Is the Media Trustworthy?

[-Astoria-]

I find it interesting watching the polls gradually move from "kinda" to maybe, straight to rarely then peaking at absolutely "no". Yet people hardly source info after it is spoon fed to them. Most media unless posted by a minor is politically motivated even if the statement is simply about your favorite comic book site or where to get the most tasteful nudes. Its all a matter of perspective until you've seen it in at least 4-6 different angles of Dissection.

As for myself I use Ground news to cover a wide range of articles covering the same news or topic.

Isn't that a paid service? I've seen several Youtubers shilling it- I'd rather just do research and digging manually. Gives me a better grasp of the situation overall.

Can confirm: it is.

[Greater Cesnica]

Isn't that a paid service? I've seen several Youtubers shilling it- I'd rather just do research and digging manually. Gives me a better grasp of the situation overall.

Can confirm: it is.

F

[Theodores Tomfooleries]

Depends, though I will say that whoever controls the media will be the one who controls the nation.

[Luziyca]

There are bias, there are exaggerated headlines, and there are outright fabricated news. Always choose your sources carefully, fact-check and cross-examine wherever possible.

This.

"The media" is too broad of a term, and ditto with "mainstream news:" I can trust the mainstream news in my country, but if I were American, I wouldn't trust some mainstream news outlets (e.g. FOX News), though I would trust others.

[Senkaku]

As for myself I use Ground news to cover a wide range of articles covering the same news or topic.

Jesus, are they doing native advertising even here now too? Their tidal wave of YouTube sponcon is already bad enough, it'll be so interesting in a few years to see how many minds have been totally poisoned by this model of for-profit offshoring (off-skulling, I guess?) of the media criticism & analysis that you should be doing for yourself. It's a world-historic tragedy that literacy among Americans is so low, basic research skills are so poor, and understanding of media criticism is so surface-level as to leave a market niche open for nasty little organizations like this to prey on people's thirst for good analysis. What are the political views of the current owners, and do you really think tech founders at a company that size aren't thinking about their pathways to acquisition by a larger company? Why would you expect some shitty mercenary content aggregator to help you form a clearer picture of the world? I honestly find them more disgusting than any propaganda outlet, especially the fact that by doing so much native YouTube advertising they're pretty nakedly trying to prey on kids and get them started young on the idea that understanding political and cultural biases in different media can be as simple as paying a subscription to an aggregator and turning your brain off.

In any case, the discussion of "media" in this thread so far seems as uselessly broad as it is naive; I'm going to offer sacrifices to appease McLuhan's uneasy spirit since I'm pretty sure you're all making him upset.

[Eastern Kansas]

As always, follow the money and you will usually find your answer.

Some news is definitely more legitimate than others (NPR and PBS over Fox News and CNN) but its still worth to know that you are always being fed a slant no matter what. The direction of that slant is usually easy to find out by seeing who owns and operates the network. If you are aware of the slant you are being fed at any given time and a good bullshit detector to go with it, any news is safe.

[Shamhnan Insir]

Yes, the media is trustworthy as long as you know how to approach the subject in hand. You have to learn how to take an objective view and understand where your source is coming from first. That's the key. Even if that means you have to swallow misguided pride and identify your own biases first. Once you have done that then you can start engaging the media properly.

You will not find all the answers upon reading one source. So take your preferred source and contrast it with reading a take from a different source along whatever spectrum your subject focuses on. That's one of the saving graces of scientific publication. Whilst it is not perfect, and things do occasionally slip through, it is peer reviewed and assessed in order to judge its quality and worth. (I could go into why scientific publication is also fucking horrible in its current form, but that is a digression...)

[Athrania]

CNN is a joke. BBC is a joke, Fox is a joke. Aljazeera is fairly good. The Economist is alright.
Like your diet, your consumption of media should be varied and divers. I even read Haaretz, Time of Israel and Jpost from time to time, despite my views on Israel.
Healthy skepticism and frankly doubt is necessary these days. Always confirm a story before believing it.
At the same time, not everything is a conspiracy; but it would be just as ridiculous to claim there are no conspiracies.

[Stylan]

I find it interesting watching the polls gradually move from "kinda" to maybe, straight to rarely then peaking at absolutely "no". Yet people hardly source info after it is spoon fed to them. Most media unless posted by a minor is politically motivated even if the statement is simply about your favorite comic book site or where to get the most tasteful nudes. Its all a matter of perspective until you've seen it in at least 4-6 different angles of Dissection.

As for myself I use Ground news to cover a wide range of articles covering the same news or topic.

Nice ad.

[The Second Order of Life]

Depends. Let's talk American news sources: they're trash all around. As a non-american I'm fucking shocked by how sensationalised and hyperbolical american news outlets tend to be. That being said, let's talk about a truth about journalism: every news source is biased. That doesn't mean they're evil, that's just the nature of human journalism. News outlets have a limited time to spend talking about an infinte array of topics, and the ones they choose to talk about will obviously reflect their bias. There is a difference, however, in showing your bias through mild editorial trickery and actively spreading misinformation and falsely presenting arguments to enamour your audience (Fox News).

I find that right-wing media tends to be a lot more actively disingenuous than any other, as they rely on uncanny amounts of fact-bending argumentation to even try to sound coherent. This goes off the rail in extreme right-wing outlets like Infowars, where facts are pretty much null. What I recommend is just careful viewing. Listen to biased sources which don't actively spread false news, and pick apart your opinion on the things they show based on what you already know about that source and your own private research on the matter. It's important to not form your opinion in real time, though, as that can lead to situations where you accidentally end up searching things up to confirm what you've already seen on the news. Keep an open mind, but be very aware that anyone that compares Fox News with CNN and others is fundamentally misunderstanding their type of shtick. CNN is editorially biased, Fox News is lying, outright. One of them tries to report on facts, the other will branch off into a 15 minute segment about how the next moral panic of the month will doom America or some bullshit like that.

[Juansonia]

And is that leftist establishment in the room with us right now?

he's a satire account, pretty damn obvious

Floofybit doesn't seem to be a satire account.

[Jedi Council]

Depends on the media outlet. Its always good to fact check and question the angle of any given piece of news.

As a Canadian, I am shocked by the state of some of our news outlets (looking at you, Post Media) but then I look down South...

[Apocalyptic Haven]

Depends. Let's talk American news sources: they're trash all around. As a non-american I'm fucking shocked by how sensationalised and hyperbolical american news outlets tend to be. That being said, let's talk about a truth about journalism: every news source is biased. That doesn't mean they're evil, that's just the nature of human journalism. News outlets have a limited time to spend talking about an infinte array of topics, and the ones they choose to talk about will obviously reflect their bias. There is a difference, however, in showing your bias through mild editorial trickery and actively spreading misinformation and falsely presenting arguments to enamour your audience (Fox News).

I find that right-wing media tends to be a lot more actively disingenuous than any other, as they rely on uncanny amounts of fact-bending argumentation to even try to sound coherent. This goes off the rail in extreme right-wing outlets like Infowars, where facts are pretty much null. What I recommend is just careful viewing. Listen to biased sources which don't actively spread false news, and pick apart your opinion on the things they show based on what you already know about that source and your own private research on the matter. It's important to not form your opinion in real time, though, as that can lead to situations where you accidentally end up searching things up to confirm what you've already seen on the news. Keep an open mind, but be very aware that anyone that compares Fox News with CNN and others is fundamentally misunderstanding their type of shtick. CNN is editorially biased, Fox News is lying, outright. One of them tries to report on facts, the other will branch off into a 15 minute segment about how the next moral panic of the month will doom America or some bullshit like that.

What they have in common, in spite of their different approaches is this: both are paid stooges for corporate interests and the military industrial complex, which wants more war, lower taxes, massive spending cuts, and a greater inequality of wealth. Republican media just takes a different twist to it and adds an extra layer of cruelty toward minorities and marginalized communities than does Democratic media.

[Apocalyptic Haven]

Depends on the media outlet. Its always good to fact check and question the angle of any given piece of news.

As a Canadian, I am shocked by the state of some of our news outlets (looking at you, Post Media) but then I look down South...

Does Canadian media still have the freedom to question Trudeau these days or has he done away with that? He seems a bit heavy-handed with political dissent these days, so I have to wonder.

[The Second Order of Life]

-snip-

What they have in common, in spite of their different approaches is this: both are paid stooges for corporate interests and the military industrial complex, which wants more war, lower taxes, massive spending cuts, and a greater inequality of wealth. Republican media just takes a different twist to it and adds an extra layer of cruelty toward minorities and marginalized communities than does Democratic media.

I don't necessarily disagree with this take, I just dislike comparing both of them on equal footing. Right-wing media is inherently more dangerous and harmful, it actively corrupts public discourse.

[Swaraelia]

Media from the leftist establishment can never be trusted.

The existence of a leftist establishment is false.

Though leftists make up a huge number of journalists and organizations, we are part of the resistance against the American Taliban, who want to ban abortions.

Both this comment and that sig make me believe your entire account is a really bad strawman.

[-Astoria-]

The existence of a leftist establishment is false.

Though leftists make up a huge number of journalists and organizations, we are part of the resistance against the American Taliban, who want to ban abortions.

Both this comment and that sig make me believe your entire account is a really bad strawman.

Because it is; and a very flimsy "parody" at that.

---

What they have in common, in spite of their different approaches is this: both are paid stooges for corporate interests and the military industrial complex, which wants more war, lower taxes, massive spending cuts, and a greater inequality of wealth. Republican media just takes a different twist to it and adds an extra layer of cruelty toward minorities and marginalized communities than does Democratic media.

I don't necessarily disagree with this take, I just dislike comparing both of them on equal footing. Right-wing media is inherently more dangerous and harmful, it actively corrupts public discourse.

And also has a far wider reach compared to any left-wing outlet out there.

[Ridicolandia]

It's hard to believe everything that you see around.

People doesn't buy newspapers anymore, so publishing is dying: what is making it survive it's the clickbait, and this is pushing forward to the rise of a dishonest kind of "information" that I really fear. I noticed that some well known huge companies are now investing in news: how can I believe to the fact-checking if the world is so much money-centered? For the greatest part of my life I avoided to watch TV and I preferred to inform myself on internet, but it's been years now that I don't trust neither it. I don't trust anything, neither what I see; and it's like to be blind in Plato's cave... but this is just the personal opinion of a man full of prejudices, and I don't believe even myself: I might be wrong.

That's how I trust comments online. Be ever on the watch.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

The so-called Turkish media called A Haber is completely insecure because political Islamists always lie.

[Life empire]

Media from the leftist establishment can never be trusted.

The existence of a leftist establishment is false.

Though leftists make up a huge number of journalists and organizations, we are part of the resistance against the American Taliban, who want to ban abortions.

the existence of the "american taliban" is false

though right wing sources make up a resistence against the overly ignorant left wing would-be-dictators

Media from the conservative establishment can never be trusted.

Though I can quite happily listen to sources such as CNN or HuffPost, I prefer to listen to my favorite online bloggers.

Media from the leftist establishment can never be trusted.

Though I can quite happily listen to sources such as FOX news, I prefer to listen to my favourite... Geometry Dash video creators?

mostly based opinion don't know much about the very last bit so I won't speak on that

[Great Britain eke Northern Ireland]

I typically view the media as untrustworthy, for several reasons:
- the media is by and large in the hands of a few corporate conglomerates, and thus is favourable towards the owners’ interests;
- the media is an integral actor in the Europhone (and especially Anglophone) culture war, and may be argued as being institutionally biassed against indigenous peoples, including Europeans;
- the media, as a business model, is inherently biassed to publishing sensationalist stories and articles that generate clicks and readings rather than publishing important information for citizens’ own benefit;
and media’s own ties with governments and governments’ control over media, exploiting their business, allows governments to manipulate headlines and access to information, which makes them, in many cases, propaganda offices and machines for governments (this goes for state-controlled media like Russia’s and China’s, except in those cases, the matter is much more openly propagandistic while it’s more subtle in the West).

[Big Bad Blue]

The Media is far, far more trustworthy than those who attempt to demonize it for their own purposes.

[Kubra]

Depends on the media outlet. Its always good to fact check and question the angle of any given piece of news.

As a Canadian, I am shocked by the state of some of our news outlets (looking at you, Post Media) but then I look down South...

Does Canadian media still have the freedom to question Trudeau these days or has he done away with that? He seems a bit heavy-handed with political dissent these days, so I have to wonder.

All media has the right to "question trudeau". Many papers exclusively do only that.

[Soviet Socialist Kazakhstan]

I typically view the media as untrustworthy, for several reasons:
- the media is by and large in the hands of a few corporate conglomerates, and thus is favourable towards the owners’ interests;
- the media is an integral actor in the Europhone (and especially Anglophone) culture war, and may be argued as being institutionally biassed against indigenous peoples, including Europeans;
- the media, as a business model, is inherently biassed to publishing sensationalist stories and articles that generate clicks and readings rather than publishing important information for citizens’ own benefit;
and media’s own ties with governments and governments’ control over media, exploiting their business, allows governments to manipulate headlines and access to information, which makes them, in many cases, propaganda offices and machines for governments (this goes for state-controlled media like Russia’s and China’s, except in those cases, the matter is much more openly propagandistic while it’s more subtle in the West).

And it made up horrible lies about Corbyn to keep him out of office.

[Great Britain eke Northern Ireland]

And it made up horrible lies about Corbyn to keep him out of office.

Corbyn is a Kremlin tool, a friend of terrorists, and a hater of British heritage and history. I don’t care at all for him.