Do you trust the MSM? (Poll)
- Thread starter GamecockJL
- Start date
Uhhh, no, why would you?
"CBS admits to using footage from Italy in NYC coronavirus report"
https://nypost.com/2020/04/01/cbs-admits-to-using-footage-from-italy-in-report-about-nyc/
"CBS admits to using footage from Italy in NYC coronavirus report"
https://nypost.com/2020/04/01/cbs-admits-to-using-footage-from-italy-in-report-about-nyc/
Also, this report from ABC:
Intelligence report warned of coronavirus crisis as early as November: Sources
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/int...isis-early-november-sources/story?id=70031273
That report received the following condemnation from R. Shane Day, director National Center for Medical Intelligence, DIA.
“As a matter of practice, the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence and release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence coronavirus related product or assessment in November 2019 is not correct. No such product exists.”
Intelligence report warned of coronavirus crisis as early as November: Sources
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/int...isis-early-november-sources/story?id=70031273
That report received the following condemnation from R. Shane Day, director National Center for Medical Intelligence, DIA.
“As a matter of practice, the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters. However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence and release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence coronavirus related product or assessment in November 2019 is not correct. No such product exists.”
I don't trust anyone on TV. The MSM is so corrupt, pretty much all being owned by far left powers that enforce their politics on the reporting. Not that I trust the far right news any more. Big media is big money. Money = corruption pretty universally. Large corporations sell their employees' rights for profit, and the almighty dollar is the new god far too many worship. Love of money is the root of all evil, and those with so much of it have definitely developed a heavy love.
When is more ever enough?
When is more ever enough?
Yes, when it gets right down to it, you can't trust anyone. Few people report the news without an agenda any longer. There are a select few who I tend to trust, but it's very few. I tend to listen to what Tucker Carlson has to say. I don't agree with him every time, but he's one of few who seems to look at things truly objectively.
I don't believe anything they report. It's all narrative driven left wing agendas!
Journalism is nothing like it used to be. Headlines are sensationalized to get people to click on the link. It’s all about clicks to drive advertising dollars and journalism suffers. Often if you take time to read the article, you will find that the headline was misleading.
Plus, every news network has an agenda it promotes. It often skews their reporting.
My only advice is to take time to read the article and don’t just assume everything is truth. Also, watch full interviews and press conferences and decide for yourself.
Plus, every news network has an agenda it promotes. It often skews their reporting.
My only advice is to take time to read the article and don’t just assume everything is truth. Also, watch full interviews and press conferences and decide for yourself.
Yes, especially compared to news from news sources that outwardly support candidates. (MSNBC, FOX, Newsmax, etc)
when I watch a Lester Holt newscast on NBC nightly news, I don’t come away thinking Lester supports any candidate. He isn’t pushing a candidate, he isn’t telling me how his favorite candidate is always right and the other side is always wrong. That’s the way I like it.
when I watch a Lester Holt newscast on NBC nightly news, I don’t come away thinking Lester supports any candidate. He isn’t pushing a candidate, he isn’t telling me how his favorite candidate is always right and the other side is always wrong. That’s the way I like it.
Last edited:
You left off one of the selections in the poll. Yes/No/Hell NO!
I think a large portion of this country scream “fake news” because their political and world views don’t agree with facts. So they shop around on the internet until they find a website or a talking head who they agree with, like Breitbart, OAN or Tucker Carlson. The irony of these tools yelling “fake news” when they do this is beyond laughable.
Institutions like the NYT, WaPo and NPR have had high journalistic standards in place for decades. Just because you are too dumb to believe in global warming or something doesn’t mean you get stand up and yell “FAKE NEWS” at the top of your lungs. This phenomenon is an unfortunate side effect of the internet.
Cable news is entertainment. If you watch that shizz, it’s on you. That stuff will rot your brain.
Institutions like the NYT, WaPo and NPR have had high journalistic standards in place for decades. Just because you are too dumb to believe in global warming or something doesn’t mean you get stand up and yell “FAKE NEWS” at the top of your lungs. This phenomenon is an unfortunate side effect of the internet.
Cable news is entertainment. If you watch that shizz, it’s on you. That stuff will rot your brain.
Even the New York times thinks the New York times is fake News.
I disagree on Lester Holt. We were watching his show back during the last government shutdown and he was personally interviewing a so called Military Dependent wife who was saying she was denied health care cause a TriCare wouldn’t approve her to see a specialist because of the shutdown. And she blamed Trump. That was a bold face lie, as I had a procedure during the draw down and no issue.
A few days later NBC retracted this video but Holt never apologized. My wife use to like him and his voice until that episode now she refuses to watch NBC news.
The NBC retraction was the wife was denied an elective cosmetic surgery, and nothing to do with the Shutdown. NBC didn’t do homework. But it ran on their nightly prime time news. Probably TriCare contacted NBC. I don’t know that part.
Last edited:
Lester Holt doesn't even ATTEMPT to mask his agenda. Dude literally snarls when reporting whatever the latest Donald Trump hatchet effort is. Completely useless at best, misleading as a routine, false completely at worst.
Election night 2016 exposed the mainstream media; I had no real skin in the game at that point, but watching their reactions as the night wore on was at once both hilarious and angering.
You can add Twitter world to this too. Twitter has turn into a bigger swamp ass if you ask me. So many fake accounts and nut jobs .
I have friend that lives in Twitter world. I seriously think they are losing their mind with the crap they are being fed and they believe it like it’s the gospel.
I have friend that lives in Twitter world. I seriously think they are losing their mind with the crap they are being fed and they believe it like it’s the gospel.
Twitter political people are literally insane.
I haven't trusted the media since sometime during the early 90s where as a young man I had first hand knowledge of a national breaking story and watched them twist aspects of it to fit an obvious agenda based on the angle they wanted to take to boost their ratings. I'm primarily talking about Diane Sawyer, 60 minutes and 20/20. The tactics I saw them use to get the reactions they hoped to get on film are dispictable. I lost all respect for network news at an early age and that continues to this day in part because it seems to have gotten worse. I cant tell you how glad I am to see the MSM approval numbers tank. They deserve it.
Is it worse than Facebook? I know people who think because a page says “ Insert TV Personality Fans” that it’s true regardless of how insane it is.
Respectfully, I disagree.
It’s not the job of a a host like Holt to correct someone he’s interviewing. It’s his job to get their insight and opinion. If that person is wrong, NBC did the right thing by correcting it. But I don’t want a Holt correcting people during an interview. If the person they are interviewing felt like it was Trump’s fault, or Obama’s or Joe Schmo, that’s their view.
Just look at the false statements uttered by presidents in live news conferences, but supporters hate when a journalist corrects the president or a press secretary because then they are making the news.
so I think someone like Holt has to let them give their opinion.
but yes, if NBC ran an incorrect story, that should be corrected. But that happens a lot to all news organizations, especially cable news organizations.
The odd thing about my Facebook is that usually the people that yell the most about fake news are the ones I can count on to post obviously misleading news links or straight out propaganda sites.
it’s odd that the ones that so often scream “fake news” on Facebook will also likely have Alex Jones quotes all over their page.
I hold NBC and Holt wrong for not vetting the source. Period. If you do not understand that then you are lost into false advertising.
I trust ANY media source as far as I can throw them. The only absolute exception would be a media source that I create and populate, but even I am wrong often.
"media" news coverage have always been around, but it had grown over recent years if not decades. News coverage was always considered a money drain on the national networks - back when you got 5 channels on your TV - ABC, NBC, CBS, and then some local public service announcement/program channels - but it was viewed as a public service to inform the people, and the costs of having them were always absorbed into the total revenues of network programming.
Then the bean-counters started trying to figure out how little they could spend, so the money dump wouldn't be so bad. So the news program executives started developing news programming packaged like regular network programming. The "magazine" news programming like 60 minutes, 20/20, 48 Hours, Dateline NBC - they were formatted into documentary-like story-telling, while informing of news topics. They brought advertising and made revenue, to counter what the straight anchor news format lost.
But that paved the way for "media" news. It was no longer a straight journalistic, news reporting format. TV anchors like Dan Rather liked to take pride in being front-line news reporters for world events: wars, uprisings. They looked down on the empty suit, pretty-faced "personalities", even after they often became those animals in order to make the big bucks.
But the success of those news magazine programs like 60 minutes brought in the desire and competition for networks to pull audiences, generate ad revenues, and make profits selling "news".
So, in order to do that, the programming moved more toward management and manipulation of the dissemination of straight, face-value news. There were more subjective coloring of said news, in order to dictate how "interesting" and "attractive" that news was.
And then, it was no longer just "news". Now, it was "media".
So, you NEVER just get the facts, ma'am with ANY one media source. If you choose to just lock in on one single media outlet source as your primary source of news, then you choose to be uneducated and led along like the proverbial sheep of the herd.
I watch/read various news sources, and if you aren't lazy and halfway intelligent, it really isn't that hard to tell when a source is telling you outright news, or trying to sell you product. I try my best to stay away from the subjective opinion heads and commentators, like Hannity, Limbaugh, Maddow, etc. Just tell me the information, and forget trying to tell me a story.
I find that Fox News does by far and away the most story telling. They get things wrong by far, and then shift totally to the other side, and act like it never happened. CNN can be bad as well, but in their articles, they disclose any associations with corporations or with persons of interest that they do stories on, while I never find Fox ever doing that. MNBC is worse than CNN IMO, and closer to Fox in how blatant they are for or against any side or argument.
But I learned a long time ago, to try to read it all, otherwise my intel gathering will be pretty one-sided, and will leave out important stuff because my "source" didn't agree with what it disclosed.....
"media" news coverage have always been around, but it had grown over recent years if not decades. News coverage was always considered a money drain on the national networks - back when you got 5 channels on your TV - ABC, NBC, CBS, and then some local public service announcement/program channels - but it was viewed as a public service to inform the people, and the costs of having them were always absorbed into the total revenues of network programming.
Then the bean-counters started trying to figure out how little they could spend, so the money dump wouldn't be so bad. So the news program executives started developing news programming packaged like regular network programming. The "magazine" news programming like 60 minutes, 20/20, 48 Hours, Dateline NBC - they were formatted into documentary-like story-telling, while informing of news topics. They brought advertising and made revenue, to counter what the straight anchor news format lost.
But that paved the way for "media" news. It was no longer a straight journalistic, news reporting format. TV anchors like Dan Rather liked to take pride in being front-line news reporters for world events: wars, uprisings. They looked down on the empty suit, pretty-faced "personalities", even after they often became those animals in order to make the big bucks.
But the success of those news magazine programs like 60 minutes brought in the desire and competition for networks to pull audiences, generate ad revenues, and make profits selling "news".
So, in order to do that, the programming moved more toward management and manipulation of the dissemination of straight, face-value news. There were more subjective coloring of said news, in order to dictate how "interesting" and "attractive" that news was.
And then, it was no longer just "news". Now, it was "media".
So, you NEVER just get the facts, ma'am with ANY one media source. If you choose to just lock in on one single media outlet source as your primary source of news, then you choose to be uneducated and led along like the proverbial sheep of the herd.
I watch/read various news sources, and if you aren't lazy and halfway intelligent, it really isn't that hard to tell when a source is telling you outright news, or trying to sell you product. I try my best to stay away from the subjective opinion heads and commentators, like Hannity, Limbaugh, Maddow, etc. Just tell me the information, and forget trying to tell me a story.
I find that Fox News does by far and away the most story telling. They get things wrong by far, and then shift totally to the other side, and act like it never happened. CNN can be bad as well, but in their articles, they disclose any associations with corporations or with persons of interest that they do stories on, while I never find Fox ever doing that. MNBC is worse than CNN IMO, and closer to Fox in how blatant they are for or against any side or argument.
But I learned a long time ago, to try to read it all, otherwise my intel gathering will be pretty one-sided, and will leave out important stuff because my "source" didn't agree with what it disclosed.....
Why is it even important to trust the news anyway. If you expose yourself to enough from all angles, then you can make up your own mind. The news shouldn't change your opinion one way or the other unless you have weak opinions. I know who I am. I am a Civil Rights driven liberal that has a slant of libertarianism at my core. This has been true for me at several different income levels. I need money to live, but I am not driven by it. So, Conservatives promises of putting more money in my pocket have never driven me to vote for them on that alone.
Last edited:
Holt wouldn’t vet the source personally. He has producers do that. The most he would do would be to tell the guest how the interview will go (what his focus will be, how many questions he will ask, direct her to think about what point she wants to make)
One of the things I respect most about Chris Wallace is he often challenges people in things. Sometimes it’s to make people think but most often it’s because he doesn’t want misinformation spread on his show. The fact that he is disliked by people on both sides tells me he’s doing his job.
Practically every friend I have on Facebook is republican.A majority of post imo crazy conspiracy theories.the ones now going around is bill gates made this virus and wants everyone microchipped..one this morning wants trump to go ahead with dismissing congress and I texted him back don’t complain when the democratic president does it.its both funny and sad but mostly sad.i guess it’s not surprising but mostly of the post comes from the very religious people..
He’s not a close friend but I do know a guy on Facebook who has run for our local county council a few times. He’s conservative but extreme. He posts all sorts of fake, misleading memes on Facebook all the time, often contradictory information. It’s little wonder why he didn’t win election.
as I said earlier, the odd thing is he is always posting about hating “the fake Main stream news.” Even some of his sympathizers have posted that they wish he would stop posting obviously misleading information. It does no good though as he posts it every day.
I do get it. I said the host doesn’t do the vetting. That’s not his job, not at Lester Holt’s level. He has assistants do that stuff.
they all make mistakes. If you are looking for the perfect news cast, you’ll be looking a long time.
my opinion is that someone like Lester Holt isn’t trying to lie or mislead people like 99.9% of the people on cable news (hannity, carlson, Maddow, etc)
A couple of major MSM outlets sat on the Lewinski story until the election passed. That's how Drudge broke the story first. That story would have been a ratings bonanza for the outlet that broke it, but they decided the agenda was more important than even their own ratings. That was the turning point for me. No more trust. Yes, that goes for Fox too. It's funny how many people think they really zinged you when they attack Fox's credibility. The reason they're the most watched is they recognized the complete vacuum for right leaning media and filled it. Smart business. But I don't enjoy watching people yell at each other. Life is too short for that.
If you don't believe "institutions" like the NYT, WaPo, and NPR don't have political agendas, then you are every bit as dumb and naive as those you criticize.
This post is on point friend. You are dead on. I am pretty sure I agree with everything you just said. I have said pretty much the same thing here in the past.
Agreed. We should all be skeptical no matter what we watch. But it does warm my heart that more Americans than ever seem to see through the BS we are fed daily. That is truely good news. And it's way overdue.
Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post (written at the time of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...cbc9f8-c680-11e8-b2b5-79270f9cce17_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...9faac4-c280-11e8-a1f0-a4051b6ad114_story.html
Ruth Marcus now (fast forward to sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/15/seriousness-flaws-tara-reades-allegations/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...cbc9f8-c680-11e8-b2b5-79270f9cce17_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...9faac4-c280-11e8-a1f0-a4051b6ad114_story.html
Ruth Marcus now (fast forward to sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/15/seriousness-flaws-tara-reades-allegations/
I use to watch Fox, NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, and occasionally MSNBC. Most of my news watching today is with FOX News. They are the only station that tries to show both sides of an issue, including someone from the left spewing their socialism. CNN and MSNBC are socialist and borderline communists.
I lean hard to the conservative side but certainly take Fox with a grain of salt especially depending on who it is.Some are opinion shows like Hannity while Brett Baier and Chris Wallace are more traditional news men.The ladies tend to be somewhere in between.There is nobody on MSNBC or CNN that even attemps to be impartial.
Similar threads
