I've been observing the media lately. Conspiracy theorists always tend to point to the bias in the media as to why people are under the control of this false left right dichotomy. So I've been watching it to see how these ideas are true, and, I'm starting to see the same things they see. These people in the media don't report the news. These people report opinions. Their job is to commentate on the news. Their job is to feed you a false reality.
I wanted to ask you what you think their motive is. Is it politics? Is it that they have power? Is it motivated by the dollar as some suggested? These people don't even hide their biases. They impose their opinions as fact. What causes these crooks in the MSM to keep doing this when they know they're not reporting the news accurately? What do they gain?
Are these people really controlled by the state? Do they work single-handedly with the state? What is their objective?
Opinions sell. People are stupid - today's news is complex. They don't want purely objective reporting. They want the conclusions, not the evidence by which to draw their own. You'll notice this trend is not politically biased. There are media figures that cater to the right; others to the left. Some are modestly libertarian, while some are unrelenting statists.
Another key is that the media needs the government's approval to operate effectively. If the media cannot access political arenas, such as presidential press releases and Q&A, they cannot serve the consumer as well as those who can. Their reporting is late or inaccurate and they cannot ask the tough questions. Also, the FCC has some power over broadcasting, which feeds back into the media.
Next, corporations have discovered buying up news media can shield them from public opinion. Whether they are "exploiting" foreign labor (Disney) or handsomely benefiting from government subsidies (GE), they have an interest to deflect possible boycotts, etc. Taken to the extreme, any government policy that can be sold as aiding the public good, while actually being a racket for such companies, will be encouraged in whatever manner. Thus, you have the mantras about the virtue of regulation, green energy, etc.
I find this is most apparent in foreign policy, especially when a war is in the works. Somehow war can be sold to the right as "kill 'em all" at the same time as it sold to the left as "unfortunate but necessary for humanitarian reasons".
Check my blog, if you're a loser
SilentXtarian:These people report opinions. Their job is to commentate on the news. Their job is to feed you a false reality.
There is no such thing as objective reality, at least as reported or relayed by anyone else. Objective news would be a string of events reported without a lot of adjectives and without any relevant details being left out, in the order in which they came in, with a reference to when they occurred. No one wants that, nor can anyone actually deliver that. No matter how objective anyone tries to be in their reporting, the bottom line is once they make a decision as to what details they will mention and which ones they won't, or what story they will report and what they think isn't worth reporting, or who they will invite in to comment and who they won't, etc., there's bias. For example back when school shooting were all the rage a couple of them were stopped by citizens with guns of their own, or had armed citizens involved and trying to stop them at least. Do you report that? Some news outlets did, many didn't. Was it on purpose? Did they take a news story that they knew was going to inform the gun control debate and consciously leave out the fact that armed citizens were doing good and only report on the ones doing evil? Or, did they honestly not see it as relevant and is everyone who accused them of bias in this regard Monday morning quarterbacking an honest decision that had no malice or alterior motive associated with it?
Why is the news left right biased? I don't think most of it is, not consciously at least. Most news is Big Government biased. But then, so are most historians. In polls of the 'greatest presidents' it's always the activist presidents who win. The news reflects what most people see and think, nothing more. There are certain obvious biases like NPR, MSNBC, and Fox. Personally I want biased news. In the old days newspapers trumpeted on their editorial pages and often elsewhere who they supported politically. At least you knew where they were coming from and could adjust your BS filter accordingly. I think the only thing wrong with modern media is this nonsensical devotion to 'objectivity'. Factual accuracy should be their goal, not objectivity, which is impossible anyway. And they are not being paid to feed us false information to keep us cowed and sheepish. They are feeding us what most people want, that's all.
The sad fact of the matter is most people are sheep, and as such the news delivers. There are more intellectual outfits out there, they have a commensurately smaller market, because the right half of the bell curve isn't as big a market as the left and the middle.