Actually, they do retractions for stories that are factually incorrect.
No, they don’t. As cited later, that’s obviously your imagination getting the better of you.
Except they’re on a station with “News” in the name.
They’d have you believe they’re unbiased because, again, anyone without an axe to grind recognizes that it’s true.
Do they do retractions for items that are biased? Of course not or else they would do nothing else. The way bias works is that they do a news story give the liberal take on it and ignore the conservative side. That way they can claim to not have lied but still deceive their audience by only giving one side. This is because most of the reporters are liberals and are rooting for the liberals as NPR host Bob Garfield put it to Ira Glass"you and I both know that if you were to somehow poll the political orientation of everybody in the NPR news organization and all of the member stations, you would find an overwhelmingly progressive, liberal crowd. Not uniformly, but overwhelmingly."
The workers are overwhelmingly liberal so the station is overwhelmingly liberal. It is just like in sports stations that hire nothing but former team members and fans to cover a team. They have a home team bias. For NPR liberals are the home team.
That’s not 100% true, according to some articles I’ve read. Roger Ailes and his team would let FOX affiliates know topics to avoid or push, but his fingers were only on the top layer, not deep into the roots as they were at Fox News network.
This statement doesn’t even make sense.
You hate NPR. I don’t care. You haven’t cited anything but your opinion in this thread, and I’m done trying to convince ya. I think anyone who reads the exchange up to this point can see what’s going on.
In terms of editorial politics, i think that chart is reasonably accurate. There are a few things i’d quibble with, but nothing too major. But in terms of journalistic and news values, i think that it perpetuates some of the very problems i was complaining about in my prior post.
You can make an argument that the New York Times leans liberal, and that the Wall Street Journal leans conservative, in terms of editorial position. But according to the chart, an apparent lack of bias actually makes USA Today a better source of news (closer to “what journalism should be”) than the NYT or the WSJ.
I’m sorry, but there is no reasonable measure of journalistic quality that would rate USA Today higher than either of those newspapers. I’m a lefty, and i recognize and admit that the WSJ has a business-oriented and often very conservative editorial viewpoint. Some of the people they invite onto their op-ed pages are right-wing whackjobs. But the Journal has also, for decades, employed some of the best and most professional journalists in the business, and on the day-to-day reporting of news and politics and the economy, i have a great deal of confidence that those people are doing a good, professional job. Same with the NYT.
The same is true of quite a lot of the other outlets on that chart, especially the ones in the “not horrible” sections, just to the left and right of center.
nm
They issue retractions for factual errors. No one “retracts” opinions. That’s what opinions are for.
Back in the good old days, you had Newsweek, with a liberal slant, and U.S. News and World Report, with a conservative slant. Neither of them ever apologized for this…and neither of them should have.
Do you ever offer retractions for things you post here which might reflect your own personal bias?