Quote:
Originally Posted by WernherVonTrapp
Maybe it's; when the media starts courting one political party (and consequently it's ideals) over the other, especially involving a potential presidential candidate, it serves as an example for the definition of "propaganda".
Noun: propaganda
1. Information that is spread for the purpose of promoting some cause
Noun: propagandist
1. A person who disseminates messages calculated to assist some cause or some government
Adjective:propagandist
1. Of or relating to or characterized by propaganda
The media should restrict it's involvement in politics to objective/impartial reporting and/or debates. Not glamorizing or glorifying any politician or party.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by August
I don't see how NBC or CNN can be considered as anything besides propaganda outlets for the Democrats. These two pieces on Hillary are clearly designed to enhance her image going into the next presidential election.
So Wolferz why exactly should the Republicans treat these organizations like legitimate media?
|
I think this is probably the crux of the issue. I never read/watch NBC, but I have been reading and watching CNN for years. It's not until you start looking at more right winged news outlets like foxnews does one realize just how slanted CNN really is, because then you have the polar opposite as a point of comparison. What they both report, how they report it, and the choice of words both use is very telling to anyone with good grasp of the English language. CNN may appear not to be biased, but in reality they are as biased as foxnews. Watch them closely and i'm sure you'll see it.
I also think this bit of news further illustrates the ongoing division in the country.