I'm sure that over time there are many inaccuracies in news broadcasting and for several reasons. User error is one thing, not checking facts accurately is another, but there are cases where you have to question editorial integrity. During the Balkan war the same footage of people detained in camps was attributed to both sides of the conflict - in one broadcast they were Serbian, in another Bosnian. Same footage. I think this happens when video footage is sold to the media with dubious origins and the media outlet decides to go with it because it's hot.
News broadcasts
- Thread starter simon1
- Start date
I don't know if NATO politics as a thing exists, but UK politics does, and the BBC is a UK source. Be that as it may, half remember a story where the crew of a Royal Navy ship was outraged at biased Beeb reports back, oh, about a quarter century back, so the question is what political view they wish to present.
This isn't a slur, BTW, the UK being a different country with different attitudes toward things, and if they want government broadcasters, so be it. It does bring to mind the old pirate broadcaster ships that beamed rock into the UK when the Beeb didn't carry it.
Have noticed in the US the old habit of just reading a press release and calling it a day. The same with wire service reports.
Seriously, I am thinking of getting Britbox for all the old Dr. Who episodes. There is too much of a gap between seasons with the modern one- need to kill some time.
Rhody
I'm a Lumberjack.
I have a feeling that posters on this thread are high information consumers of news pointing out factual inaccuracy or mistakes. News people are human too i don't subscribe to a grand scheme that they are trying to trick us
Its the low information voters im concerned about
Its the low information voters im concerned about
Good point - during the Balkan war I knew a fair bit of what was happening since my wife was Serbian and had her network of news. I was in the BBC one day to talk on another issue and I asked a couple of journalists whether their Balkan stories were being "edited" to the Nato line. They said no. The impression I got was that the journalists themselves were so used to working within certain parameters that they continued to do so without thinking. It wasn't that they were distorting news deliberately, it was just they over time they had adapted their thinking to the organisation they worked for.
A mistake is misreporting. That does happen. So does deliberate spin. Some are easy to identify.
A grand scheme? Something Illuminati - like? No. Like-minded individuals and cronyism? Absolutely. They can and have and will suppress one set of facts to present a certain view.
This is not new. Back when newspapers were a going thing, the first thing someone did if they wanted to influence public opinion was to set one up. The only difference now is it's easier to catch them spinning.
Rhody
I'm a Lumberjack.
Not to dump on reporters but much of what you are describing is basic human laziness
Most disturbing trend in "journalism" to me is the deliberate disregard of objectivity.
"So-and-so represents such a grave threat to humanity, there's no need to be objective in our reporting."
Ethics, morals and the fundamentals of what they are supposed to be doing are gone. Truth? "Our truth."
AA
I’ve been reading along, but I figured I would not post... until now.
The media also makes their own news. Case in point... I work in lower Manhattan and recall the Occupy Wall Street crowd. To catch my connection home, I had to walk by their smelly encampment every night. One evening, CNN was there. The reporter and cameraman encouraged a large group of them to get up and follow them. CNN led the group out of the park and into the street. The cameraman was walking backwards while filming them and the reporter was waiving them on while they proceeded to block the street. My bus couldn’t move and we were delayed by 45 minutes until the police could break it up.
CNN’s motto: If there’s no news to report, make your own!
The media also makes their own news. Case in point... I work in lower Manhattan and recall the Occupy Wall Street crowd. To catch my connection home, I had to walk by their smelly encampment every night. One evening, CNN was there. The reporter and cameraman encouraged a large group of them to get up and follow them. CNN led the group out of the park and into the street. The cameraman was walking backwards while filming them and the reporter was waiving them on while they proceeded to block the street. My bus couldn’t move and we were delayed by 45 minutes until the police could break it up.
CNN’s motto: If there’s no news to report, make your own!
+1!!
I think they borrowed that from William Randolph Hearst, who said to Frederic Remington, his reporter in Cuba who told Hearst that all was quiet and there would be no war, "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war."
Yes; they were all forced to read a Sinclair script, so many viewers were angered by the Pravda-esque daily broadcasts. They stretch the credulity of a dim child.
AA
AA
So very astute of you. Self censoring by unwittingly toeing the company line. How many other professionals in other fields sacrifice their personal standards by giving up pieces of themselves everyday without even knowing it. I think I saw it in nursing, hope I never did it. Doubtful, but who knows? I can say I was fired once for being "too patient oriented", I kid you not.
- Thread starter
- #95
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
Yup, yellow journalism has been around for a loooong time. I think today it is called Fake News. Even the news outlets that used to be respected seem to now be doing it for one reason or another. You can't believe anything you hear or anything you read.
Yellow journalism and the yellow press are American terms for journalism and associated newspapers that present little or no legitimate well-researched news while instead using eye-catching headlines for increased sales.[1] Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion.[2]
In English, the term is chiefly used in the US. In the UK, a roughly equivalent term is tabloid journalism, meaning journalism characteristic of tabloid newspapers, even if found elsewhere. Other languages, e.g. Russian (Жёлтая пресса), sometimes have terms derived from the American term. A common source of such writing is called checkbook journalism, which is the controversial practice of news reporters paying sources for their information without verifying its truth or accuracy. In the U.S. it is generally considered unethical, with most mainstream newspapers and news shows having a policy forbidding it. In contrast, tabloid newspapers and tabloid television shows, which rely more on sensationalism, regularly engage in the practice.[3]
Similar threads
