Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them • Hacker News Board

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

#351

Post by BurningFrog » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

soco wrote: post #110

dotnet00 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

If a youtube video shows a reality that the news denies or doesn't report, that should make you trust the news less.

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

#352

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #234

bigger_inside wrote: post #47

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…

I think it's interesting that this is a highly upvoted comment considering it leans on sociology as an academic study as a source of truth for its claim. The social sciences have long been harangued by HN for not being "real science", but I've seen exceptionally little pushback to the claim above. Why is this? [To be clear I actually agree that sociology is the appropriate academic descriptor regarding the study of w…

At least to me, it seems people push back on sociology claims that focus on individuals or member groups, not so much on organizations like companies. Part of this I believe is due to the personal nature. Part is because it can be seen as stereotyping, or has poor study design.

This particular example is playing both sides in a generic way. Half the people say "oh yeah, Fox spreads BS", while the other half is saying the same about NBC. If they called out one or the other, it just turns into a shitfight.

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

#353

Post by brewdad » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

mjr00 wrote: post #284

MrMan wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The actual news on Fox News, i.e. not Tucker and the rest of the talk shows, is not fake news, even remotely. Absolutely has a conservative bias, but not to the extent it would qualify as fake news. It's even listed on Wikipedia a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Per...

When the shows that draw the most eyeballs and are aired at the times most people are watching news at all, the morning shows and prime time, are almost entirely made up of half-truths and outright lies, I think it's fair to say Fox is an unreliable source.

Fox and Friends and Tucker Carlson are lying to viewers every day.

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

#354

Post by kneebonian » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #256

soco wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Try this experiment: Read old news for a while. You’ll quickly learn not to trust the news. Not because it’s wrong – it’s pretty factual for the most part – but because it keeps trying to make you care about the wrong things. Whipping up an emotional reaction to matters that don’t affect you. Ignoring large elephants in small rooms. Talking juuuust slightly past the core issue hoping you won’t notice. Much of news, e…

The quote is from the book Pre-suasion by Robert Caldini, he points out that what we focus on will elevate the importance of whatever is focused on.

This is part of the reason I don't trust the news, because they all are focusing on the same things for a few weeks and then it drops never to be heard from again. Some examples

When Trump met with Kim Jong Un everything in the news media was about North Korea for weeks, it was painted as the vital question of our times that was a clear and present danger to democracy. 3 years into Biden I have barely heard anything about NK.

Another exmaple is oil prices, does anyone else remember during the Bush years how the oil prices dominated everything in the news and the Middle East was the most important region in the world, to the point that we supposedly went to war in Iraq over oil? Yet when it was hitting $5-6 a barrel I wasn't hearing anything about it. Or how many of us have heard anything on Iraq or Syria since ISIS?

You can look for countless examples but even if it isn't outright lying by choosing what to focus on the media already sets an agenda.

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

#355

Post by HDThoreaun » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

barbariangrunge wrote: post #262

ss108 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Seeing footage of Trump supporters and speaking with them is sufficient to expose them as bad people You just classified 46% of voting Americans as bad people, as if they have no other motive than to do evil. I didn’t like him either, but give me a break and try to let go of that media narrative. His supporters were just people. Both sides have outspoken nut jobs stealing the spotlight

Mask off, at least 46% of Americans are bad people. Most people in every country are chiefly interested in furthering their own goals.

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

#356

Post by Retric » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

tgv wrote: post #295

bigger_inside wrote: post #47

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…

This is such a black and white spin. First: I don't know which sociological studies you refer to, but most of it is politically colored arm chair philosophy. These insights didn't come from sociology, but from political movements. Second: there's a difference not providing a full picture of a war or a new economic policy, and outright lying. I expect news organizations to provide me with the basic info: incomplete, b…

The most valuable asset of a new organization is trust, and thus they are often bought as propaganda platforms.

But propaganda is tricky, you need people to keep paying attention which means the most overt spin is to be avoided. Done well you shift the narrative over decades not just swap positions on day one. Fox News is the most well known US example, but you don’t want to just preach to people who already believe your message.

Thus you want to control the widest possible selection of media.

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

#357

Post by qikInNdOutReply » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

yks wrote: post #300

bigger_inside wrote: post #47

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…

> don't apply to independent journalists What a naïveté. Independent journalists are even more beholden to their audiences, if they start talking up something those audiences don’t like, their incomes dwindle. I’ve yet to see a prominent independent media figure that changed their position on any topic, regardless of real life events or evidence.

Have you seen what happens with communitys who caught there leaders lying and not retracting? Flamewars and death.

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

#358

Post by Spooky23 » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

bigger_inside wrote: post #47

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…

That’s just cynical blah blah that ignores the pretty obvious cause.

It’s pretty easy why trust in media has eroded in my lifetime (I’m a 40 something). We deregulated and allowed for consolidation of ownership of print, broadcast and eventually online media.

That changed the dynamic. People will always correctly call out right wing talk radio as an example but the problems with media are more subtle as well. Broadcast news changed from a public service obligation to entertainment. If you were around in the 90s, you’ll remember how the OJ Simpson drama was a transformational event - which would not have happened in 1982. Serious journalism gave way to circus.

Our wiser predecessors learned in the 1920s and 1930s of the danger of mass media. Right wing nutcases like Father Coughlin, demagogues like Huey Long, America First, and more extreme left wing labor activists bear a strong resemblance to the characters in modern media.

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

#359

Post by kneebonian » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

brookst wrote: post #20

elil17 wrote: 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…

That same line of reasoning was used to dismiss the Tuskegee experiments, MKULTRA and a host of other things that later turned out to be true.

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

#360

Post by anthomtb » Thu, Feb 16, 2023, 4:29 PM UTC

Merad wrote: post #264

barbariangrunge wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was not a fan of trump, at all, but even I noticed this. If trump scratched his butt in public, figuratively speaking, the media jumped on him for it, and would then decline to cover any story about whether butt scratching (figuratively speaking) was ever appropriate. The media also cast his supporters in an incredibly dark light, which was worrying because that was roughly half of voters who voted for a major cand…

If you really think that this started with Trump, you must not have been paying attention before. The media (conservative media in particular) hounded Obama about some extraordinarily stupid things. Famously there was a significant controversy one time about the color of his suit [0]. I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Maybe the prominence of clickbait/outrage journalism didn't come abou…

I remember left-wing media hounding Bush 43 for his pronunciation of nuclear:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/09/why-does-bush-go....

That Slate article is actually pretty fair to Bush. But others from that time, which I cannot find, were not so fair. Nuc-u-lar versus nuc-lee-are certainly gave my left-leaning extended family reason for an hour of Bush-bashing at one of our gatherings. While I thought then, and still do now, that the whole thing was ridiculous.