I used to really like CNN Headline News back in the early to mid 2000's. Was madly in love with Rudi Bakhtiar. I felt like it was a pretty fact based news report. Not a lot of interviews and talking heads. Just reporting the news.
I'm sure you did, but there's a reason that format changed: no one watched
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
The news is part entertainment. I actually wonder how much more polarising things will get. While Don Lemon was very likely sincere in his frustration, the added drama of the confrontations over the Trump administration on both left and right news channels may well be helping with the ratings. Such opportunities for sensationalism do not foster more balanced coverage in a 24-hour news entertainment market.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
I'm sure you did, but there's a reason that format changed: no one watched
Agree totally. We get the media we deserve. Because people love the talking heads arguing, that's what we get.
Just providing an example of when there was still such a thing as boring news. Who would have thought that the Iraq WMD era would have been the last bastion of honesty?!!?!
The Following User Says Thank You to dobbles For This Useful Post:
Speaking of how to make things more polarising, here is a very interesting article on the data analytics using psychological profiling employed by a company called Cambridge Analytics in both the successful Brexit campaign and the Trump campaign. So very worth reading.
Thanks to Corsi, I now get a bunch of Rubin Report videos suggested on youtube. Saw this one. Its a few months old, but really enjoyed the conversation:
Publishers Weekly ✔ @PublishersWkly
Simon & Schuster is canceling the publication of 'Dangerous' by Milo Yiannopoulos "After careful consideration." Full story coming soon.
Well, it was inevitable that this would happen. The guy basically pretends to have a contrarian opinion about anything without any qualification or historical analysis whatsoever. Just says things for effect, and then cries foul when people call him on it.
His appearance on Maher was hilarious as he was basically the little boy sitting at the men's table, and was taken to school, appropriately.
Good to see that there are real world and mature consequences that don't involve government to the kinds of things he routinely says to incite division. Far more effective than the Berkeley riots.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
Well, it was inevitable that this would happen. The guy basically pretends to have a contrarian opinion about anything without any qualification or historical analysis whatsoever. Just says things for effect, and then cries foul when people call him on it.
His appearance on Maher was hilarious as he was basically the little boy sitting at the men's table, and was taken to school, appropriately.
Good to see that there are real world and mature consequences that don't involve government to the kinds of things he routinely says to incite division. Far more effective than the Berkeley riots.
I'll be honest I had no idea who the guy was until I watched Maher, my first reaction was why the hell would anyone take this child seriously, my second thought was maybe his accent confuses the Yanks and they don't get that he's gay.
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
I'll be honest I had no idea who the guy was until I watched Maher, my first reaction was why the hell would anyone take this child seriously, my second thought was maybe his accent confuses the Yanks and they don't get that he's gay.
It is embarrassing that anyone human adult could take what this kid seriously. As with you, the Maher appearance was the first time that I had seen him to "his thing." What a simpering, coquettish, little know nothing!
I laughed when Maher said he had the potential to be the next Christopher Hitchens.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
I got lost at "CNN only passes along left wing facts". Sounds like someone may be searching for non-partisan facts. Like those alternative ones.
I kind of see what he's saying though. Different news outlet choose to put more or less (or even no) emphasis on different news stories. Golfing and security expenses are stories on CNN but not Fox. Fox covers the cheering crowd in Florida, others focus on the size of the crowd. Is one over-reporting or one under-reporting?
Leaving aside incorrect or misleading information, which I do think comes more often from the right, the choice of which facts to present and emphasize does follow a left right split. Facts are not left or right but can be used to support either viewpoint.
Having said that Trump is a very easy target for anyone not on the right, the news writes itself.
The Following User Says Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
His appearance on Maher was hilarious as he was basically the little boy sitting at the men's table, and was taken to school, appropriately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
I'll be honest I had no idea who the guy was until I watched Maher, my first reaction was why the hell would anyone take this child seriously, my second thought was maybe his accent confuses the Yanks and they don't get that he's gay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
It is embarrassing that anyone human adult could take what this kid seriously.
This basically makes Maher's point that trying to prevent people from hearing what someone has to say is the wrong strategy. The "boy at the men's table" thing is a pretty accurate description, and having been exposed in that fashion, it's now fairly obvious that this particular self-described emperor has no clothes. That wouldn't have happened if he hadn't had him on in the first place. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
I kind of see what he's saying though. Different news outlet choose to put more or less (or even no) emphasis on different news stories. Golfing and security expenses are stories on CNN but not Fox. Fox covers the cheering crowd in Florida, others focus on the size of the crowd. Is one over-reporting or one under-reporting?
.
But this has been the way it is forever. The fake news bit is Trumps way of getting his lowIQ minions riled up.
He hates Mexicans, build that wall.
He hates Hillary, crooked Hillary.
He hates Muslims, Muslim ban.
He hates the media that doesn't worship him, Fake News.
So surprised how many dumb people there are that fall for his rhetoric.
__________________
Pass the bacon.
The Following User Says Thank You to DuffMan For This Useful Post:
I kind of see what he's saying though. Different news outlet choose to put more or less (or even no) emphasis on different news stories. Golfing and security expenses are stories on CNN but not Fox. Fox covers the cheering crowd in Florida, others focus on the size of the crowd. Is one over-reporting or one under-reporting?
Leaving aside incorrect or misleading information, which I do think comes more often from the right, the choice of which facts to present and emphasize does follow a left right split. Facts are not left or right but can be used to support either viewpoint.
Having said that Trump is a very easy target for anyone not on the right, the news writes itself.
I see what your getting at and would agree with you in the bush/Obama days. Fox presented a skewed but sort of credible criticism of Obama (some commentators were trash but the news coverage was skewed but reasonably true)
Now Trump blatently lies, crowds are back to the fence, and they aren't back to the fence. So covering how big his crowds are is just false. Security expenses shouldn't really be a story but they are for every administration remember Obama going to a baseball game was blown out of proportion.
As for Golf again quit lying, if trump plays a round of golf a week, who cares, the reason it became news was the lie.
So I think if Trumo wouldn't just blatently lie or attack the various pullers of government his coverage would much more resemble Obamas with Foz and MSNBC flipped. And then he would be right to go after non-genuine coverage.
However when day one you send out your press secretary to spout out verifiable lies you have lost all ability to criticize the coverage you receive.
But this has been the way it is forever. The fake news bit is Trumps way of getting his lowIQ minions riled up.
He hates Mexicans, build that wall.
He hates Hillary, crooked Hillary.
He hates Muslims, Muslim ban.
He hates the media that doesn't worship him, Fake News.
So surprised how many dumb people there are that fall for his rhetoric.
You probably watch CNN...
The thing I've found interesting is for the most part the anti-Trump folks are the ones that use wordsome like dumb, hate, etc. It doesn't exactly add credibility to any sort of argument.
The thing I've found interesting is for the most part the anti-Trump folks are the ones that use wordsome like dumb, hate, etc. It doesn't exactly add credibility to any sort of argument.
There isn't much of an argument left that needs to be made. The man's own statements have made the argument themselves. He's a serial liar, a self-important bully, beholden to Russia and China financially, perfectly willing to skirt ethics rules to use the office of the President to enrich himself and his family and increase his brand status, and repeatedly declares himself to be a threat to fundamental American institutions, notably the independent judiciary and free press.
Those things are simply true regardless of how CNN or others report on them. There's really no spin required, Trump provides all the spin that's necessary himself.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
