That seems to be his rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
|
That seems to be his rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Scott Pelley of CBS admits that he sucks .
Scott Pelley: 'Journalists Are Getting Big Stories Wrong, Over & Over Again' - NowThis News
CBS anchor Scott Pelley said at a speech at Quinnipiac University that journalists "are getting big stories wrong, over and over again." No shiite !
"Let me take the first arrow: During our coverage of Newtown, I sat on my set and I reported that Nancy Lanza was a teacher at the school. And that her son had attacked her classroom. It's a hell of a story, but it was dead wrong. Now, I was the managing editor, I made the decision to go ahead with that and I did, and that's what I said, and I was absolutely wrong. So let me just take the first arrow here."
Pelley said the republic relies on the quality of the news business. "Democracies succeed or fail based on their journalism," ... "America is strong because its journalism is strong. That's how democracies work. They're only as good as the quality of the information that the public possesses. And that is where we come in."
My only quibble with him is in his thinking that this is a recent development . For a long time now these so call gate keepers of the truth have spun the news based on their pre-conceived notions and ideological spin. The only difference now is that there are "people in pajamas 'doing the heavy lifting that the independent press abandoned a long time ago.
Edit by the way... NBC has hired a tabloid journalist to head NBC News
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/bu...-division.html
So tell me again why the Koch Bros owning a newspaper is a bad idea .
She's no tabloid journalist:
Quote:
Ms. Turness has strong credentials. She has worked at ITN, a British producer of television news, for 25 years. ITN provides three daily newscasts to ITV, a broadcaster that is one of the BBC’s main rivals in Britain, under the banner of ITV News. Ms. Turness has overseen those newscasts as the editor of ITV News since 2004.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITNQuote:
ITN's first bulletin aired on 22 September 1955, the day commercial television was born in the UK. ITN began its own World News bulletins in the late 1980s, which were shown around the world on local television channels, particularly on PBS stations in the US, where presenter Daljit Dhaliwal (now with Al-Jazeera English) enjoyed cult status.
These were discontinued in 2001, in the face of competition from dedicated news channels such as BBC World (now known as BBC World News), although it still provides footage to CNN International and reports often appear on PBS NewsHour. Its ITV Evening News bulletin was shown on the Newsworld International cable channel in the US.
In the 1990s, under new ownership, it was accused of abandoning its previous news style, which was broadsheet in style to mid-market tabloid with news stories that focused on personalities in the news rather than heavy news coverage.
The change in style matched changes in the nature of news coverage on the ITV Network (which has seen the network and ITN accused of dumbing down its style), which saw the axing of the long-running and award winning World in Action current affairs and investigative journalism news programme in 1998.
You have already provided the answer to your question. It is because there is an equal probability that the news will be based on pre-conceived ideas and ideological spin.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
That's the way it always was. This notion of an unbiased press has always been a fiction . I am content with a system where all points of view can be expressed ,and let the market decide who succeeds and fails .
Tom, you are an ideologue. Surely you can make some room for a little bit of fiction in this area.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
My apologies. I withdraw the comment.
And yet you didn't edit the comment
I didn't edit it because I thought that you would have already read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You made a legitimate comment and my response didn't address the issue you raised.
So the press is biased, that what comes of insisting on a free press, they can be as biased as they want to be
The left wants a monopoly on the media plain and simple. They hate Fox and talk radio because of their success and fear the Kochs could eat into their brand even more. It's why they long for the fairness doctrine, they don't want to compete in the market.
I didn't quite get that.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Do you mean the left media would be forced to share the market place?
Who longs for the fairness doctrine?
Liberals, progressives, the left. No they don't want to share the market place, they want Fox and conservative talk radio shut down. They have actually tried to silence Limbaugh, and if they can't shut them down they demand equal time as if they don't already control most of the media. They're horrified at the thought of more conservatives owning another share in my opinion.
OK, so we can't let the Kochs buy a newspaper because we need an honest accounting of things that are important to and affect the lives of Americans, right? Because goodness knows that's what the left's lapdog, echo chamber media does, yes?
While others are actually reporting on the UGLY, OUTRAGEOUS, ILLEGAL efforts of the most feared government agency in targeting and harassing conservative groups SINCE 2010, whose senior officials have known about this for at least TWO YEARS and LIED to congress about it, the NY Times focuses on what's important to Americans here:
I.R.S. Focus on Conservatives Gives G.O.P. an Issue to Seize On
Dang right it does, as at least one prominent progressive agrees, it should give EVERY American an issue to seize on and demand accountability on and protection from such future abuses. The question here is why doesn't it give the most prominent newspaper in the country an issue to seize on?
I guess we need those Kochs in the media business. Don't we?
Nice soaring right wing rhetoric, but if conservative groups were targeted by the big bad IRS, then who were the majority of those left? TParty and patriots were only 25% and you guys are so outraged you don't care who the others were. Lets get some more facts here guys.
Dude, the only spinning is you. I gave you the FACTS from the get go and they're getting worse. You and Jay Carney are the only two on the planet defending the indefensible here. Get your head out of the sand, Tal. As a friend, I'm just saying you're going to look really silly in short order if you keep dodging this issue this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Then you must know ALL the groups in question are. Care to share?
Look buddy, that the IRS issued a preemptive 'apology' to conservative groups ahead of the IG's report should tell you all you need to know about who was targeted. C'mon, this is a no-brainer.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Yeah it wasn't only TP.. it was also pro-Israel groups .
U.S. Presidential Election: Americans In Israel Vote For Mitt Romney
Quote:
A survey by iVoteIsrael, a nonpartisan get-out-the-vote organization, found that 85 percent of American voters in Israel cast absentee ballots for Romney. The group polled 1,572 U.S. expatriates between Oct. 22 and 24, and said the survey had a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.
Quote:
In the United States, Obama won 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008, according to exit polls at the time. Recent polls show the president down as much as 10 percentage points because of economic and foreign policy concerns, but by and large, American Jews remain firmly in the liberal camp that backs Obama – unlike American immigrants in Israel.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:07 AM. |