The right has figured out how to keep the media in check--just scream "liberal bias!" loud enough and then they get scared.
Now where I part with some of the left is the belief that the evil Republican corporate bosses at CBS, Comcast, Disney and Time Warner are leaning hard to get their message heard on the air. That's just silly, because to me a corporation should be apolitical and be more interested in what makes money, not what gets votes (although granted, sometimes they are one and the same). If Comcast was so ultra-conservative, why would they hold an minor ownership stake in Current TV and rent a channel in Chicago and other cities to the lefty conspiracy theorists at RT? In the words of Jessie J, "It's all about the money/Money/Money..." On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:01 AM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, David Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm meaning that news in general is in pretty bad shape. Consider that >> there was a mini-scandal a few weeks ago that the White House was >> giving access in exchange for getting approval on any quotes before >> they were published, or that it was news last week when CNN's Soledad >> O'Brien challenged something said by a Romney surrogate that was >> demonstrably false (and even bigger news when she did it again the >> next day with a different surrogate), or that Newsweek admitted this >> week that it didn't fact check Niall Ferguson's piece that contains >> serious distortions of the truth if not outright lies. >> >> Basically, we have reached a point where people with power can control >> what the media says about them and people with a point to make can >> claim whatever "facts" they want to claim with very little fear of >> somebody actually checking whether those claims are true or >> challenging them if they aren't true. There's a line I see >> occasionally when the media credulously reports something like >> "Senator Smith says the sky is blue, Representative Smith says the sky >> is green" as if both sides have an equal claim to the truth--"This >> isn't journalism, it's stenography." >> > > Yes, I agree with all of this. I guess I just thought it was accepted that > granting conditions to politicians was a line that anyone who even > pretended be in the news business would at least claim not to cross - and > have the good manners to at least blush if caught doing it. Kind of like > governments and negotiating with terrorists. Quote approval for example is > a questionable practice (I guess it is tantamount to letting people > retroactively take things off the record), but is at least just on the near > side of the pale. The only thing left is for candidates to demand that news > organizations make donations to the DNC or RNC before granting interviews. > > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
