Media, Media, Media

[abijnk]

I know from time to time we have discussed the state of the media, but I was wanting to pose a few specific questions and have a general discussion about the state of media and news outlets in the U.S. and around the world.

During the election season I watched CNN for most of my news because it was the one that stung the least. Now I can't even turn on a cable news network without my gag reflex being triggered. As a result I read the Huffington Post. I am well aware of their extreme liberal bias, but I find their writing at the very least entertaining, and they cover stuff fairly well (in terms of quantity, not necessarily quality). If I find a subject I am interested in knowing more about I try to go out and find several different articles to gather as much of the truth as I can. In the evenings I watch my local ABC station (ABC7 in L.A.) because they seem to have a fair amount of journalistic integrity and I can usually get a general snapshot of what has gone on during the day.

So this poses my first set of questions: how do you go about gathering you information? Which sites or stations do you follow, do you think they have a bias, and, if so, which direction do they lean?

The thing lately that has really hacked me off has been the lack of accountability required of hosts on news stations. I am referring specifically to the three incidents in which Dana Perino, Mary Matalin, and Rudy Giuliani have each stated that there were no terrorist attacks under the Bush administration (in Matalin's case she asserted that 9/11 was inherited from Clinton) and no one corrected them (on the spot). Now, I don't want to discuss this instance in detail, there is a thread for that, but I am interested in knowing what you think of the media's behavior as of late.

So this comes to my second set of questions: do you think the media has become more irresponsible as of late? If so, do you think this is ok and that the responsibility is on the consumer to verify information for themselves? Do you think the media has become overtly sensationalistic?

[skunk]

I use the BBC (with a pinch of salt since they caved in to government bullying) and the Independent (especially Robert Fisk on the Middle East), and throw in a bit of Vanity Fair, New Yorker and the Economist. I try to keep away from Murdoch's rags as much as possible. One doesn't want to catch anything nasty.


Oh, and congratulations on your change of username :)

[abijnk]

Oh, and congratulations on your change of username :)

Thank you :D

[localoid]

The main stream news media isn't what it used to be. Overall the media, or mediums, are much more numerous today, thanks in no small part to the advent of the Internet which spawned more new mediums than we'd ever dreamed possible.

The liberal application of critical thinking is only means of defense against the tsunami of opinion, misinformation, distortion, and bias presented 24/7 by a ba-zillion different media outlets. But few practice this technique. All of this great "choice" of mediums means that anyone so inclined can live their life on a virtual island, cutoff entirely from the type of news or facts that they don't want to hear. They can easily spend all their time listening, watching, and reading only only the type of news they'd like to hear. Unfortunately, this sort of isolation fosters group-think, which in turn stifles critical thinking.

Of course applying too much critical thinking isn't a good thing. One could easily arrive at the conclusion that all of society and its institutions are simply the preordained protagonists in an Absurdist drama being played out in the mind of a dysfunction god who just did two too many hits of windowpane. One can only hope that this isn't the case, and that this level of Absurdity is only the act of randomness. If this is the case, and if there is hope, our hope lies in Chaos Theory.