Would you agree that the overwhelming majority are not?
I'm getting REAL tired of trying to educate people about the different between Fact and Make Believe
I am afraid so. At a minimum, this is the start of the Chinese Century.
Is this equivalency, or just outright bullshit?
I’m voting bullshit.
No. Because “ratings”.
Shit sells.
Oh yeah … Breitbart… the “alt right” (which is code name for NAZI) “news” rag.
Once upon a time the BBC did have a reputation for impartiality. Whether it was ever deserved is another matter but certainly in the UK it lost that reputation a while back. The last straw was its killing of an investigatory program into the pedophile Jimmy Savile. Few people trust what it says after that.
A Dark Age, no. A moderately large recession of the human intellect and a Counter-Reformation to the Enlightenment, yes. And, yes, definitely the Chinese Century.
A Chinese Century is not necessarily a bad thing. They’re more interested in markets and trade than in the violent exportation of communism.
I know its reputation in the UK isn’t as stellar as it once was, but I’ve always found its international service to be exemplary, especially in relation to “passionate” issues in a particular country where it can be hard to get factual local news on the matter.
Since we’re already in the Pit, let me point out:
(1) You’re an imbecile if you think incompetent journalists pursuing a true story but not winning awards with their non-existent investigative skills is the same as deliberate lying to subvert democracy.
(2) You’re an idiot if you use “mainstream” and “liberal” as synonyms in this context. Most of us rational thinkers only wish the mainstream media were liberal.
How about NPR
I guess those fuckers are just too low key.
Not impartial enough.:rolleyes:
or something.
They’re “liberal”.
Just like the BBC.
Just like CNN.
Just like ABC.
Just like the New York Times.
Just like virtually any newspaper in America.
Just like everything to the left of FOX News.
The right wing has done an incredibly good job of destroying the credibility of any news source that isn’t rabidly right-wing, at least to the right wing.
Every news source in the world has some bias. Even if that bias is manifested in what and how certain subjects are even covered.
There’s a difference between “biased” and “unreliable”. Yeah, the Washington Post leans pro-democrat. So do most people who aren’t fucking idiots; the republican candidate was Donald fucking Trump and their policy over the last 8 years has been one insane and reprehensible stunt after another. Doesn’t mean their reporting isn’t usually quite on point, and worlds better than the best conservative newspapers.
It’s been said before, but it is worth repeating :
Bias does not mean inaccurate or unfair. Every news organization in the world is run by people. Most of them are run for profit. These two factors will influence every story in every outlet everywhere.
Bias does not disqualify an outlet from being a quality source of information. You need to look at a few things to determine if they are a quality source :
1.) Do they publish the truth?
2.) When they make mistakes, do they correct them promptly and visibly?
3.) Do they disclose their conflicts?
4.) Do they explicitly distinguish between opinion journalism and news?
These are common-sense criteria.
Why do the biggest shitheads here always try and point out how stupid other people are?
The same reason the stupidest people always point out the biggest shitheads?