What you say is very true. This effect can be somewhat mitigated by gathering news from a variety of sources, both national and international, but it remains a serious problem. Sadly, this phenomenon seems likely to gain strength as time passes rather than losing it, and it will become increasingly difficult to find out what's actually going on in the world. The internet might provide some respite from this as well, but I fear those who would control the minds of the masses will seek ways to control internet content as well. The Age of Media it is, and troubled times are these.

quote:

Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior The media is biased institution run by a select few--this applies especially to American media (ie CNN, NBC, FOX, etc).

...as well as "Middle East" media, such as "AQ-TV" - al queida tv network, "SHN" - saddam hussein network, and "AFT-TV" arafat tv. many of these biased networks feed their country people with untruthful, anti-American propaganda as well as untruthful information about what is really going on in the world.

there you have it. as much as the US is in the "wrong" in respect to this subject, so are the other countries as well.

>JM<

dont pay attention. seriously, besides learning that everyone is going to die of west nile - what would you hope to learn from the news media. not paying attention doesnt make you any less informed or stupid, surely you can get an equally good picture from actual human beings in your everyday life.

and not paying attention is probably the best way to enact change, not that the policy would ever be adopted by the public as a whole.

if youre going to listen, do so in as many places as possible. and pick and choose and filter the info with common sense - theres always at least 2 sides.

i personally do not believe the media has gotten 'worse'. it has always used its position in society to preach a message, whether encoded or not, or even consciously. now it seems that the message has gotten out of hand, but its simply because the world has become more globalized. rather than just giving one message to a town, state or country, its going worldwide. what effect that has on the globe is yet to be seen, but i dont think it poses a great threat. at least not as much as those retarded bipolar shouting match debate shows on all the news channels - that is purely unintelligent|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

quote:

Originally posted by biznology dont pay attention. seriously, besides learning that everyone is going to die of west nile - what would you hope to learn from the news media. not paying attention doesnt make you any less informed or stupid, surely you can get an equally good picture from actual human beings in your everyday life.

You make a good point.

However, the danger I see with the media is not the information that it airs; it's the information that it selectively doesn't show or talk about that causes the problem. Let me give you a couple examples:

There have been more Palestinians killed in the Middle East crisis than Isrealites. But for some reason most Americans tend to think the opposite. Why?

Why is it that everytime Iraq is mentioned in the news, we only hear about how evil Saddam is and not about how the US imposed sanctions have killed thousands of people in Iraq?

I'm not suggesting that any violence in the Middle East is justifiable, but why is it that a Palestinian suicide bomber attack gets much more airtime on CNN than an Isreali military attack on a Palestinian refugee camp?

Why don't we hear about the 10 million causualties that Africa has suffered over the last decade in its numerous civil war conflicts?

If you don't pay attention to these things, then you're just one of the many that are being manipulated.

___________________
sig edited: no political imagery allowed. please reref to the sig guidelines

quote:

Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior You make a good point. However, the danger I see with the media is not the information that it airs; it's the information that it selectively doesn't show or talk about that causes the problem. Let me give you a couple examples: There have been more Palestinians killed in the Middle East crisis than Isrealites. But for some reason most Americans tend to think the opposite. Why? Why is it that everytime Iraq is mentioned in the news, we only hear about how evil Saddam is and not about how the US imposed sanctions have killed thousands of people in Iraq? I'm not suggesting that any violence in the Middle East is justifiable, but why is it that a Palestinian suicide bomber attack gets much more airtime on CNN than an Isreali military attack on a Palestinian refugee camp? Why don't we hear about the 10 million causualties that Africa has suffered over the last decade in its numerous civil war conflicts? If you don't pay attention to these things, then you're just one of the many that are being manipulated.

all well taken. i say watch whatever news is most local to you(for instance- i still check The Daily Camera for some reason, even tho its possibly the most retarded newspaper ever ), then the BBC and hopefully that gives enough of a complete picture. im afraid that while the BBC is excellent, it is still to Western to be unbiased.

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

although i do think that most media outlets show some sort of bias, every journalist who studies that major takes in in-depth couple of courses into ethics of journalism. when reporting on world events one should bring out just facts, be fair, try to refrain from unnessacry biased adjectives and so forth. that said journalist integrity is comprimised in the work place.

the media is a capitalist entity wanting to earn as much money as possible, this is done by gaining the highest audience (gaining more advertisers that way). but in order to appease the audience the company gives them what they want, which isnt always fair. furthermore some advertisers will no pay the companies if they poorly portray something they feel strongly about...
anyways i really think TV stations can go around that by reporting news un-baisedly and keeping all the biased stuff for opinion shows such as O'Rielly and such

btw let me answer the specifics

quote:

Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior You make a good point. There have been more Palestinians killed in the Middle East crisis than Isrealites. But for some reason most Americans tend to think the opposite. Why?

i dont find that to be really true, almost ALL AP and Reuters reports online mention the death toll on each side. however on a TV show strapped for time i can see why this stat holds very little value. why does a death toll really matter in an issue? does it matter that more Nazi's died then americans in WW2? does it matter that more nothern vietnamiese civilians were killed then the southern vietnamiese civilians. it doesnt really change the issue of the forces causing it. i hope this makes sense

quote:

Why is it that everytime Iraq is mentioned in the news, we only hear about how evil Saddam is and not about how the US imposed sanctions have killed thousands of people in Iraq?

because this particular statement is baised from the beginning. it is an opinion. one can think of the sanctions being an American reposiblity while others blame saddam. thats why you cant report the above but rather talk about it on opinion shows or interviews.

quote:

I'm not suggesting that any violence in the Middle East is justifiable, but why is it that a Palestinian suicide bomber attack gets much more airtime on CNN than an Isreali military attack on a Palestinian refugee camp?

you hear more about a palestinian bomber because he intentionally targets innocent civilians, while an israeli military operation in a palestinian refugee camp happens becase it intendeds to stop such actions.
(and dont follow up with "there is suicide bombings because of the military operation" because those same bombings started way before any specific military operation)

quote:

Why don't we hear about the 10 million causualties that Africa has suffered over the last decade in its numerous civil war conflicts?

ok got me there... i personally would like for there to be greater awarness of this issue, however other then taking heavy military action in some regions, there really isnt all that much an outside force can do.

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy although i do think that most media outlets show some sort of bias, every journalist who studies that major takes in in-depth couple of courses into ethics of journalism. when reporting on world events one should bring out just facts, be fair, try to refrain from unnessacry biased adjectives and so forth. that said journalist integrity is comprimised in the work place. ...

yeah but i think it can be said some of the bias certainly isnt intentional. FOX isnt running around not reporting stuff just for more cash flow, or cause someone paid them not too. its an inherent, cultural bias that keeps certain issues out of the newsmedia, a bias that a simple ethics class cant necessarily remedy. its a matter of importance, what is truly important to the average US viewer is trivial to a majority to the world|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

Eh somehow they all cancel eachother out (i.e CNN-liberal leanings, FOX-downright conservative bastards, MSNBC-just plain shit)

Just know what you're being fed is not in fact "Fair and balanced news" (get fucked Fox news) and you'll be fine.

I myself just watch for whoever has the hottest women. And that would be Foxnews.

quote:

Originally posted by IronDragon I myself just watch for whoever has the hottest women. And that would be Foxnews.

over here that'd be upn at 11 pm, the latina with the short tight skirt and half her cleavage hanging out. yum.

is it my imagination or did it seem like the media/ tv networks blew out of proportion the partisanship? it seemed to me like they were trying to create somthing like it was a national disaster that so many democrats lost. maybe this is for the rep/dem topic, but seemed like the media was making a big issue of it. the media is supposed to be on our side - again a check on the government - but if i was watching a network owned by liberals, it would make sense. i should have checked other channels to see if they were celebrating. why would the media care which way congress leaned? they're not supposed to think for us. just report the news. lately, maybe because of the elections i can't stand any of the news. we're in the information age, but it's nothing usefull, just garbage. and of course the government wants control of it. it's big money, not to mention power and control over any dissent. and about internet media? just look at the aol time-warner merger. you can't trust print media, broadcast media, now what? cable and internet service combined, hmm...

quote:

The media is supposed to be on our side

You sir, are sadly mistaken. lol.

The media is as political as the politicians.

If the President says "It would be very much appreciated if you all didn't air this. We may give you some insite into later" Then guess what! We don't find out about it!

quote:

CNN-liberal leanings

Leanings? lol, naw, they are straight Liberal as they come.

quote:

FOX-downright conservative bastards

Very true, but Fox has so much better news just cus they don't give a shit. lol. And they have hotter news chicks.

quote:

MSNBC-just plain shit

Uhhh...yeah, pretty much.


Media sucks. The news tells only bad things cus they are the only things that will make a "good story."

Like Iron Dragon said, you have to make sure you are fairly well balenced. Think of it as a political Pyramid. heheh. Not to mention just make sure you think for yourself. If you hear someone say some statistic don't base your political ideas on it. Have your own brain.

___________________
"Oh NO! It seems the world has been infected by a disease called shitty music.
We've had innocculations for some time now but the populace keeps refusing it.
You don't want it? Fine. Give me all the vaccine and a needle and I'll fucking overdose.
It'll be the best day of my life."

This is indeed a problem, not just in america, but worldwide.

Journalists are simply NOT objective and unbiased. They strive to be, and do a decent job, but ther is an inherent factor that will keep complete objectivity and neutrality out of the realm of possibilty as long as it is maintained. money. basically, as long as the news buisness is about making money and not reporting news, there will always be someone to slant the sides.

that said, juricmo raise a good point that its not just american news agencys like CNN and Fox, but others such as Al-jazeera doing this to, and MUCH worse than in america.

As has been said by arbiter, get your info from various sources and form your own conclusions.

for corporate news networks, i actually prefer msnbc, i guess just because i see it everytime i log out of my hotmail i suppose.

I also enjoy the british paper, The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/

also, a good source for news is the indy media.
http://www.indymedia.org/

they are just as guilty as anyone as far as slanting goes, there articles are decidely left winged.

However, it's a good counter point to watching CNN.

finally, i'd like to mention FAIR a media watch group trying to eliminate this bias issue.
http://www.fair.org/

they have an excellent radio program as well:
http://www.fair.org/counterspin/index.html