News Blindspots

They are opinion shows, like our hosts show. Not hard news reporting.

There is no such thing as “hard news reporting” at the national level.

It exists, but it’s not popular because it doesn’t validate ones own bias. People like to hear stuff they agree with and a lot of outlets spread disinformation, some more nefarious than others.

Not at a national level.

Yes, CNN, The New York Times, and other outlets from the left have spent the last four years reporting fake news about the Russia-collusion hoax. Their reports from “credible sources” frequently ended up being false rumors, Russian disinformation, or simply fiction that they later were forced to retract. At the same time they have effectively ignored the attempted coup by Democrats and their allies in the surveillance agencies.

For example, here is a list of retracted and bungled stories from CNN:

My opinion is that the unending stream of fake and grossly biased reporting was a major factor in the 2018 congressional elections. Is that election interference?

Is a false rumour the truth?

Yet, you admit to reading Breitbart and Zerohedge. Why do they get a pass?

1 Like

Yes, but it is not illegal interference. Both sides do it.

The gunfight at the OK corral was basically fueled by Tombstone’s two papers, the Epitaph and Nugget.

Interesting topic.

I’m not sure people even want the the truth.

Witness the current occupant who literally lies on a daily basis. Not just the normal spins from politicians that we are used to, but huge obvious unnecessary ones like like signing a ‘full and complete’ health care bill yesterday, etc.

His supporters accept it. Unfortunately, now the bar has been set. Supporters of the next Democratic president have carte blanche to do the same. The end of the cycle is truly frightening.

Another example. My sister swore there were blackwater type mercenaries in Portland. I checked her link and was some sketchy thing from India. It only took me about 5 minutes to debunk it but it still took work.

It’s hard work to get news. One has check the source itself, then check story with multiple sources, hopefully from different perspectives. Then it will probably turn out to be not quite as beneficial to ones favorite side and thus not give us the little shot if endorphins we crave. It’s so much easier to accept the story at face value.

What seems completely inexplicable is some of Trump’s lies such as when he claims that his father was born in Germany. What possible reason or advantage is there for him to do that?

A Rhodes scholar, with a PHD in political science.

Compared to a cultist science denier.

The mother of all false equivalencies.

Well played. for the gullible.

1 Like

The scary door that’s been opened is something like the Democrats believing ANYTHING their president says because judges.

This true, but to fair, she is quite biased to the left. She is not news, she is political commentary.

1 Like

They are all commentary. There is no straight news at the national level.

The mother of leftist conspiracy theories and hysteria.

Ted Bundy had academic credentials too.

Yes, but some is better than others. Again, one has to go to multiple sources. Fox news is one check every day…the web site not the video channel. That goes for others as well. The video channels are worse.

1 Like

Disagree. Muted televisions in a gym don’t constitute a bubble. Facebook circles and YouTube recommendations are the default bubbles.

And infowars is right up there with New York Slime and Washington Compost.

Give us example.

There is always a grave danger when the bulk of the “news media” is clearly biased politically.

A “Free press” is not essential to liberty, a “Free and Unbiased Press” is essential to liberty.

Politics corrupts virtually everything it touches.