# Does the mainstream media actually lie in it's reporting? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 8, 2017, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683 "2017-03-08T12:40:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/101 "2017-03-09T18:16:04Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I did some Google searches: > “Travel hacks”-381,000 hits. > “Sex hacks”-35,800 hits. > “Marriage hacks”-17,000 hits. > “Relationship hacks”-187,000 hits. > “Work hacks”-310,000 hits. > “Kitchen hacks”-457,000 hits. > “Life hacks”- **9,340,000 hits.** > > Now, why don’t you tell us what “hacking” means, again? The life hack Wikipedia page defines it as a “trick, shortcut, skill, or novelty method that increases productivity and efficiency” which is something decidedly positive (and that’s true about all the other examples, I think). But we’d never say that the Motor Votor Act or same-day registration is hacking the election, would we? Also, earlier you explained that the modern definition of “hack” was “to game a system or process to make it do something other its original intended use.” That’s doesn’t seem to be the definition that I would apply to “life hacks,” “work hacks,” or “sex hacks.” ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/102 "2017-03-09T18:17:42Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > I do appreciate the folks here who are apologizing for MSM … just remember MSM puts their own financial profits before your best interests … Are Fox and/or Breitbart “MSM”? Could you please give us your definition of “MSM”? ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/103 "2017-03-09T19:35:28Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Interesting. > > Here’s the PolitiFact stats on [CNN News bias](http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/cnn/). > > Do the same assumption you made about Fox news apply to CNN and its audience? > > If so, whose perceptions are more likely to be coloured by lies? For those who didn’t bother to click the link, those “Pants on fire” and “false” lies on CNN were told by such liberal bastions as Sarah Palin, Mike Rogers (former Republican congressman), Michelle Bachman, Ted Nugent, Mary Matalin and Republican strategist Nancy Pfotenhauer. Interesting that the most egregious lies told on CNN were when they invite conservatives to be heard. > [@TimeWinder](#): > > Does CNN (et. al) lie in it’s reporting? Almost certainly. Any institution that includes humans includes lies. But going from that to “both sides do it equally” is blatantly deceptive, misleading, and itself a lie. Like John Oliver pointed out, _La La Land_ had flaws, and _The Human Centipede_ had flaws, so they’re equivalent! ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/104 "2017-03-09T19:45:50Z")
> [@Falchion](#): > > Also, earlier you explained that the modern definition of “hack” was “to game a system or process to make it do something other its original intended use.” That’s doesn’t seem to be the definition that I would apply to “life hacks,” “work hacks,” or “sex hacks.” Nor would that be an apt description of what happened during last year’s election. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/105 "2017-03-09T19:51:57Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Nor would that be an apt description of what happened during last year’s election. Still sticking with that “it was just a simple publication of unfavorable news” spin? Good for you! ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/106 "2017-03-09T20:31:14Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Still sticking with that “it was just a simple publication of unfavorable news” spin? Good for you! Still pretending someone “gamed the system for something other than its intended use”? Got any evidence of that? Besides “someone I don’t like tried to convince other people to vote for candidates I disagreed with”? Look, I hate Trump, too. But 60 Million Americans freely voted for him. Wikileaks and Russia no more “hacked” the election than CNN or Breitbart did. People are allowed to publish information that they think will help the candidate they prefer to win. And the first amendment wasn’t ratified last year. People have been doing it since before the US was a country, and will continue long after we’ve gone away. Convincing people to vote a certain way is not “hacking” in any sense of the word, except perhaps a made up sense used for propaganda purposes. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/107 "2017-03-09T20:38:17Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Are Fox and/or Breitbart “MSM”? Could you please give us your definition of “MSM”? I’m using the definition in the OP … which excludes FOXNews and Breitbart … and I’m fine with that in this context … it would be clearly threadshitting to post my own definition … let’s just say the _Journal of the American Medical Association_ isn’t mainstream … ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/108 "2017-03-09T20:45:49Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Wikileaks and Russia no more “hacked” the election than CNN or Breitbart did. People are allowed to publish information that they think will help the candidate they prefer to win. And the first amendment wasn’t ratified last year. People have been doing it since before the US was a country, and will continue long after we’ve gone away. Convincing people to vote a certain way is not “hacking” in any sense of the word, except perhaps a made up sense used for propaganda purposes. First, I challenge the idea that the word “hack” was used for both the idea that the Russians computer-hacked computers in the US, and that they “hacked” the election, in the same stories. Saying they “hacked” the election was clearly said in the context of them manipulating Americans by giving them access to information that served Russia’s interest, but not competing information. In that context, “hacking” is doing something other than the conventional way to influence an outcome. Some here have pointed out that it’s usually used to mean doing something positive, but that applies here too, because it was Russia hacking our system and doing things that were positive _for them_. It would be a problem using that word if any significant number of people had the impression that Russia hacked voting machines. But no one thinks that! Why would you complain that a word was misleading if no one was actually misled? ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/109 "2017-03-09T20:47:17Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Adjectives can also be used to completely change the narrative, without ever telling an outright lie. > \* > “North Korea defiantly tested missiles yesterday, despite U.N. sanctions and test bans” > > “North Korea courageously tested missiles yesterday, despite U.N. sanctions and test bans”\* For completely honest reporting, we can add so can adverbs. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/110 "2017-03-09T23:41:17Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I don’t understand what you’re saying here. I’m asking what, to you, a satisfactorily “non biased” news report on Sessions would say, and whether just taking him at his word on what he “meant” wouldn’t be bias on its own. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/111 "2017-03-10T14:39:51Z")
OK. I don’t think reporting on the story should take anyone at their word. The idea is to report on relevant facts, and let the reader decide what to believe. But deciding whether facts are relevant or not based on whether they support your preferred agenda is biased reporting. Including the McCaskill story doesn’t amount to taking Sessions at his word. It’s just a story which would tend to illustrate how Sessions might have made the same type of misleading statement as McCaskill did (i.e. failing to remember incidents which the mind views in a different context), and thus make his version more plausible. By contrast, the original version of the McCaskill story was one which tended to cast doubt on Sessions’ story (since it implied that he would be unlikely to have met with the ambassador without some political intent). Since the paper included the McCaskill story when it cast doubt on Sessions, they should have left it in when it suddenly changed to being one which supported him. That they originally included it when it was negative for him but chose to remove it entirely when it became helpful to him suggests some bias. ---
**Author:** ![sear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@sear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sear)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/112 "2017-03-10T16:26:28Z")
> [@](#): > > “I’m asking what, to you, a satisfactorily “non biased” news report on Sessions would say, and whether just taking him at his word on what he “meant” wouldn’t be bias on its own.” L #110 A report from a biased reporter might surely seem biased. But mightn’t an unbiased report about a biased report subject also be biased? ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683/113 "2017-03-10T16:38:13Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > It would be a problem using that word if any significant number of people had the impression that Russia hacked voting machines. But no one thinks that! Why would you complain that a word was misleading if no one was actually misled? Apparently, 50% of Clinton voters believe (or at least believed) that Russia “tampered with vote tallies to help Donald Trump.” [[Cite](https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/12/27/belief-conspiracies-largely-depends-political-iden/)]. That’s hardly no one. (Curiously, roughly the same percentage of Trump and Clinton voters believe that the US government planned 9/11). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-mainstream-media-actually-lie-in-its-reporting/781683.md?page=5)