Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 844 posts

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#91

Post by RivieraKid »

kneebonian wrote: post #88
RivieraKid wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an example from the last year how CNN deliberately misled? How often does that happen? My view is that serious news organizations clearly don't deliberately mislead but they have some amount of bias and contain inaccuracies as a result of low-quality reporting. And I think the perception of "MSM" which is common among the group of people which includes Elon / libertarians / MAGA fanatics / alt-right is ob…

I said it farther down but I'll say it again. What possible justification could there have been for 2 weeks of continuous news coverage on covefe?

High interest in that topic and therefore more ad impressions.

(Assuming you're right that there was non-stop coverage, I don't know.)

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#93

Post by k1m »

elil17 wrote: post #13

Better headline: half of Americans don't know that (many) news organizations deliberately mislead them.

Noam Chomsky - Manufacturing Consent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTBWfkE7BXU

Full documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li2m3rvsO0I

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#94

Post by haskellandchill »

nivenkos wrote: post #78
haskellandchill wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only real investigative journalists these days - Edward Snowden and Julian Assange That's insulting. There are thousands of investigative journalists doing real work every day. Do some research: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigative_journalism > Seymour Hersh His recent story was very sketchy, but he has always spoken against the establishment. The government has been smearing him since 1969.

My point was that in the past journalists in general supported him and were against the establishment. Whereas if Watergate happened today they'd just say it's justified against Russian spies or something.

Should journalists just blindly accept his work? There are numerous flaws that he won't respond to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh#Nord_Stream_sabo....

There are better examples of what you're saying, not saying your point doesn't have merit, just that Hersh is a bad example.

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#95

Post by CharlieDigital »

gtmitchell wrote: post #4

Because, to first approximation, this is true. Every organization, every person has their own biases and agenda. I'm not sure why Americans believe that objectivity in news reporting is even possible. Other countries don't seem to have as much of an issue with this, since you typically have news sources that are either owned directly by the government or are published by political parties.

Triangulation is the best strategy to approximate the truth and counter biases/agendas.

Works best when you get news from sources that are not tightly connected.

For example: NYT (American) + NPR (American) + DW (German) + Aljazeera (ME) + Reddit (people "on the ground").

Different financing/revenue models, different ownership, different continents, different cultural biases and norms, different perspectives.

Nothing is perfect and free from influence, but the broader one's consumption, the more angles one can work with on a particular topic.

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#96

Post by __jambo »

This is very old news. The encyclopaedia Britannica article on the subject says a good propagandist knows the mainstream news are untrusted, and will target their audience through receptive channels, like influencing family or social groups.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda/Media-of-propaga...

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#97

Post by tootie »

nivenkos wrote: post #16

They do. The only real investigative journalists these days - Edward Snowden and Julian Assange - face life in prison and exile. Even Seymour Hersh has been smeared to discredit him now he dared speak against the establishment. It is not journalists' role to be a mouthpiece for the government, but to challenge it.

Hersh was extolled for speaking against the establishment. He was smeared for promoting outlandish claims with extremely thin sourcing.

And neither Snowden nor Assange are journalists at all. Snowden stole some docs and Assange runs a wiki. Assange also collaborated with Russian intelligence.

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#99

Post by tootie »

nokcha wrote: post #2

Highly relevant: https://AstralCodexTen.substack.com/p/the-media-very-rarely-...

Bad take. For one, any time you try to evaluate "the media" as a single entity, you've already failed. Secondly, the first example of "not really lying" is most definitely a deliberate lie.

Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

#100

Post by dfxm12 »

didntreadarticl wrote: post #54
RivieraKid wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first approximation is: a typical journalist working at a serious news organization has some amount of bias but at the same time tries to be objective. So it is approximately false, they don't deliberately mislead. My threshold for "serious news organization" is that CNN gets there, Fox News doesn't.

American news organisations are all paid for by advertisers who have a vested interest in the status quo

It's hard to take this comment at face value when the content on CNN and Fox News is so different. I wouldn't really argue against CNN being interested in maintaining the status quo, but Fox News is reactionary.
Post reply on HN