When did YOU realize the media was biased?

[griz]

I knew that they had outright lied and been caught at it, but for some reason assumed those incidents were outliers. (no pun intended)  But the first time it slapped me in the face was the early 90's under the Clinton administration.  While the main stream media begrudgingly admitted there was evidence he lied, sexually harassed women, and perjured himself, they always had the tone of "but he's OUR guy so it doesn't matter". 

[kgbsquirrel]

I don't really have a singular moment. I never paid much attention to politics or the goings-on in the greater world until the mid 2000s during the Iraq war. At that point I was spending a lot of time in a patrol vehicle listening to El Rushbo. While he was obviously biased, he was effective in pointing out the bias of the main stream media too. Since then I've moved entirely to reading the internet for my news. I think getting news from the TV (or internet videos for that matter) is just a bad idea, people's brains seem to disengage and they just absorb whatever the talking head says. Radio isn't quite as bad but I still think reading is by far the best way to engage the grey matter and think critically about what's being fed to you.

Spot on.

[fifth_column]

I think it's obvious that TV/movies/the entertainment industry drives popular culture.  People constantly chat about what happened on the currently popular TV shows, make references to jokes in movies, imitate popular SNL skits, whatever.

Being naturally paranoid, I recognized a long time ago that this influence was not necessarily organic in nature, i.e. it was possible that some over-arching organization could subtly direct that influence.  I used to think of it as an unlikely possibility, an artifact of my paranoid imagination. 

It was shortly after 911 that I decided, despite my paranoia, that in fact there has been a conscious, organized attempt to manipulate US culture via the entertainment industry.   The US government has had a hand in determining what Hollyweird produces for nearly a hundred years. 

TV news departments have been part of that manipulation ever since broadcasters started using the news as a revenue stream.  It's gone from "If it bleeds, it leads" to "If it will influence people's opinions in the direction we want them to go, it leads (and if we have to make it bleed also, so be it.)"

It's no surprise to me that people would want to have the same control over the internet.  The internet started as a great level playing field, but there's no way it could have stayed that way. 

[Ron]

Sort of media related, I read that wikileaks just released a big file drop.

[Ben]

Slight tangent, but I thought this was a very "in your face" example of current media bias and manipulation. It hasn't been two months since these exact same people attacked ACB for being a mother and having a job (not to mention the bashing of the other women mentioned in the link). Now it's rare and brave because democrap:

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2020/12/15/kayleigh-mcenany-and-others-let-nyt-reporter-know-female-biden-staffers-who-have-kids-and-an-intense-job-arent-alone/

[MechAg94]

Slight tangent, but I thought this was a very "in your face" example of current media bias and manipulation. It hasn't been two months since these exact same people attacked ACB for being a mother and having a job (not to mention the bashing of the other women mentioned in the link). Now it's rare and brave because democrap:

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2020/12/15/kayleigh-mcenany-and-others-let-nyt-reporter-know-female-biden-staffers-who-have-kids-and-an-intense-job-arent-alone/

I think that is one of those examples of the media pushing their bias without any memory of what they or others have already said.  This person good, write glowing article on something.  This person bad, write scathing article on something.

[Ben]

I think that is one of those examples of the media pushing their bias without any memory of what they or others have already said.  This person good, write glowing article on something.  This person bad, write scathing article on something.

And another one:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2020/12/16/are-they-trying-to-rewrite-history-media-and-democrats-fete-pete-buttigieg-by-doing-their-damnedest-to-erase-richard-grenell/

[Ben]

Now that the election is over, there's no need to "be thoughtful" regarding your tweets. Mission accomplished.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2020/12/16/go-figure-twitter-announces-functionality-is-returning-to-the-way-it-was-before-now-that-the-election-is-over/

[Ron]

I wonder percentage of the population looks at twitter or facebook?

In some aspects focusing on the impact of social media distracts from the real problem.

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and FOX.

Not just the "news" divisions either.

[Ben]

I wonder percentage of the population looks at twitter or facebook?

In some aspects focusing on the impact of social media distracts from the real problem.

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and FOX.

I have to strongly disagree with you here, Ron. I truly believe that social media is becoming a much bigger problem than the MSM, because they "control the means of production" so to speak in that they control what gets into the Internet to a large degree.

I recognize myself as in a very small minority of the population that doesn't participate in Twitter and Facebook, and even so, I'm still currently sucked in by Google, who also wants to manipulate what I see and how I think on a daily basis.

I can judge the MSM for myself when I hear what they say, but you can't judge what Twitter, et al, forbid you from seeing.

[Ron]

The problem does stretch across all platforms. They all speak with a unified voice supporting the same narrative, ignoring all the same alternative stories.

Lately, I've just observed that among non politically engaged normies that the mainstream media still seems to be the baseline source that everyone accepts as representative of what is going on.

I guess it would be unwise for me to downplay the impact of social media. It may be that I'm just not of the generation that uses it exclusively.

[Ben]

Local example: For months, the local liberal papers have been publishing ZOMG headlines about the record daily China virus infection rates being broken. Suddenly, now that 46 is in, they are reporting daily headlines like, "Over 700 patients presumed recovered for Dec 16th."*

So doom and gloom to, "Everything is going to be okay!"


*Also, these numbers are not chronologically accurate to begin with. I was called by state health to follow up on my bioweapon infection three weeks after I mostly recovered, because the state simply doesn't have the personnel needed to do timely follow-ups. Not their fault, but it skews those numbers if "recovered reported today" might include a month long date range of recoveries.

[French G.]

I think you are right.  But they've turned it up to 11 for about a month now.

Any AP front page on Trump and the election you struggle to find words that are not adjectives. I feel like the editorial page has higher standards.

[MechAg94]

Part of the problem is many people just browse headlines.  My personal email is a yahoo/AT&T account.  Their headlines are so biased and sensational to the point they are lies.  If you don't realize that, you might get an odd picture of things. 

[MechAg94]

I wonder percentage of the population looks at twitter or facebook?

In some aspects focusing on the impact of social media distracts from the real problem.

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and FOX.

Not just the "news" divisions either.

I think Twitter exposure is pretty small.  Facebook is a lot bigger.  I have no idea how many people pay attention to news on those sites.  I used twitter to follow Trump and a few others.  I have drifted away from it now.  IMO, if they actually kick Trump off like some are saying, they will die on the vine.

[Nick1911]

I wonder percentage of the population looks at twitter or facebook?

In some aspects focusing on the impact of social media distracts from the real problem.

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and FOX.

Not just the "news" divisions either.

[RoadKingLarry]

Of course "fake news" isn't anything new.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-02-10-mn-1335-story.html

[MechAg94]

It is difficult to avoid youtube if you want gun video content.  There are alternatives, but few content creators post on the alternate sites at the same time.  

[Unisaw]

Oh, 1975/1976 or so...

  Like Mike, in the mid 1970s.  However, only recently have I caught on to the bias that manifests through what is covered and what is just ignored.

[TommyGunn]

Of course "fake news" isn't anything new.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-02-10-mn-1335-story.html

And 81 years earlier .....