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

Media trust hits new low

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 205 posts

Re: Media trust hits new low

#141

Post by tsimionescu »

I see most takes here discussing the growing distrust in media as a problem to fix. Instead, I see it as a welcome change, a necessary but not sufficient condition to a more free society. The media has always been extremely biased, selling a particular elite consensus view of the world. Sure, some real reporting made it though once in a while, especially when it was orthogonal to the overarching narrative or when it directly served it. But major news organizations have always been run and edited by the same academic elite and political elite who make policy.

For some examples, you will not find any high-level media people (senior editors, senior reporters) at any US institution who believe the Vietnam war was an act of aggression, who believe George Bush Jr was a war criminal, who believe consumerism and economic growth are not a net good in the world, who believe the USA is most responsible for the state of the Middle East, who believe Cuba has often been a force for good in the world and the illegal embargo against it should be lifted, who believe Israel is an apartheid state performing daily acts of aggression against Palestine, who believe that its fair and good for people who don't work to be poor and miserable, and so on.

You don't have to accept these views as true, but you should still note that CNN and The New York Times and Fox News and Breitbart all agree on the bedrock narrative of the USA's fundamentally noble role in the world, its fairness to its citizens, its desire to do good, even if they disagree on a few specifics and may or may not think there were some mistakes along the way.

To me it seems that having people distrust this media is like having people distrust Pravda in the USSR: absolutely crucial if they are to think of a better world. Now of course, some people stop trusting the NYT and move to trusting flat earth groups on FB, which is worse. But I believe that the great good that comes from realizing you shouldn't trust those in authority simply because you've been taught to will see a slow but fundamental shift in society. One that news organizations and PR firms and other propaganda machines will fight tooth and nail, as this article shows.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#142

Post by hef19898 »

beej71 wrote: post #115
citrus1330 wrote: post #16

So their solution to the declining trust in government and media is to leverage the trust that employees still have in their CEOs. If they can convince CEOs to push their false narratives, then trust will evaporate there as well. How about instead: be more trustworthy.

"Be more trustworthy" isn't a particularly simple notion. What could CNN or Fox do to do that?

Stopping to treat politics like entertainment and actively spreading false facts would be a good start, IMHO. Not that I expect any of that so. Same goes for other countries, maybe a tad less extreme.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#143

Post by mikedilger »

SnowProblem wrote: post #117

For a long time my model of the world assumed a certain level of corruption to exist in the West, but I assumed it was generally local, and that any large-scale corruption would become a national scandal, like the Church Committee, or Watergate. Basically I had expected an equal balance of justice to match the crime. I no longer hold that. There is deep corruption everywhere - through the media, to government, academ…

Well said. Deep corruption everywhere and it is spreading. I think empires in decline are unavoidably this way.

I think this Ivermectin debate has nothing to do with Ivermectin, but about big pharma attempting to usurp power via several government agencies who also want power as they are now being put in charge of things they were never designed for and are not well constituted to handle (things your doctor should be in charge of).

I think this Afghanistan withdrawal was intentionally botched in order to try to get American support for going back in, by sick-minded money-hungry monsters.

You have to listen to many people and then figure out who you trust and on what topics. The most trustworthy and intelligent voices are podcasters. But each has their failings and none should be held up on a pedestal. I trust Glenn Greenwald, but not on topics regarding Socialism. I trust Bret Weinstein, but I don't trust his judgement of other people (he seems far too forgiving and trusting of others) [I took the vaccine and don't take Ivermectin]. Those are just examples.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#144

Post by mikewarot »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #104
mikewarot wrote: post #39

Pushing narratives instead of reporting the truth has a corrosive effect on reputation, who knew? ;-) There are many small teams on YouTube and other places that are building up a community of patrons to sponsor their efforts, both in news and other areas. It is through these efforts that I see a replacement for the mass media emerging. Their dedicated non-advertiser driven source of support allows them to take risks…

Do you have examples of these teams please?

Wow this list got long... sorry

Beau of the Fifth Column has a pretty interesting take on events, a strong interest in community networks, and deep insight into what holds society together - https://www.youtube.com/c/BeauoftheFifthColumn

Breaking Points - Krystal Ball is a liberal, Saagar Enjeti is a conservative, and together they seek to cover the important stories that would otherwise go unnoticed - https://www.youtube.com/c/breakingpoints

Knowing Better is an ex soldier who offers long insightful views on a variety of topics - https://www.youtube.com/c/KnowingBetter

Lex Fridman was born in the Soviet Union, worked at MIT in AI, and does interesting interviews with a wide variety of people - https://www.youtube.com/c/lexfridman

MKBHD reviews technology in a fairly credible way - https://www.youtube.com/c/mkbhd

MrPete222 is the shop teacher you never had - fascinating lessons and stories about machining - https://www.youtube.com/c/mrpete222

Phil DeDranco does a daily rundown of the stories that you might get in the media, with a fairly balanced view - https://www.youtube.com/c/PhilipDeFranco

Practical Engineering is an explainer channel about most things infrastructure - https://www.youtube.com/c/PracticalEngineeringChannel

Rebecca Watson provides a welcome skeptical view and calls out quite a lot of BS related to science - https://www.youtube.com/skepchicks

Rebel Wisdom is a project that is actively trying to figure out collective sense making in the modern era - https://www.youtube.com/c/RebelWisdom

Sabine Hossenfelder is a commenter on all things physics - https://www.youtube.com/c/SabineHossenfelder

Scott Manley provides commentary on all things space and rocket related - https://www.youtube.com/c/szyzyg

Smarter Every Day is an engineer who provides interesting explainers about various subjects. He got permission to film and interview inside an active US nuclear attack sub... pretty cool - https://www.youtube.com/c/smartereveryday

Technology connections does in depth explainers of everyday stuff you didn't realize you wanted to know more about, like how heat pumps or lanterns work. - https://www.youtube.com/c/TechnologyConnections

Veritasium was founded by Derek Muller, who was looking for more effective ways of teaching, when he found that traditional education has almost zero effect at removing misconceptions - https://www.youtube.com/c/veritasium

ZDogg is an MD who gives strong personal opinions on all things medical - https://www.youtube.com/c/ZDoggMD

Update: I've made public my list of channels I subscribe to on Youtube, for better or worse

https://www.youtube.com/user/ka9dgx/channels

Re: Media trust hits new low

#145

Post by tsimionescu »

morsch wrote: post #132
mikewarot wrote: post #39

Pushing narratives instead of reporting the truth has a corrosive effect on reputation, who knew? ;-) There are many small teams on YouTube and other places that are building up a community of patrons to sponsor their efforts, both in news and other areas. It is through these efforts that I see a replacement for the mass media emerging. Their dedicated non-advertiser driven source of support allows them to take risks…

How do I know which of the many small teams is telling the truth?

Well, the same way you know if the big guys are telling the truth - you listen without trust until you can check enough verifiable claims to make up your mind.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#146

Post by oroul »

tootahe45 wrote: post #118
oroul wrote: post #35

> Reversing the decline is a monster task — and one that some journalists and news organizations have taken upon themselves. They're going to need help — perhaps from America's CEOs. Is this a bad joke? Distrust of media is largely brought about because it is (mostly) in the private sector and therefore always puts the sustainability of its business model above objective reporting. We've known for a while now that ne…

> sustainability of its business model above objective reporting Wouldn't publicly-funded media be the same? if a conservative govt wanted to cut the media budget would we not see one-sided negative reporting targeting conservatives?

It's a very valid question. My personal opinion is that public media isn't by default better due to its ability to operate at a loss - in fact it could be argued that the only reason an administration would allow it to run at a loss is if it saw the operation as advantageous to its political objectives.

I think the real answer that nobody wants to hear is that media at this scale cannot exist without bad actors trying to manipulate it. There is no "web of trust" at the scale of millions.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#147

Post by curation »

zepto wrote: post #10

> How it works: Media outlets can continue to report reliable facts, but that won't turn the trend around on its own. What's needed is for trusted institutions to visibly embrace the news media. This is an extremely weird and disturbing conclusion. Orwellian even. What’s needed is for news organizations to not only report facts, but stop telling stories in ways that only benefit their own ideological systems. That’s…

Yes. The problem is, the way ideology works today is not so simple. It is not that we need to realize we have ideology aka - 'we know not what we do but we keep doing it'. It is: We know fully well what we do is meaningless/oppressive and yet keep on doing it thereby perpetuating it. The cornerstone of modern ideology today is that we all think we are free of it - the surest marker of total entrenchment. The media outlets are not evil/plotting/bought - it is far worse. They think they are free of ideology and think they are very critical of it even as they perform the service of power. There is no way for them to 'stop telling stories that only benefit their own ideological systems' because they already think they are doing that. Alongside experts and scientists we need some philosophers and thinking.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#148

Post by ssss11 »

zepto wrote: post #10

> How it works: Media outlets can continue to report reliable facts, but that won't turn the trend around on its own. What's needed is for trusted institutions to visibly embrace the news media. This is an extremely weird and disturbing conclusion. Orwellian even. What’s needed is for news organizations to not only report facts, but stop telling stories in ways that only benefit their own ideological systems. That’s…

I feel like reporting facts is half of it and stopping the sensationalism is the other half. I guys I understand the sensationalism because they need to make money and it’s a tough industry.

Re: Media trust hits new low

#150

Post by LAC-Tech »

vxNsr wrote: post #116
LAC-Tech wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last 5 years is a very short time horizon, I'd love to see a longer one.

Until 2016 it seems it was assumed and the question wasn’t asked. It was only when the term “fake news” was coined that anyone thought to gauge people’s trust in media.

I would contend that 2016 was just the first time it manifested itself in a big way, and the sentiment had been building for a long time.
Post reply on HN