - I'm just half serious and half joking here, but I wonder if there is an agenda - I'm willing to bet that those commericals constitute more than half of what's shown...

Yeah I guess there's nothing wrong with being skeptical.
But what surprises me, is that when you choose sides for Israel regarding the whole Israel/Palestina topic, pro-palestinia people tend to have their verdict about "our media" ready quite fast.

As if our media makes all terrorists look pure evil and Israelis like saints.
Of course we all know it's not that black and white, but what are news channels supposed to do?
Explain why someone blew himself up, according to Allah and the Koran?
I don't think terrorists need any subjective news channel to look bad, their actions allready do that for them...

the problem with the media is quite simple, they are no longer unbiased, as they once use to be. nowadays so much of the media is "liberal" that it is overwhelming and dangerous becuase that sways the opinion of the people reading the newspaper or watching the news. when the media begins pushing their (most likely the editors and owners of media outlets) personal views through their stories then something is wrong. i'm going to be quite honest. i didn't see the bias until i started watching relatively "conservative" news outlets, that gave me a base to compare the media i see and it made me realize just how much the media spins or distorts their stories. try, if you can, watching the Fox News Channel, specifically the Oreilly Factor and Hannity & Colms for a little bit. that station and shows are much more closer to conservative then liberal, but i'd say have a good mix of both sides.

Unfortunately most of the media reports have fallacies in their reasoning. It is important to understand and ask questions when you read or listen to a news report. Writers often use words or phrases that are ambiguous and lead you in a certain direction.

Fallacies appeal to emotion, fear, popularity, belief etc. Even though an article states fact, it may not state "all" fact, or both sides to a story. Most articles you read today do not state both sides. They cover the story from a certain angle, therefore you do not have enough facts to form an unbiased opinion.

Here is an example.

Economist John Kenneth Galbraith argues that a tight money policy s the best cure for a recession. (Although Galbraith is an expert, not all economists agree on this point, but it is not presented this way.)

Here is an example of serveral fallacies.
Blair finally admits it: 'We may never find WMD'

The statement "Blair finally admits" (Ad hominem type of fallacy)

Woman killed in front of empty police station (another fallacy 'appeal to emotion')

When you read, listen or watch the media, it is important to keep in mind what the issues truly are. Skepticism is good; you should challenge what someone tells you. Remember there is more to the story than what you see or hear.