Live data from Hacker News

Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them

fortune.com

101–110 of 844 posts

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

#101

There are literal mountains of sociological studies on how (state and corporate) media have been in service of the powers that be, for decades, and how exactly this works. With a mountain of examples. So, for sociologists, this feels like "wow, it only took half a century to trickle through." Though of course this is the wrong reaction; it has always trickled through. Only that, in the past, it took a few years or de…

"But many of the structural pressures that sociologists have long identified shape commercial and state sourced news stories just don't apply to independent journalists, who don't have to rely on continued access state contacts, commercial paychecks, don't have to serve ad revenue and corporate PR aims"

I was with you up until this point. Audience capture and the need to sell ads for brain pills etc. are a huge issue for many independent content creators: at least, the ones who are trying to make it their main source of income.

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

#102
50% isn't much. If you ask people if they believe something obviously false (is Obama lizard?) 5% people will tell you they believe it. If you ask them something that COULD happen (did Biden tried to cover up New Hampshire docks shooting (I just made it up)) 30% will tell you they believe it.

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

#103
post #85
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspire , no, but the emergent behavior is like stochastic terrorism; if everyone in the chain of production places their finger slightly on the same side of the scale, you can very easily end up with a very misleading result. You can produce misleading news by who you don't cover as much as who you do. A current example: https://www.glaad.org/new-york-times-sign-on-letter-from-lgt... ; coverage of trans people is h…

> A current example: https://www.glaad.org/new-york-times-sign-on-letter-from-lgt... ; coverage of trans people is heavily skewed, partly because it's risky being a named source in the paper, or people have had previous bad experiences with the press. So you get lots of articles that don't cover the side from the point of view of people most closely affected. That is a demand from a trans advocacy group. They don't w…

> uncomfortable questions about impositions upon women's rights

The only right alleged is a right to exclude trans women, and consequentially a right to screen all women suspected of being trans.

> and the medical abuse of children

The children in question want to transition, and their parents or the state want to prevent them; defining this as "abuse" without actually listening to the allegedly abused is the problem.

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

#104

There are literal mountains of sociological studies on how (state and corporate) media have been in service of the powers that be, for decades, and how exactly this works. With a mountain of examples. So, for sociologists, this feels like "wow, it only took half a century to trickle through." Though of course this is the wrong reaction; it has always trickled through. Only that, in the past, it took a few years or de…

"But many of the structural pressures that sociologists have long identified shape commercial and state sourced news stories just don't apply to independent journalists, who don't have to rely on continued access state contacts, commercial paychecks, don't have to serve ad revenue and corporate PR aims" I was with you up until this point. Audience capture and the need to sell ads for brain pills etc. are a huge issue…

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/opinion/covid-misinformat... (which of course will be immediately accused of bias, but he's not wrong about the facts of the extent to which those people are funded by supplements)

It's a big problem for the regular press too. Peter Oborne resigned from the Telegraph after they suppressed negative reporting on big advertiser HSBC: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/peter-ob...

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

#105
post #20
post #13

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

Bette yet: half of Americans believe in conspiracies with superhuman coordination and execution capabilities. I’ve worked in a newsroom. The idea that puppet masters thousands of miles away are controlling things is absurd to the point of hilarity. Yes, Rupert Murdoch, etc. But it’s all emergent behavior. There is no master plan. These organizations are not well run enough to deliberately get stories out in time, let…

The most reliable major news source in my view (and no, we're not on cable, cordcutters for years now), is Fox News.

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

#106

Correct me if I am wrong, but this is attributed to Jefferson: "The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers" Makes you wonder who remains to be trusted, the governments are not reliable at all times either in most parts of the world.

He said this (I believe) in the context of the French Revolution. Possibly also as a dig to Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson was most likely advocating for a rounded education that did not rely solely on topical information. He was an ardent supporter of free press and even considered it more important that functioning government.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/jefferson-s-preference-for...

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

#107
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed.

With all due respect, you either don't live in the US or are living under a rock if you feel like you need citation. Denying the US's propaganda machine is like denying climate change at this point. The news corps don't tell flat lies, they cherry-pick facts and events, often reporting them out of proportion to paint a narrative; which is almost as bad as telling flat lies.

I was after a citation for the claim that talking about media bias is correlated with media bias.

You seem to be talking about the general existence of media bias, for some reason.

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

#109
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Fox news is reactionary against progressivism, leftism, etc... but the status quo in the US is pro military, pro oligarchy, pro gun, pro life, conservative, white and Christian. The "leftist" party in the US, the Democrats, can at best be described as center-right, there is no true left with any real political power.

The Democrats are pro-war, pro-capitalism, only nominally anti-gun, pander to the Christians as much as Republicans, and don't even side with labor anymore, as we saw with Biden crushing the railroad workers' strike, which was even supported by supposed progressive firebrand AOC.

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

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in the US, but I usually see a lot of people saying don't trust the news but it's also not as if they are doing any rational thinking about it. And a lot of the times is just because news are not validating their own beliefs so I think it's even worse than just having bad news.

I don't think it takes much rational thought to realize that the news are incompetent at worst and intentionally misleading at best. Even without validating beliefs, there are so many cases of news organizations publishing incorrect or misleading information in a rush to cover a story, only to then issue a silent correction weeks later when the damage has been done. This weakens trust in two ways, first is just peopl…

Data set of one, but the people I met claiming they don't trust the news, all take their news from youtube and random taxi drivers. This doesn't say anything about the news outlets, just about those people and their peculiar ways to "think for themselves".
Post reply on HN