Media Tracker (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    SaintForLife

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    7,313
    Reaction score
    3,404
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    I figured we needed a thread specifically about the media.

    There was a very big correction recently by the Washington Post.


    That story was supposedly "independently confirmed" by CNN, NBC News, USA Today, ABC News, & PBS News Hour. How could they all have gotten the quote wrong if they actually independently confirmed the story?






    Why do all the errors always go in one political direction and not closer to 50/50?
     
    Good article
    =========
    My vision for addressing the huge decline in local journalism involves hiring 87,000 new journalists for about 1,300 news organizations with more than $10 billion in funding.

    Such a massive investment in local news isn’t going to happen next week and probably not next year, either.


    But it is also not a pipe dream.

    There is a growing recognition that the collapse of local news and information is a crisis undermining the United States’ politics and communities.

    Ten billion isn’t much money for the United States to spend on something the nation defines as a crisis. Millions of dollars are already being pumped into reviving local journalism, although right now that’s largely limited to a few major cities such as Chicago and Philadelphia.


    Where would the $10 billion and all those reporters go?

    There are five principles for local news that can and should be implemented as widely and quickly as possible: news outlets in communities across the country; more outlets with a well-defined, transparent point of view; coverage that is free for everyone; a lot of in-depth reporting available in multiple formats; and news organizations that are nonprofits…..

    So, here’s the solution. The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with about 760,000 people. We need at least one 100-staffer news organization in every district. Some of those districts aren’t a single community or city. And districts, of course, change every 10 years.

    But if there were well-staffed news organizations in 435 distinct geographic areas around the country, that would result in a huge increase in journalism, particularly places that are now “news deserts.”……

    In-depth, multiplatform.

    Local newspapers once did a lot of in-depth reporting but they have laid off tens of thousands of reporters over the past two decades due to declining revenue. Local TV still has high profits but never really had a tradition of in-depth reporting. This is a huge problem.

    It is essential that local news organizations have beat reporters and investigative teams who do real scrutiny of the police, schools, politicians and other centers of power in each community. These organizations should also cover major business and cultural news……

    Free. Anyone born after 1985 has lived in a world where at least some news was on the internet for free. It will be hard to get them to pay for it.

    When I visit college campuses, students chafe at the very idea of paywalls.


    Paywalls often result in the journalism with the most rigorous reporting and editing (like that of The Post, the Times, the Wall Street Journal and many local newspapers) reaching a paying audience that is upper-income and older, while younger and less wealthy nonsubscribers can’t access important stories they might otherwise read.

    Once you graduate from high school or college, journalism is one of your primary sources of education, particularly about policy and government. Walling off this information might be good economics, but it is bad civics……

     


    Yes Mitchell thinks she still lives in a time before newt took control.

    Btw similar to other media figures blaming dems for policy failures. And like Pete buttigieg pointed out....why are you letting the 50 repubs be excused for 2 dems not falling in line???
     
    MT15 said:
    Also-WaPo ran a story on the Yemen genocide in June of this year, the NYT in September. The BBC did in March. It’s not on the top of the news cycle, but it is being covered. Various human rights groups have it on their home pages, Al Jazeera covers it more extensively, which makes sense.

    Always seeing a conspiracy. It’s a rotten way to go through life.
    Click to expand...
    You found 2 articles from the US corporate media. Yeah that shows thats it's being covered 😆. BBC and Al Jazeera aren't the corporate media.

    Do you ever stop and wonder why the media largely ignores that horrible genocide that the US is enabling?
     
    SaintForLife said:
    You found 2 articles from the US corporate media. Yeah that shows thats it's being covered 😆. BBC and Al Jazeera aren't the corporate media.

    Do you ever stop and wonder why the media largely ignores that horrible genocide that the US is enabling?
    Click to expand...
    You got a big heart for the people of Yemen. You should join the Peace Corps.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    You found 2 articles from the US corporate media. Yeah that shows thats it's being covered 😆. BBC and Al Jazeera aren't the corporate media.

    Do you ever stop and wonder why the media largely ignores that horrible genocide that the US is enabling?
    Click to expand...

    Stories being covered does show that they're being covered. Gold star for you.
     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    Stories being covered does show that they're being covered. Gold star for you.
    Click to expand...
    The New York Times says they publish around 200 pieces of journalism each day. Does one article out of approximately 73,000 pieces each year qualify as covering it?

    Do you have any comment on the US support for the Saudi genocide?
     
    SaintForLife said:
    The New York Times says they publish around 200 pieces of journalism each day. Does one article out of approximately 73,000 pieces each year qualify as covering it?

    Do you have any comment on the US support for the Saudi genocide?
    Click to expand...
    Is this what you're talking about?

    DAYVP56XgAET46m
     
    SaintForLife said:
    The New York Times says they publish around 200 pieces of journalism each day. Does one article out of approximately 73,000 pieces each year qualify as covering it?
    Click to expand...

    Yes. That's literally the definition of news coverage.

    SaintForLife said:
    Do you have any comment on the US support for the Saudi genocide?
    Click to expand...

    I don't support genocide, period. Of course, this is all I've said about it, which means (by your definition) that I haven't said anything. What a conundrum...
     
    I didn’t say those were the only articles on Yemen, there were more from earlier in the year. Those were the most recent articles. Twisting it around to say those were the only articles is not accurate.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    It seems like it's almost impossible for some of you guys to respond without mentioning Trump. I'm well aware of the relationship we've had with the Saudi's for multiple presidential administrations.
    Click to expand...
    And it's almost impossible for you to do anything but rant and complain and regale us with whatever happens to be on Greenwald's substack at the moment. Any independent thoughts? Any solutions? Any candidates you like?

    Or are you are going to predictably pull the lever across the board for the GOP in November like 80% of the rest of the residents of Madisonville? And don't counter with 'ERMAGERD URR GUNNA VERRT DERMMACRAT SO DERP DERP DERP.' That's not a substantive response.

    The 'I'm not a Republican but all I do on here is critique the Democrats' schtick is getting old. And it's not that the Democrats are beyond criticism. They do a lot of moronic things... which I've actually noted myself on these forums. But the Glenn Greenwald/Tim Pool/Tulsi Gabbard act... nobody is buying that, dawg.
     
    Last edited:
    More of Carlson’s idiocy, he’s such an “everyman” he thinks that McMuffins are actually muffins. 🙄No, he’s no landed gentry elite, lol. His full name is Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson, each one a surname of wealth and privilege from his lineage. Proof that as financial dynasties age, the offspring get more and more rotten.

     
    SaintForLife said:
    It seems like it's almost impossible for some of you guys to respond without mentioning Trump. I'm well aware of the relationship we've had with the Saudi's for multiple presidential administrations.
    Click to expand...
    And yet the Trump administration was front and center.

    Followed by LIV golf playing 3 of its events at? That's right, Trump properties.

    But your topic was Ukraine, right?
    Or was it Nordstream? Did your boy pontificate on who cut the fiber communication lines off coast of France? Was it the US too?
     
    SaintForLife said:
    It seems like it's almost impossible for some of you guys to respond without mentioning Trump. I'm well aware of the relationship we've had with the Saudi's for multiple presidential administrations.
    Click to expand...
    That's all very interesting. I'm quite happy and pleased to be the exceptional exception around here for having responded to you without mentioning him.

    I don't want to make a big deal of this but I do kind of wonder if you're aware that in responding to me you were "mentioning Trump."

    :)

    If you will note I still haven't mentioned him. I quoted you mentioning him, to avoid doing that.

    ;)
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom