How biased is the media really?

[Skaldia]

I believe all forms of media have been biased to some degree since its inception.
I think it's gotten worse since the rise of the interwebz and the obliteration of newspapers.
Most of broadcast cable Media (CNN, MSNBC, Fox, CBS, etc) are so biased it's unreal, and I've stopped watching them.
Instead, I get most of my information from a plethora of sources while trying to keep from becoming echo chambered by listening to decidedly left leaning sources to even dipping my toe into far right sources (the scant few left that is).
The truth is, as ever, somewhere in the middle.

[The Lone Alliance]

The media has gotten biased mostly in the sense that it's gotten lazy, the media isn't really a monolothic bloc, it's more like there's a handful of reporters who report and everyone else just lazily copies off their paper while adding in whatever op-ed that supports said Journalist's personal political views.

A lot of the older class of investigative journalists are becoming a rare breed partly because now they risk getting canceled for investigating the wrong things.

That leads to the other reason reporters don't stick their neck out anymore if they do some hard hitting piece and some identity group on the left or right gets triggered they're out of a job.

[Postauthoritarian America]

Facts have a liberal bias.

[The Sherpa Empire]

It's gotten worse over the past years because a new generation of activist type joined en masse the ranks of journalism. People who have a different ethos, mindset and background than previous generations of journalists.

^This.

I don't watch a lot of TV, so I wasn't totally conscious of it when the change started, but I am struck by it when I turn on the news now. Different outlets have different spin, but across the board they are getting more opinionated and less informative. Fox News is some Nazi-level bullshit, but CNN has started getting bitchy and propagandized too. And the whole discourse around race issues, from all sources, is just weird and toxic.

[Bombadil]

Biased news is not fake news. Unless a news outlet decides to outright fabricate an event, normally it will report its own perspective of the event. In such cases, the reporting can be biased, but ultimately still true (at least in the core facts). It is up to you to disseminate the reports and decide whether this is the full representation of the facts, or some context is missing. In the end, though, calling a news article which you disagreed with "biased" is a lazy deflection. Since news is made by humans, and humans are biased, all news is biased anyway. Either refute the evidence presented, or provide missing context, or go.

The media is, surprisingly, not a monolithic bloc full of propagandists. There are networks that I consider to be very credible and least biased, such as AP, Reuters or C-Span. When my appetite craves for more deep analysis or Op-Eds into the content, context, or potential ramifications of an event, I seek for outlets that do better in this regard. Guess what? They are biased, because humans made them. And I don't mind that since I already know what I'm going for, I'm here to gain new insights into the problem.

There's a distinction to be made between news and media overall. Mostly the news isn't biased and, mostly, the majority of media lift the news direct from AP or Reuters.

There's bias in the selection of news, and there's certainly bias in opinion. Jon Stewart long ago noted that FOX makes news from it's opinions.

Each outlet has its own particular biases. NPR one way Fox the other.

No, FOX is specifically bad, and went fully down the crazy train.. link

At some point after the 2008 election, something changed with my friend Roger Ailes. I once met him in New York during the Obama years to plead with him to put a leash on some of the crazies he was putting on the air. It was making my job trying to accomplish anything conservative that much harder. I didn’t expect this meeting to change anything, but I still thought it was bullshit, and I wanted Roger to know it.

When I put it to him like that, he didn’t have much to say. But he did go on and on about the terrorist attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, which he thought was part of a grand conspiracy that led back to Hillary Clinton. Then he outlined elaborate plots by which George Soros and the Clintons and Obama (and whoever else came to mind) were trying to destroy him.

“They’re monitoring me,” he assured me about the Obama White House. He told me he had a “safe room” built so he couldn’t be spied on. His mansion was being protected by combat-ready security personnel, he said. There was a lot of conspiratorial talk. It was like he’d been reading whacked-out spy novels all weekend.

[Odreria]

why they always lying

[Free Ravensburg]

why they always lying

Yellow Journalism helped the US get most of its overseas territories.

[Cannot think of a name]

Biased news is not fake news. Unless a news outlet decides to outright fabricate an event, normally it will report its own perspective of the event. In such cases, the reporting can be biased, but ultimately still true (at least in the core facts). It is up to you to disseminate the reports and decide whether this is the full representation of the facts, or some context is missing. In the end, though, calling a news article which you disagreed with "biased" is a lazy deflection. Since news is made by humans, and humans are biased, all news is biased anyway. Either refute the evidence presented, or provide missing context, or go.

The media is, surprisingly, not a monolithic bloc full of propagandists. There are networks that I consider to be very credible and least biased, such as AP, Reuters or C-Span. When my appetite craves for more deep analysis or Op-Eds into the content, context, or potential ramifications of an event, I seek for outlets that do better in this regard. Guess what? They are biased, because humans made them. And I don't mind that since I already know what I'm going for, I'm here to gain new insights into the problem.

This post made me almost want to cry as I was hate reading everyone's canned bullshit one liners and then this...this actual acknowledgement of the more complex realities and even simply stated. I'm done with the thread now. I mean, stupid canned one liners that completely misrepresent the issue and make people feel good as they continue to fuck up basic media literacy will continue, but this shining light will still be on the front page and I don't have to die inside.

[The United Remnants of America]

We're missing a fundamental fact here.

They're companies that run at a profit.

Regardless of your media. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Red State, NYT etc. Almost every news network and news media entity in the United States is first and foremost a for-profit company, and a news distributor second.

They need to make the news "interesting" to draw in an audience to watch to generate advertising revenue. This is where this bias exists, as they can target viewers as a demographic market.

You could go to the extreme and say it's a propaganda campaign led by the corporate elite, but in my opinion, that's a touch far. In the end, though, they're still soulless companies looking for the one thing any company needs: Profit margins. They don't really care whether the news they give to you is unbiased or 100% factual, so long as you click their article or watch their talk show so they make money off of your viewership.

C-SPAN gets a pass, though.

[Zurkir]

I believe all forms of media have been biased to some degree since its inception.
I think it's gotten worse since the rise of the interwebz and the obliteration of newspapers.
Most of broadcast cable Media (CNN, MSNBC, Fox, CBS, etc) are so biased it's unreal, and I've stopped watching them.
Instead, I get most of my information from a plethora of sources while trying to keep from becoming echo chambered by listening to decidedly left leaning sources to even dipping my toe into far right sources (the scant few left that is).

Same here.

[Odreria]

The truth is, as ever, somewhere in the middle.

That's not how truth works, no.

[Skaldia]

The truth is, as ever, somewhere in the middle.

That's not how truth works, no.

Forgive me for making an absolute statement. Let me correct it:
The truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
As most Americans would agree, I won't say the right or left in the American political system are always correct in their political motivations or that they are the sole arbiters of unvarnished truth.
But that is neither here or there.
The topic of the thread is discussing biased media.
Which, from most of the comments I've read, seem to agree that it is indeed biased.
Whether that be for profit or pandering to a certain demographic or to push a certain political narrative is irrelevant.
The question now would be, what happens next?
Well, ratings for most cable news appear to continue to decline, given way to a plethora of independent media. No longer does the fourth estate rest solely in the hands of a few corporate conglomerates. Now this has a positive and negative impact on the dissemination on information and we are already beginning to see the repercussions and response from old media and big tech.

[Nilokeras]

Facts have a liberal bias.

omg what's it like back in 2008, time traveler guy

[Page]

The conservative vs. liberal thing is just a performance and it's irrelevant. The real bias is the bias in favor of the neoliberal capitalist world order.

[Kubra]

I tell ya what when folks say media bias is worse today well I only have a few words for em
REMEMBER THE MAINE
TO HELL WITH SPAIN

[Royal Frankia]

Controlled by financial interests that have vested interest in stoking racism, class war, bigotry, and what have you among the proles while they loot the country 8 ways from Sunday.

[Engadine Mcdonalds 1997]

It depends on where you live really, some countries might at least have the façade of a balanced media ecosystem, but other countries might have the entire media bag out one of the major parties while sucking up to the other big party. An example of that would be here in Australia, where you have Rupert Murdoch in one corner with Sky News and basically the vast majority of the newspapers (he actually owns all of the newspaper corporations in Queensland, just a little fun fact), Peter Costello (who was a former treasurer under John Howard) with Nine/Fairfax and their tendrils, and finally the ABC who is just stacked with LNP goons all the way to the top. What media conglomerate actually supports the ALP? None, the closest you will get is David on Channel 7 in the mornings giving the ALP some props, but that's about it really.

[Roegerland]

Laughably so, going one way or the other depending on the agency in question.

The days of actual journalism are dead.

This.

[TotalitarianHellhole]

Here is a fun experiment: Go to a major news website and see where the writers got their college degrees.

[Kubra]

Here is a fun experiment: Go to a major news website and see where the writers got their college degrees.

Ok
what do I do if it's Columbia

[TotalitarianHellhole]

Here is a fun experiment: Go to a major news website and see where the writers got their college degrees.

Ok
what do I do if it's Columbia

Ivy League: +5
One that nobody gives a crap: +1

[Kubra]

Ok
what do I do if it's Columbia

Ivy League: +5
One that nobody gives a crap: +1

Well should it go
Ivy league...?: roll a 1d6 for value
I mean it's Columbia

[Ifreann]

Saw a meme that rather sums up my feelings. Journalists in 1990: I'm feet away from grenades and gunfire, if these soldiers spot me I'm dead. But It's worth it to get my story. Journalists now: An anonymous source told me that trump said bing bong near a Chinese restaurant in 1970. When will white men admit all his supporters are nazis!?

Remember in 1990 when an American journalist was murdered and dismembered by the Saudi government?

Wait, no, that was 2018...

[TotalitarianHellhole]

Ivy League: +5
One that nobody gives a crap: +1

Well should it go
Ivy league...?: roll a 1d6 for value
I mean it's Columbia

I wasn't trying to make this a game lol, I'm just saying that the media has a very elitist composition.

[Comfed]

There’s a spectrum of bias, from “cherry-picking events” to “misleading portrayal” to “outright lies”.