I don’t know if Rupert Murdoch will fire Glenn Beck or not. I don’t really care. I think it is a bad thing that Fox News exists, and Murdoch isn’t going to eliminate the network. What difference does it make that Beck is airing there when the rest of the lineup is only marginally more sane? In fact, I find their less openly partisan broadcasters to be more pernicious because they are more likely to deceive the unwitting with their dishonest style of reporting.
At this point, I am beginning to be put-off by MSNBC’s coverage for the same reasons. They are buying ratings by foregoing any sense of impartiality. I don’t want my media to pretend that both sides of all political debate are equally valid when they’re not. But I don’t want my media slinging bullshit for any particular partisan end. They should be fact-checking everyone, regardless of which party they belong to.
I agree that the media should fact-check everything – even and ESPECIALLY on the opinion shows. I don’t consider any of the MSNBC shows news shows – they’re all opinion shows. I like some, like some of them quite a lot, and watch them religiously. But if I want just straight news, and sometimes I do, I turn to CNN or even network national news.
I think what’s horrible has been the labeling of opinion shows like “hannity and colmes” as “news” or as “fair and balanced” when it is anything but.
I could do without opinion shows on news networks.
I could do without news networks. they are all on cable, that means, even if they did a good job, they are only viewable by a portion of the population, allowing the broadcast networks to ignore the news.
I watch Rachel Maddow because I know it mixes news with slant. I also know her info is more reliable than Fox, or for that matter, most broadcast news.
When I want “objective” news, I read the BBC website.
Maybe truth in labeling, with them being called “opinion networks”?
But everything is opinion at some level. When Charles Gibson reads the news for ABC there are dozens of stories that are not read. That’s editing. You get a story about Afghanistan, but it was filmed with US soldiers standing around with weapons. Don’t think that that didn’t influence the story? Don’t think that most people who see that story don’t take that into consideration? You don’t get a story from Unocal’s boardroom about their long-term pipeline strategies in Central Asia. You don’t get Russian spokespeople talking about their plans for competing natural gas pipelines.
Think about all the months of stories about the ruthless Iranian Jew-hating Holocaust-denying Islamic dictators’ stolen election and hardly a tweet about the Afghan election, or any of the muscle and criminality behind that.
And that’s just editorial decisions made on a single story on ABC. And it’s always been this way. Cronkite read pretty much what was put in front of him, and if he were a radical who saw through the lies he probably wouldn’t have been around to announce that Vietnam was a lost cause.
“History is a series of agreed-upon lies.” – Napoleon Bonaparte.
The question isn’t so much that people on TV are lying, it’s which ones you allow yourself to agree with.
There is no equivalency between the crazies at Fox and what is shown at MSNBC…
Anyway, the boycott seems to have some impact, even overseas:
UK supermarket pulls ad from Fox News over Beck
You know, I agree that there isn’t perfect equivalency. But I’ve seen Olbermann and Maddow doing things recently that are just as biased and unfair as I see on most Fox programming.
KO’s spiel is occasionally getting a bit tired. I think Rachel is simply excellent and she lets opposing views on her shows and then lets them hang themselves without resorting to nastiness. I can’t see that she is fact-challenged at all.
I actually wish Oberman would get more political and give up on the Enquirer-style celebrity crap. The “Worst Person” thing is definitely past its shelf date, too. Agree on Maddow — it’s insulting to compare her to the Fox Fonies.
Right now my favorite is the new guy, a CNBC transplant called Dylan Ratigan who was explaining this morning that we’ve entered into “corporate communism”, where the corporations get the safety net and the working people get to pay for it. Powerful vision.
I saw your earlier comment on Ratigan; when is he on?
It’s a morning show called Morning Meeting. 8 am central around here. I hope they move him to nights soon.
Love Dylan. Too bad his show is on during the day. (I am retired so no problem for me.) It is almost worth taping to watch at night if you are a political junkie.
I don’t always agree with him, being of progressive leanings, but I always find him interesting and informed.
Love Rachel. Some nights, get a little tired of Keith.
Olbermann has been an insufferable ass for a long time. I stopped watching him right after the election. But I agree, Maddow is superb.
I rarely watch them, but I really doubt that they are just as biased and unfair as Fox, or even close. Fox is an uninterrupted stream of outright insane lies. Unless MSNBC has radically changed in the last few weeks, I think you’re full of it on this one. Unless you have some examples to prove the case.
Absolutely, the evening lineup is all biased on MSNBC ~ but their news division, the updates throughout the day, etc., are pretty fair. That’s where they differ from Fox where it’s just the PR sing of the GOP all day and night long.
I love the BOOMAN but I disagree.
MSNBC evening line-up only exists as a counter to FOX. If Fox were actually a fair and balanced news organization, then MSNBC would not exist.
I am for real news myself but lets not equate FOX with MSNBC. FOX was born after 20 years of propaganda on AM talk radio regarding the so called “Liberal Media.” Of course there was no such thing as a Liberal Media but constant sniping from the right about it gave it traction in the media/politico establishment and FOX news was born.
I think any rational person on the left, including Olbermann and Maddow themselves, would agree that it would be better to not have a FOX or MSNBC as they are today, but as long as FOX continues to mislead, MSNBC is one of the only outlets to continuously call out the BS on FOX and its a full time job.
Lets be careful about equating MSNBC to FOX because as long as there is a FOX we need MSNBC. FOX goes away so does MSNBC. Do you think if MSNBC goes away so does FOX?
Inasmuch as there are no longer authoritative speakers who can declare truth about objective reality I would prefer all media outlets to be overtly partisan – then we can sift what they say according to their declared bias. As it is the media have to portray the position of objective impartiality when that is rarely the case – if you have no opinion about that which you are reporting then you’re probably not qualified to report on it in the first place.
That’s the key – overtly partisan, not pretending to be “fair and balanced”. I could take it if they changed their name to “GOP News” and were listed as “GOP” in the TV Guide.
The fundamental problem here is that the news media aren’t primarily news media; they’re a platform for selling advertisements. At the end of the day, they’ll do whatever they think will attract the most viewers, period. Unless and until quality journalism attracts more viewers than bread and circuses, the current state of affairs will only continue, and probably worsen along the way.
I’d like to say that I have a solution for this problem, but I don’t. Or rather, I do, but it would take generations and be fought tooth and nail by the combined forces of bullshit of all conceivable varieties, and that is to produce an educational system that instills in its pupils a firm grasp of logic, a flair for recognizing and resisting rhetoric, and a broad and aggressive sense of skepticism. And if you can think of a way to simultaneously drive stakes through the hearts of religion, politics, and capital, you’re a far better man than I am.
We’d better not lose old fashioned newspaper reporting. This from the New York Times:
Good reporting. No sensationalism. Just useful information. Sneer at The Times all you want. But ask yourself how many places reporting like this comes from.
Don’t have cable, still can’t get my digital tv to work (not that I’ve put any effort into it) and have gone back to reading the print edition of the NYTimes – love the photojournalism (especially the international) and in depth articles about all kinds of things.
McChrystal should remember that these are his recommendations and not his orders to Private O’bama. What an ego.
This is how media has been for the vast majority of of American history. The 60s-70s were an aberration, a noble experiment maybe, but that experiment has failed. Partisan news sources are the future and it’s up to individuals to learn enough or think enough to read between the lines and think critically.
BTW, the CEO of Stardock Games (who has enlightened DRM ideas) now has his company boycotting UPS because of their boycott of Glenn Beck. They have switched to FedEx.
I completely agree with this post.
I love Rachel M., but I phoned in a complaint a few weeks ago when a story she covered left out some information that was pertinent to the story (but interfered with the point she was trying to make). I told the person who answered the phone, “Don’t turn into FOX!”
But they have.
If I want the most unvarnished information via broadcast media, I’ll watch NewsHour and BBC.