I don't go out of my way to listen/watch the news, but I catch it with the radio on at home or in the car, and DW has the TV on, so the news will come on from time to time.
The local news does provide some stories of interest. I get what others are saying about "tuning out" as there is so much noise in what passes as 'news'. However, friends and family tune into this, so if I don't keep up somewhat, it can be tough to follow a conversation.
Here's the approach I've taken lately: If I see a headline that I think is important, or that others will be commenting on, I may decide to try to find some source information on the topic. For example, rather than watching the newscast of what was said at some event, I'm often able to find the original unedited video of the event itself. Then I can hear the info direct from the "horse's mouth".
I'm almost always shocked at how biased the reporting is. In a recent case, I watched an event where the speaker spent two minutes praising someone for their actions and assistance, but then followed up with "of course, there is still so much more to be done". Well, the only part that made the evening newscast I saw was "there is still so much more to be done." Leaving a totally negative impression.
Even the headlines and 'lead ins' are biased. They don't say
"And so and so did this today.", but it's twisted with
"And so and so, among a storm of controversy, did this today.",. Or "and this proposed change, which is going to hurt such-and-such group...", instead of just telling us about the change, and letting us decide if/who it hurts? The "news" has become editorialized. And then they try to layer a blanket of authenticity on it by labeling themselves "Fact Checkers". But that's bogus, I've seen different sites come up with different decisions on True/False - then it is not a fact. And the bias is obvious if you look for it.
And to be clear, I consider all sites to have bias, that's why I try to find source documents.
There was discussion about Brian Ross a ways back. I hardly see where a 4 week suspension solves anything. What are they doing to assure nothing like that ever happens again? Show me systemic changes, not a slap on the wrist to one person - who has done it before!
If news organizations had any integrity, Brian Ross would be hung out to dry, with a full investigation of who was involved in letting these fake stories get released. And Brian Ross should never be hired by any news agency again, ever - find a different line of work Mr Ross. You blew it in this one.
So the fact that all he got was a suspension tells me they are not serious, and as I check source documents I keep getting proof of it. It's rampant.
I find that if you get the economist and read it it does a decent job. ...
Thanks for the reminder, I need to stop by the library more often and catch up. They do seem to hold to a standard, I can't even say that of the BBC anymore.
-ERD50
