Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

When you are reading an impactful article

Keep in mind that most reporters don't understand things any better than you do.
CountScrofula · 41-45, M
You can find good old fashioned reporters working a beat who are actual world experts in something but that's from a bygone age and its mostly just awful. I'm embroiled in a mess that's in national newspapers and the misinformation is -wild-.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@deadgerbil Thank you for the question but it's necessarily a long story.

The Guardian, which is our primary liberal news source has a heavy anti-left bias. It is anti-Conservative and also has some genuine left writers (Gary Younge/Owen Jones) buts its editorial line is very much in favour of the Labour right and outright hostile to the Labour left. There is even e book article dedicated to this and here is an extract, if you have time:

https://novaramedia.com/2017/01/08/how-the-guardian-changed-tack-on-corbyn-despite-its-readers/

In terms of outright factual inaccuracies, the Guardian had an article claiming left-wing and Corbyn supporting activists 'bullied' MP Stella Creacy by harassing her and intimidating her for voting to bomb Syria. I literally knew the people involved and they merely posted letters on her MP office door with anti-war messages. This is a group of hippies and students but was depicted as an angry violent mob.

As for the BBC, some on the right in our country depict it as 'left-wing' because it is a publically-funded broadcaster. TBF, its international coverage is pretty decent but its domestic coverage is clouded by the fact that it is stacked with Tories and has New Labour (Clinton Democrat) types as its outer-most left.
Laura Kuensberg, the chief political editor, clearly takes a centre-right line and is hostile to the left.

Unfortunately, a lot of Labour voters trust the BBC and Guardian and believe their coverage unquestioningly.

The American mainstream, media does lean centre-left and has slightly higher standards of objectivity. The UK print media is owned by Conservative oligarchs (like Murdoch). The parts that don't, take a right-leaning view of centrism and have a thermo-nuclear hostility to anything to the left.

Partly because our ruling elite is based in one city (London) and they literally all know each other. Laura Kuensbery, Jonathan Friedland and Boris Johnson go to the same dinner parties. In America, the southern and rural sections of the ruling class genuinely do despise the liberal elite. The extremism of Trumpism maybe allows the American liberals (like Nate Silver) to sometimes make common causes with the Bernicrat left because they hate the right so much.

I know this is a long reply but I could talk about this MUCH more. LOlz.
deadgerbil · 26-30
@Burnley123 the long reply is appreciated since your political commentaries are of quality.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@deadgerbil As are your's man. I have skin in this game because I have been part of the (ultimately failing) Corbyn project as an activisist irl. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist but I've seen so so much cynical shit happen with my own eyes.

I agree with Count when he says:

[quote] Their identification of symptoms is as good as anyone else, their diagnosis of problems is insane.[quote]
Heartlander · 80-89, M
:) agree ... their role is not to inform or educate, but to move the air around and prevent stagnation. Even if it's just hot air they are moving.
ElRengo · 70-79, M
Specially true with scientific journalism.
@ElRengo I also tumbled to the fact that both headlines and articles are NOT designed to educate, and may only marginally relate to what the science folk said.

 
Post Comment