The End of Journalism ?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Plutonius, Aug 21, 2016.

  1. Plutonius macrumors 603

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #1
    An interesting article on the collapse of journalism ? Is the author correct or is he missing something ?
     
  2. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    Cry me a river. The media has been partisan forever.
     
  3. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #3
    There is a legitimate concern. See Matt Taibbi's earlier article in Rolling Stone on pretty much the same subject.

    The ideal of truly objective journalism is largely an American invention and a fairly recent one at that. Prior to the 1920s nobody really gave much thought to the matter.

    It's hard for me to ignore the role that Fox News and conservative talk radio have played in this. Fox especially has turned their particular brand of journalism into a tremendous cash cow at the same time as traditional media outlets - everyone from the CNS Evening News to the New York Times are struggling with dwindling sources of revenue. And so we end up with Les Moonves (Chairman of CBS) describing Donald Trump: Bad for America, but great for business.

    But even Fox has found Trump problematic:

     
  4. maxsix Suspended

    maxsix

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2015
    Location:
    Western Hemisphere
    #4
    Journalism was killed by the Clinton News Network (CNN) during Bubba's reign. It's all Clinton all of the time now.
     
  5. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    This is such ********.
     
  6. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #6
    According to Trump - all they do is report on him and NOT Clinton. I guess it's more appropriate to call it TNN.
     
  7. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    The other problem is that foreign media in sensible countries doesn't want you to elect Hitler either. So they are also bias.

    And the Russians and other people who don't like the US are supporting Trump to harm America.
     
  8. Zenithal macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
  9. Mac'nCheese macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #9
    So trump says something stupid almost every day. The media reports on it. And then trump supporters cry that the media is biased for simply reporting on it. Usually while welcoming trump staff on the air to explain what happened. Ok.
     
  10. Plutonius thread starter macrumors 603

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #10
    I might agree but Hillary gets a free pass.
     
  11. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #11
    Agreed, Eraserhead, but considering the 1996 Telecom Act supposedly paved the way for mergers and takeovers (there may be dozens of news network names, but in reality only 6 companies exist and each owns several of those network names...) Just because a president signs something doesn't mean all the companies, who otherwise tell us how awesome competition is, don't have to feel obligated or actually buy out the competition or engage in what is colloquially called "hostile takeovers".

    And CNN, if people paid attention, has been anti-Clinton as well. Feel free to find and post articles as proof - 4/16 and 6/16 alone have a few pretty neat articles that readily disprove the claim CNN is "Clinton(-skewed) news Network"...
     
  12. Mac'nCheese macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #12
    No she doesn't. Really everyone says oh but if a democrat did it.... Yeah, like no one reported on clinton the first's bj or the second's email.
     
  13. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #13
    A free pass? Don't think so. How are stories like these "a free pass"?


     
  14. Limey77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #14
    First off, let's start by acknowledging that this opinion is a partisan hack job in support of Trump. Now that doesn't mean it doesn't have some points, but let's not start believing that this is objective. If anything this article is a prime example of everything it complains about.

    Disclaimer: I'm a former journalist that has worked for a large number of publications and news sites including Reuters, BBC, ITV, CNN and many smaller publications.

    Every single one of those (except maybe the Daily Mail, I could only stand 24hrs) strived to be 100% objective in their reporting. Tried to tell the truth and show the facts as facts.

    Now in my opinion (and I know many will disagree) the idea of a left wing media in America is a joke. Generally it's very right wing if anything. I know the usual posters will laugh. But the fact that creationists, anti-vaxers etc actually get airtime is incredible.

    Now during this election honest (genuinely honest and hard working journalists) have been faced with something neither they nor their bosses have ever seen before. They've been charged with writing objectively on the weirdest election ever. A rep candidate that actively antagonises not only the media but huge sections of society.

    The initial coverage was overly fair to Trump but there comes a point as a journalist when you can no longer just reword official press releases, you actually have to report on what is happening. Sadly for Trump these truthful stories seem "bias" but they're not. When Trump says he's leading in the polls when he's not, what should a journalist do?? Just "report" Trump's comment (despite it being a lie) or point out what he said and clarify that it's wrong? Obviously if they want to be non-partisan they should do the latter, but by doing so they get mid-labelled as being pro-Hillary.

    It's a no win game for them and eventually they're left with simply telling the truth. Sadly Trump and his Trumpettes don't like that because it paints him and then in a very bad light.
     
  15. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #15


    The worst example of this has been Sean Hannity on Fox News.

    For the past year Hannity has turned his nightly opinion show on Fox News into an hour-long infomercial for Donald trump and his candidacy. During the Republican primary campagin, Trump was interviewed on Hannity's show (in person) something like 13 times. More than 50% more than Ted Cruz. Most of the other Republican candidates didn't get a single appearance. And the Trump "interviews" with Hannity were almost embarrassing to watch, so fawning and softball were the questions,

    Hannity is the individual creating revolting rumors about Hillary Clinton's health. He claimed that an aide was carrying a hypodermic syringe - when in actual fact it was a Secret Service agent carrying a flashlight. Something the Secret Service (not usually the most talkative of agencies) confirmed in a phone call. But "journalist" Sean Hannity didn't bother to make that phone call.

    Hannity has announced that he will be "advising" Trump for the duration of the campaign. On the one hand, I can take comfort in the fact that an imbecile of Hannity's proportions as an "advisor" is more likely to be a hindrance than an actual asset.

    But I do think it's finally beginning to dawn on Fox News - and the Republican Party - that Hannity and Trump have taken things too far.

    Last note: As a final irony, Hannity has the chutzpah to say that his is the only trustworthy position, because he is open about his support for Trump, whereas every other journalist hides their bias.
     
  16. Limey77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #16
    I completely agree about Hannity. But to give him credit where it's due, he does admit that he is in no way a journalist.
     
  17. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #17
    Slanted journalism is never sensible.
     
  18. Limey77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #18
    Ridiculous statement.

    All journalism no matter how good is always, always slanted in one way or another. Now the level of slanting is a whole different question.

    Journalists can't possibly report on things without imparting some of their own ideals. It's impossible. However a good journalist attempts to mitigate this by proposing alternative ideas.

    But there is no way that a journalist or a paper facing reporting on Pol Pot or Stalin or hitler could remain objective. Sometimes something is so abhorrent that you have to stand up against it.
     
  19. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    I have yet to hear you slam Fox News.
     
  20. Mousse macrumors 68000

    Mousse

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Location:
    Flea Bottom, King's Landing
    #20

Share This Page