On the media

I once heard it said that it is impossible to be an unbiased reporter.  Inevitably, one’s own views will affect what he or she considers “newsworthy.”  Knowing this, it is always a good idea to filter what you see and hear in the media through at least some skepticism.  But there are some media outlets who deserve a lot more than skepticism, outlets that have built reputations by deceiving people.  Be ware of these.  Do not fall for what they would convince you is the “mainstream” view.  I won’t name the media giant, but over the course of a year, I fact-checked their newscasts, and found them to be no more than propagandists.  I know that sounds extreme, but there is really no other way to describe it.  The gross misreporting they did consistently was breathtaking.  There were days they got things right.  But few were they.

I could give example after example here, and perhaps one day will.  But the bottom line is that I don’t believe 90% of what I hear from what some would consider the “mainstream media.”  You should know this up front, as it will be illustrated throughout this blog.

This first illustration is perhaps my favorite.  Reporters covered the 2008 election with an unprecedented love for one of the candidates.  Some talked about his stunning and captivating personality, his genius and nuance, or his being so articulate.  They talked about him with a pep in their voice, and thrills in their leg.  It was difficult to find anyone who would mention anything about his past.  So amazing a man was he, that the media practically fell over themselves to give him high words of praise.  So enamored were they, he could do no wrong in their eyes…which made this question of MSNBC’s David Shuster to filmmaker John Ziegler so priceless.

“Isn’t it important to at least try to test their credibility as opposed to just being taken in by their wonderful personality?”

And who was he talking about?  Obviously…Sarah Palin.

Advertisements