Is the Media Trustworthy?

[The Republic of Covelandia]

The Media, Something that most humans use in their every day lifes, but is it trustworthy? if you didn't know but apparently 6 in 10 americans dont trust the media, because its to 1 sided is this a problem?
Please explain your answer.
(Mainstream Media and News Media are what we talking about)

[Free Algerstonia]

the only media i can trust is infowars and sometimes newsmax

[Jabberwocky]

"The media" is rather vague. Any medium? All media? Only news media? Social media is arbitrary and whimsical. You might have to define your terms.
But then, I don't "trust" media. You have to be able to read between the lines.

[The Republic of Covelandia]

"The media" is rather vague. Any medium? All media? Only news media? Social media is arbitrary and whimsical. You might have to define your terms.

Mainstream News

[The Fist of Liberalism]

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.

[Floofybit]

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?

[Kerwa]

You should be skeptical of everything you read except maybe reference tables, even then…..

If it’s on tv, the radio or streams it can be ignored.

And only rely on stuff that is available in hard copy. Electronic stuff has a habit of changing or vanishing.

[The Fist of Liberalism]

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.

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.

[San Lumen]

I think it’s trustworthy depending on the source. Abc, cbs and pbs my three main sources are all very reliable and trustworthy.

[German Territories]

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?

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

[Tangatarehua]

Generally, no I don't but nor am I inclined to believe that all media is lying or part of some terrible conspiracy (I can usually watch the news without having to put tinfoil on my head).

But I absolutely recognise that most outlets claiming to be neutral are in fact biased and usually (though not always) skew toward the liberal-left due to fact that most journalists these days come from affluent urban backgrounds and attended liberal universities (whereas historically, journalism was a blue collar profession).

I further recognise that journalists are human and therefore susceptible to human error and that most TV journalists aren't actually journalists but simply people who learned how to look good in front of a camera.

There's also the very obvious problem that most media these days tends to editorialise and present opinion as fact, which further erodes trust.

The best solution I've found is to ignore outlets claiming neutrality (they never are) and instead I try to read both openly left-wing and openly right-wing sources and draw my own conclusions from the evidence either side presents.

It's not ideal, but it's the most workable way I've found to sift fact from opinion.

[Picairn]

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.

[Hirota]

I don't trust anyone blindly. Picairn is right to encourage cross examination.

[Korwin]

Although US mass media overwhelmingly skews right-wing and unapologetically capitalist, it is my experience that the reason why people are hostile to journalists and media organizations is because they're upset that their misbehavior and abuse of power is being exposed.

For the most part, the reason why an entire political party has made it their impetus to discredit mass media is because they don't want to be held accountable to their corruption and their full embracing of fascism.

[Merriwhether]

My overriding principle is that you can't trust anybody talking about politics whatsoever to be speaking truthfully or in good faith. At the end of the day, everybody gets their nonsense from somewhere, and it would be naïve to trust the faceless authors of their talking points or the emotional-intellectual origins of their ideology. It's no different to me than denying the infallible truth of the Bible; Somebody wrote it, and that somebody cannot be shown to have perfect knowledge of anything. So I'll hold the opinion I hold because I trust myself and my judgment above anybody else.

In other areas such as philosophy, or science, there's objective, demonstrable truth. But in politics, there is nothing. It is the intellectual epitome of Hell. I'll hear out political arguments and opinions over participating on all but the rare exception such as this, and I'll decide as it unfolds whether I'm doing it for entertainment or insight.

[Ostroeuropa]

No. You ought not trust the media, unless they wear their bias and agenda on their sleeve, in which case you can engage with their content as a rhetorical argument for a cause. Media that presents itself as "Just presenting the facts" or "Taking no sides" is behaving dishonestly from the outset and can be disregarded. They are attempting to stymie discussion, by framing what is taking place as "just facts" for a political agenda that disrespects other persons rights to have differing views. You ought not trust anybody who says "Anybody who disagrees with what i'm about to say is insane or stupid, it's just the facts bro." and then rattles off race IQ stats divorced from context as one example, and then devotes most of their efforts into demonizing "The dumb people who don't understand the facts" while framing opposition as "Misinformation" while appealing to their own authority continuously rather than actually engaging in a discussion.

They are bad faith political actors and should be marginalized.

If they come out there and like some content producers just open with "I'm a social democrat and here's why I think that's a good thing" then you're going to have a more fruitful engagement with them. The reason the media doesn't behave that way is that there are sets of dominant hegemonic ideologies in society and the adherents to those ideologies want to control the media entirely as a power play, and if they were forced to be more honest then every news segment on television would open with;

"I'm a neoliberal feminists and-" or "I'm a christian fundamentalist and-", at which point people would rightly point out "There's a lot more views than those two quite unpopular ones. Can we get some other people on television?" which would directly threaten the power of those ideological groups. By conflating their views with objective reality and a neutral depiction of facts, they can avoid questions about the piss poor job of representation the media does as well as demonize other ideological perspectives and groups.

They tell you lies and behave dishonestly for a reason, and that reason is their own ideological self-interest. They will tell you "This is '''Newsworthy''', that is not" when what that means is "I give a shit about X, not Y, because I'm a member of an ideology that places value on the one and no value on the other.", which ofcourse would lead people to again ask;

"Where can I find someone who gives a shit about Y to tell me about it?" and that makes them panic for financial, social, and political reasons.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

It's no different to me than denying the infallible truth of the Bible.

Other Religions (Especially Judaism and Islam), Beliefs, Historians, and Scientists: Low Audible Grumbles

[Vistulange]

Let's see, is it trusted?

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a more recent source than 2008 from the American National Elections Study, but I only looked for about five minutes. Let's see if the media is trusted!

So, you know. Yes...ish. But we can do more interesting stuff, like looking at it by race!

My apologies to any colourblind folks out there—I wasn't able to make the colourblind friendly palette work quickly enough—but basically, more of the same.

So, at least in 2008, yes, media (in the US) was considered trustworthy.

Now, if anybody can show me some data relating to 2020 or even 2022, that'd be great, and I'd be happy to replicate the above plots with recent data. Oh, and if you want the R code used, shoot me a telegram. I'm not in the habit of sharing my GitHub here, because I don't want a bunch of extremists doxxing me, so I'll share the code through other means.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

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.

Yep... also avoid sensational or extraordinary claims!

[Durius]

Depends on the country (and from which country). Depends on the media outlet and on their consumers. It even depends on the subject that is being reported.

In my country, media from it are generally trusted. Though unfortunately they seem to be dropping their journalistic standards, they are still quite professional and regarded as objective. On the other hand, I wouldn't say that Russian or Chinese media are trusted in the least (even though they might be trusted in their respective countries, by their respective populations). Opinions of American media might vary, but they are certainly less polarized than American opinions of their own media. It depends on a lot of factors and it's obviously stupidly simplistic to give a simple "yes" or "no" answer.

[-Astoria-]

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?

> CNN
> HuffPost
> "leftist" establishment
To borrow a turn of phrase: lol; lmao, even.

[Torisakia]

No, but I think some media are more trusted than others. For instance, I would be more likely to trust an article from Reuters than I would be to trust one from CNN or Fox. I also think most of these media outlets are just echo-chambers for their targeted demographic, so of course they're going to lie.

[Doomsday Delaware]

I think it’s trustworthy depending on the source. Abc, cbs and pbs my three main sources are all very reliable and trustworthy.

That explains a lot about you. Mainstream media, rightist or centrist (I don't consider the "liberal" media leftist at all) is skewed in favor of warmongering, corporatism, identity politics (both "liberal" and "conservative" versions of it). You're far better off with independent media and some foreign press, at least in countries that don't bully or bribe their media into submission. Just my take. HardLensMedia is a good one, Jimmy Dore most of the time, Breaking Points, Rising, just to name a few mostly reliable outlets.

[Incelastan]

The media is a tool of those with nefarious purposes and interests. They have a sinister agenda, plain and simple.

[The Lone Alliance]

The media is misleading and untrustworthy, though the two wings of media lies are different from one another.
One side misleads by deliberately omitting things that make their side look bad or goes against the narrative, while the other side misleads by piling on bullshit and strawmanning to support their narrative. It's both deception but the technique is different.