News Media Spin

AllForIt

flazio wrote: »

I post these questions with no agenda and just to measure a yardstick into boards thoughts here.
In relation to investigative journalism. Who is fair game and how deep should they legally allowed to dig?
How should this journalism be funded?
Could accusatory journalism encourage the Irish people to bypass the justice system they don't trust and eliminating any hope for redemption of a tarnished reputation?

I'm not sure where you're coming from here. Everyone should be fair game rather than deliberately ignoring other people. I don't have an opinion on the legal side of it. And accusatory journalism isn't journalism.

Smacruairi

flazio wrote: »

In relation to investigative journalism. Who is fair game and how deep should they legally allowed to dig?
How should this journalism be funded?
Could accusatory journalism encourage the Irish people to bypass the justice system they don't trust and eliminating any hope for redemption of a tarnished reputation?

Interesting to see where you are going with this but...

1. Fair game - anyone involved in a public role or who relies on public for their own advancement. Allowed to dig? Their actions, their comments on matters relevant to their actions. What they did, and what they ssy they did, not their private comments about religion or sports etc.
2. Funded through sales, advertising etc. The current media set up is dying because no one feels the need to buy a paper anymore as there is no critical analysis, no must read into. Its just taking press releases and putting them out there. If you, however, take the Delaney scandal, proper journalism, proper research, and people rushed to pay for that.
3. Journalism should investigate, and ask questions, that's it. Opinion pieces and analysis are too common now, with people offering hot takes (which are often wrong) rather than measured debate.

Wanderer78

AllForIt wrote:

Do you trust the so called Main Stream Media?

All 'information' has inherent bias, if you don't like it, stick your fingers in your ears, stick a blindfold on, a peg over your nose, never interact with another human being ever, and lock yourself in a dark room

MisterAnarchy

Kind of related .
TD Michael Mc Namara calling out the lack of free media in Ireland and the cronyism of RTE and the Irish Times.

https://twitter.com/MlMcNamaraTD/status/1357327141348769798

Floppybits

I can understand the use of spin to get something out there but have FG and FF gone too far with the spinning? For there is a fine line on most things and go to far over that line that thing becomes useless and I think that FG and FF have gone to far spinning that maybe it is time to cut back on the spin.

AllForIt

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Kind of related .
TD Michael Mc Namara calling out the lack of free media in Ireland and the cronyism of RTE and the Irish Times.

https://twitter.com/MlMcNamaraTD/status/1357327141348769798

Absolutely related and dead right he is I'm sure.

Invidious

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Kind of related .
TD Michael Mc Namara calling out the lack of free media in Ireland and the cronyism of RTE and the Irish Times.

He's right that the news coverage has become oppressive.

I can't stand the perpetual wallowing in self-pity that is so common in the Irish media. Even before the coronavirus and lockdowns, we had the steady drumbeat of headlines about the housing crisis, homelessness, suicide, depression, cancer, people sleeping on trolleys, climate change, etc.

Negativity is played up, but we rarely hear about the things that are going right.

You'd think the country was falling apart the way they go on. You'd never imagine we were one of the richest countries in the world, with one of the fastest-growing economies.

flazio

Smacruairi wrote: »

Interesting to see where you are going with this but...

1. Fair game - anyone involved in a public role or who relies on public for their own advancement. Allowed to dig? Their actions, their comments on matters relevant to their actions. What they did, and what they ssy they did, not their private comments about religion or sports etc.
2. Funded through sales, advertising etc. The current media set up is dying because no one feels the need to buy a paper anymore as there is no critical analysis, no must read into. Its just taking press releases and putting them out there. If you, however, take the Delaney scandal, proper journalism, proper research, and people rushed to pay for that.
3. Journalism should investigate, and ask questions, that's it. Opinion pieces and analysis are too common now, with people offering hot takes (which are often wrong) rather than measured debate.

Thank you for your thought out answers
My "hot take" is that I believe the biggest enemy to proper journalism is not government interference, but tabloid sensationalism. They're much worse in the UK then here but I still struggle to see a reason for publications like the Irish Daily and Sunday Mail papers to exist and what do they provide to society.
I can't remember a single time a Red top has made a positive contribution to life apart from the odd giggle when they come up with a good pun front page.

briany

One thing I did notice recently was about US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene - she never actually referred to *jewish* space lasers, when theorising about the Californian wildfires, even though it's been reported as such. Not that talking about space lasers isn't mad enough by itself, but it was unfair to automatically append 'Jewish' to that, when it was the Rothschilds, among others, she referred to when talking about who she thought was behind these lasers. Could have as easily said 'rich bankers' lasers '

Fr Tod Umptious

AllForIt wrote: »

Absolutely related and dead right he is I'm sure.

He's dead right about the witch burning live on air.

Fighting Tao

Invidious wrote: »

Rubbish. RTE devoted just as much airtime to covering demonstrations against Reagan's visit, all with an approving tone. While they covered the visit itself, they absolutely did not treat him like a "superstar."

During the 2012 election cycle, when President Obama ran for reelection against Mitt Romney, Senator Paul Bradford criticized the "institutionalised pro-Democratic Party bias that exists within RTE," saying: "I wonder why we pay to have an American correspondent ... It would be just as easy for RTE to have a direct link with Democratic national party headquarters."

That said, given that you haven't been able to produce one example of RTE fawning over President Trump, I expect you'll just reiterate your claims without proof. But repeating something doesn't make it true.

Can’t win with you regardless. You just highlighted that RTE did not have a biased approach for Regans visit. They fairly covered the food and the bad. Make up your mind what you are trying to get at

AllForIt

Pertinent comment from David Quinn

https://twitter.com/DavQuinn/status/1359267537339432963

Kivaro

And guess what happened to the BBC?
Today China has banned BBC World news from broadcasting in China. They revoked their license after accusing the BBC of "fake news".

RobbieTheRobber

Kivaro wrote: »

And guess what happened to the BBC?
Today China has banned BBC World news from broadcasting in China. They revoked their license after accusing the BBC of "fake news".

The UK banned a Chinese state backed channel from broadcasting in UK and china retaliates by revoking BBC world service channel license in China.
I don't think it was because of their story on the wuhan lab on the BBC one news that really caused this.
I'm not sure of any other official UK state channels that are allowed to broadcast in china so it was a tit for tat banning of the BBC world service or nothing in Chinas attempts to get in a quick retaliation.

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966933445/china-bans-bbc-world-service-following-u-k-ban-of-chinese-network?t=1613065654309

Kivaro

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

The UK banned a Chinese state backed channel from broadcasting in UK and china retaliates by revoking BBC world service channel license in China.
I don't think it was because of their story on the wuhan lab on the BBC one news that really caused this.
I'm not sure of any other official UK state channels that are allowed to broadcast in china so it was a tit for tat banning of the BBC world service or nothing in Chinas attempts to get in a quick retaliation.

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966933445/china-bans-bbc-world-service-following-u-k-ban-of-chinese-network?t=1613065654309

I noticed CGTN disappearing from my channels last week after Ofcom withdrew their license, so the Chinese were going to retaliate.
However, and I don't say it often about the BBC, fair play to their reporter in Wuhan asking the WHO investigation team spokesman on why he already made a statement about the Covid virus not being created in a lab ........... even before their official investigation and visit to China.

MisterAnarchy

Calls for Cuomo’s Emmy Award to be taken back over nursing home coverup

https://nypost.com/2021/02/12/pol-wants-cuomos-emmy-to-be-rescinded-over-nursing-home-scandal/

“The Academy awarded Governor Cuomo ‘in recognition of his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic & his masterful use of TV to inform and calm people around the world,'” Holden wrote.

“We now know that his TV appearances and clout were used to mislead the public regarding how their loved ones died.”

Cuomo, built up to be such a great character in the last year.
A saint , on CNN most nights with his brother, there was even talk of a run at the presidency.
Robert De Niro said he'd like to play him in a pandemic movie, and said the New York governor was doing what a president should do.

Ultimate spin.

James Brown

All media has bias. Be it politically or profit driven.
You can tell the clowns like Fox and the Sun a mile off.
Pick a few outlets and make up your own opinion based on that..
What stories get the top spot can be more revealing than any obvious spin to the story.

johnboy1298

Personally I think the mainstream media can be incredibly biased at times. The facts they report are often 'correct' but important context seems to be conveniently omitted when it suits to present a version of an event. I also think what what people say about the facts the media receive is correct, the media will report what official sources say, which is the way it should be, but it really annoys me at times that glaringly biased things or credible sources making dubious claims are not investigated. The media do not lie to us but they do not dig to find the truth either.

FileNotFound

johnboy1298 wrote: »

Personally I think the mainstream media can be incredibly biased at times. The facts they report are often 'correct' but important context seems to be conveniently omitted when it suits to present a version of an event. I also think what what people say about the facts the media receive is correct, the media will report what official sources say, which is the way it should be, but it really annoys me at times that glaringly biased things or credible sources making dubious claims are not investigated. The media do not lie to us but they do not dig to find the truth either.

Biased based on???

If it is based on fact then it will only have 1 side.

Opinion is subjective, some people try to imagine facts are too. Alas they are not.

When it comes to political correspondence now that's a tough one.

Let's be honest, this thread will have people with wildly varying opinions and each will consider a media presenting an opinion other than theirs as biased.

In most subjects most of us are clueless and incapable of reading anything factual either due to not having access to the correct info or just not wanting to look.

Maybe I would say the media should be a little less combative. All round.

johnboy1298

FileNotFound wrote: »

Biased based on???

If it is based on fact then it will only have 1 side.

Opinion is subjective, some people try to imagine facts are too. Alas they are not.

When it comes to political correspondence now that's a tough one.

Let's be honest, this thread will have people with wildly varying opinions and each will consider a media presenting an opinion other than theirs as biased.

In most subjects most of us are clueless and incapable of reading anything factual either due to not having access to the correct info or just not wanting to look.

Maybe I would say the media should be a little less combative. All round.

Facts are rarely black and white unfortunately there are two sides to a lot of stories.

I dont smoke weed but I find this a good example, I recently seen a picture on facebook of two side by side headlines both for a certain brand of weed, The headline in Canada promoted the weed as 'providing a good lively vibe for a wedding party' or something to that effect. The same brand when found in Ireland was under the headline 'potent, dangerous strain of weed seized'. You tell me there's no bias in headlines of this nature yet they appear all the time. Headlines like this are designed to influence people.

Another old but good example is when Peter Casey gave out about the travellers while running for President. There was a lot of merit to what he said about the impact of some travellers on society but it was dismissed by the media and they said he should pull out of the race. The increase he got in votes suggests that as much as the media tried to bury this, there was truth in what he said and people voted for him because he spoke out rather than following the media acceptable response. There is no black and white fact here but the answer lies somewhere in the middle of the contradicting opinions. I personally do not want the media to decide what is right/wrong for someone to say/think but that is where we are.

Dismissing things like this instead of addressing them is a huge problem. Having an opinion that isn't the opinion of the media often leads to being labelled as wrong in the modern world. Its actually the complete opposite of democratic unbiased reporting to be honest.

I think your last line about the media ideally being less combative strikes a chord.

FileNotFound

johnboy1298 wrote: »

Facts are rarely black and white unfortunately there are two sides to a lot of stories.

I dont smoke weed but I find this a good example, I recently seen a picture on facebook of two side by side headlines both for a certain brand of weed, The headline in Canada promoted the weed as 'providing a good lively vibe for a wedding party' or something to that effect. The same brand when found in Ireland was under the headline 'potent, dangerous strain of weed seized'. You tell me there's no bias in headlines of this nature yet they appear all the time. Headlines like this are designed to influence people.

Another old but good example is when Peter Casey gave out about the travellers while running for President. There was a lot of merit to what he said about the impact of some travellers on society but it was dismissed by the media and they said he should pull out of the race. The increase he got in votes suggests that as much as the media tried to bury this, there was truth in what he said and people voted for him because he spoke out rather than following the media acceptable response. There is no black and white fact here but the answer lies somewhere in the middle of the contradicting opinions. I personally do not want the media to decide what is right/wrong for someone to say/think but that is where we are.

Dismissing things like this instead of addressing them is a huge problem. Having an opinion that isn't the opinion of the media often leads to being labelled as wrong in the modern world. Its actually the complete opposite of democratic unbiased reporting to be honest.

I think your last line about the media ideally being less combative strikes a chord.

I suppose "facts are rarely black and white" is something we will disagree on - as by definition a fact is just that. (the opinion born of them most certainly is all grey)

People jump to conclusions and i do feel the media rat run to be first to press has ultimately meant we are being given opinion rather than fact - then when find the facts afterwards(if ever) the media have jumped to the next selling story.

Your weed and Casey arguments do raise good points - they really do. Is weed the devil, I don't think so. Is it bad for you - I do think so.

And Casey's comments re travelling community may be close to the mark - but I held them against him when voting in said election. (Mine own hypocrisy haha)

I would like to see something stop this - maybe even just for the state broadcaster - give it a purpose - legislation requiring the facts to be presented plain. A pipe dream.

I do think the media has now taken to stirring the pot rather than reporting.
So I agree with much of your comment. But i do believe we now more than ever have to remember the difference between fact and opinion.

Healthy debate seems to be dead now, seems to always head to extremes

MisterAnarchy

jmcc wrote: »

Good friend of the Clintons. O'Brien was expecting Hillary Clinton to win, just like the people in RTE. Things went a bit pear-shaped with the flotation of Digicel in the US.

Trump winning upset RTE and they never forgave him for showing them up as propagandists rather than objective journalists.

Regards...jmcc

Some good news, Denis O Brien is selling off Communicorp.
It might be some way tolerable now.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/denis-o-brien-s-communicorp-agrees-sale-to-bauer-media-audio-1.4494816

Communicorp, the radio group controlled by Denis O’Brien, has agreed a sale of the company to UK-based Bauer Media Audio for a sum understood to be north of €100 million.

joseywhales

I find it so baffling, the mental gymnastics to prove the bias news media when we already knew it was biased and that everyone is biased and that all human perception is flawed and always has been. This is why we read from many sources and use evidence to make up our own minds. Is this not primary school level teaching?

Also the msm hated donald Trump because they are all liberal, nonsense, donald Trump was the biggest dickhead in the western world , that is why the msm hate him, nothing to do with left and right.