CNN credibility in question

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

LIES!

no really:

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by August

no really:

i just had a hilarious moment imaging someone "saying" this in a conversation. Lots of facial exercise!

This will make reading posts a lot more fun (<<see!)

[Yahoshua]

Originally Posted by August

Neither am I.

If you're not crooked are you squiggly or curly?

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

If you're not crooked are you squiggly or curly?

I'm bent to the left.:p

[shadow701]

You need to HAVE credibility before you can actually lose it. 24/7 coverage of Anna Nicole Smith and Paris Hilton doesn't seem like news to me.

[Yahoshua]

Most of the news networks back in the day (read: the 1960s') actually had something decent to put out on the air. But with management changes, the number of foreign correspondents and related funding dropped through the floor. So not much REAL news was being put out for the public since around 1983.

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

Most of the news networks back in the day (read: the 1960s') actually had something decent to put out on the air. But with management changes, the number of foreign correspondents and related funding dropped through the floor. So not much REAL news was being put out for the public since around 1983.

Yea but really whos fault is it anyway? I meet so many people that are blatantly ignorant that it just makes me sad. You can disagree about politics all you like but to be totally unaware of the basic functioning of your country or world on a dialy basis is just... sad.

The integrity of the press itself is mostly sound. There are plenty of excellent reporters out there collecting information, the real difference is whether the execs choose to show it. So the majority of people let it be like this by being ignorant. If they made the effort to just read the news by digging beyond the front page and finding different sources then they'd know that CNN is crap and not watch it or lobby it to clean itself up. But people can't be bothered it seems.

How many times has someone told me, "its just too hard to think about that stuff".

[Heibges]

I think it is scary just how prophetic Farenheit 451 turned out to be. People would rather sit around watching "I Wanna be a Millionaire" or "American Idol" than think about important issues.

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by Heibges

I think it is scary just how prophetic Farenheit 451 turned out to be.

Hey buddy. You got the numbers wrong.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by shadow701

You need to HAVE credibility before you can actually lose it. 24/7 coverage of Anna Nicole Smith and Paris Hilton doesn't seem like news to me.

I agree 100%.
Aside from the inevitable bias that any news org will likely have, the two big TV news networks, CNN and Fox, both fail miserably. CNN, as shadow pointed out, devotes way too much time to celebrities and dog-bites-man stories. It's pathetic, who cares about Michael Jackson or who is the father of Anna Nicole's baby? CNN can go days without updating the news from Asia and North Korea. CNN will run a piece on the price of gas but they never mention the rig count or refinery outages. CNN just plain sucks. And Fox new is worse, at least in the presentation. I like the right leaning bias, it gives me something balance the left bias from most other news orgs. But geez, their production values are terrible, all glitter and flash, something that looks like the E! channel. And their website... IMO, both are just a grade above tabloid journalism.

In my eyes, CNN has a liberal lean, FOX has more right lean. NPR, which I listen to about 2 hours each work day, is pronounced left. NYT have discredited themselves so frequently I won't even rate them. Washington Post, WSJ and Economist, which I consider the elite news sources, are slightly left, right, and pretty neutral, respectively. You can't go wrong with Post, WSJ, Economist, Guardian, and Christian Science Journal, and NPR on radio. NPR is almost tree-hugger left, but they do very good investigative journalism and they cover their stories throroughly.

I used to tune into Rush occasionally, he makes some good points and used to be capable of keen insight and good analysis, but he has degenerated over the last ten years into a rather ordinary showman. Usually in the noon timeslot I listen to Jim Rhome, he's great.

[moose1am]

Source of this so called news? Fox maybe or G Gordon Liddy or maybe Rushbutterball is an idiot limbaugh?

Hillary was right... there is a vast right wing conspiracy that's designed to take out the Clintons. This is most likely the same people that shot Bobby and Robert and Martin.

Radical Right Wing Zeolots like Dick (breaking the law) Cheney! Or should I say dick "shotem in the face " Cheney.

This story is about a stupid at they come.

CNN is the only news organization that's not totally controlled by the Right Wing Military Industrial Complex . It's only appears to be uncontrolled by these people. The rich own and control the media and don't let anyone tell you different. Because it takes big money to control the media and the Clintons don't own Disney or GE. But you know who does don't you?

Originally Posted by August

So i other words the Clintons are going to control CNN opinion polls ahead of Hillarys run for the oval office?

And they say the Republicans are crooked.

[moose1am]

The "slant" or Spin started with this thread and this leading stupid question on the title of this thread. Balance is achieved when it's pointed out that Fox news is run by a former Republican Operative Roger Ales who use to be in charge of the National GOP HQ. He's like G Gordon Liddy or close to him.


[QUOTE=The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

Didn't take long to slip in the slant, did it?

[moose1am]

That's because the Regan Appointed Supreme Court Justices voted to Repel the Fairness act for the media. That's when the media really started to show it's bias.

If not for this supreme court decision 5/4 we would not have FOX news at all. They would have to be fair and balance and they defiantly are not fair or balance right now.

We all have the freedom of speech but Speech directed to the masses over the air waves is controlled by the government or should I say MONOPOLIZED by the Rich.

Now if anyone or everyone could broadcast over the airwaves then we would have a better democracy. When only certain people have that privilege it creates problems in this county.

Mass Media via TV or Cable TV and Radio is too powerful to be a monopoly. That's the main problem with this country. It's why we are at war and nobody does anything about it. We didn't sit down for the Vietnam war because the media was force to be fair and to tell both sides of the story equally and to give equal time to both sides of the story. That's not longer being done thanks to the GOP appointed Supreme Court Justices appointed by Regan, and the Bush(s). Unless these conservative GOP judges die early we will be stuck with them for the next 50 years or more.

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

You're saying current news networks don't cover Iraq in a negative light? Some certainly do.

I'm not saying that any news channel carries the truth more than any other. They just market to different people. You can hear whatever news you prefer by changing the channel. The media as a responsible service doesn't exist anymore for the most part.

PD

[FIREWALL]

[quote=The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

Didn't take long to slip in the slant, did it?

THAT WAS POSTED BY P FUNK.

Avon Lady your useally VERY accurate on your posts.

Watch it young lady or i"ll give you a spanking. :rotfl:

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

THAT WAS POSTED BY P FUNK.

Avon Lady your useally VERY accurate on your posts.

Watch it young lady or i"ll give you a spanking. :rotfl:

Has your phone been ringing incesantly all weekend? :p

Me bad. Original post fixed.