This article doesn't even remotely go where you think it would if you're going off the headline and your preconceptions. Ends up as > CEOs have long put themselves forward as the people able to upgrade America's physical infrastructure. Now it's time for them to use the trust they've built up to help rebuild our civic infrastructure. Who's trusting most CEOs? Being charitable, I guess people are trusting people who a…
Media trust hits new low
151–160 of 205 posts
Re: Media trust hits new low
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it wouldn't lol, majority of people when given the facts simply refuse them. You have facts about vaccines working yet how many are still refusing them?
Could that might be caused by one major network gaslighting their viewers for the last 4 years?
Re: Media trust hits new low
#153"The natural bodies of administration which are traditionally either elected by people at large or appointed by elected leaders of society are being actively substituted by artificial bodies. Groups of people that nobody elected. As a matter of fact most of the people do not like them at all, yet they exist. One such group is media - who elected them? How come they have so much monopolistic power over your mind? How…
Re: Media trust hits new low
#154> 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…
France has a public agency, AFP, being the news arbiter (it’s the Reuters competitor). Yet, information is bullshit. They choose to report on some topics and not others, and they choose to publish extremely biased news without quoting the opposing side to interview their defense. Happens with the wage gap, happens with the Traoré, happens with Sarkozysm, happens with Fillion... It sways elections. Owned 56% by the st…
In which sense did it happen? They didn't report on it or they did without "quoting the opposing side"? Specifically in the case of Fillon, the guy was caught stealing from the state in a pretty obvious manner ( his wife was receiving a salary for being his parliamentary assistant for like 15 years, while never having received a pass to actually get in the parliament). There was little of substance he could say, and when he did say it, it was obviously complete bullshit. Yes, it swayed the elections ( he was the favourite to win) and thankfully, that's not the type of person anyone should want running the country.
Re: Media trust hits new low
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust can't really be gained as easily as it is lost, at this point I am skeptical there is a real (nice) solution available and the only path is for these institutions to continue to further dig themselves into their hole until there is no trust left to erode. We have to remember that the media is like this because this is apparently what people want to consume. The old, traditional way is not one that will keep the…
> We have to remember that the media is like this because this is apparently what people want to consume. But their audience is decreasing, so I'm not sure that it's actually what people want. It seems to me that it's more of a "cashing in" thing. They built up trust for generations by mostly reporting factually with little bias, and the current generation is cashing in by abusing that trust to advance their personal…
Re: Media trust hits new low
#157"The natural bodies of administration which are traditionally either elected by people at large or appointed by elected leaders of society are being actively substituted by artificial bodies. Groups of people that nobody elected. As a matter of fact most of the people do not like them at all, yet they exist. One such group is media - who elected them? How come they have so much monopolistic power over your mind? How…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate
Media, since it's mass existence, has always had an outsized, unelected influence. And it has never been a monopoly ( baring wartime censorship and control) because there have always been more than one institutions, which have an interest in competing, at least to some extent.
Re: Media trust hits new low
#158That about sums it up. The lies are fine, the problem is that nobody believes them. But let's imagine that the media wanted to regain the trust of the public by being more trustworthy.
Here is some advice:
Acknowledge bias. Too many in the media try to portray themselves as truth-tellers, and everyone else has hopelessly biased propagandists. Just own it. Be clear about ideological positions and points of agreement and disagreement with other political actors.
Acknowledge uncertainty. The truth is out there, but we often don't know what it is. Be willing to delay judgement until the facts are in, update conclusions when new evidence surfaces, and treat some "facts" as tentative when they're based on weak or the balance of contradictory evidence.
Criticize allies. If somebody is lying to support a conclusion you agree with, call them out. The ends do not justify the means.
Praise opponents. When "the other side" says something you agree with, say so, without any caveats about the other stuff you still disagree with. When they tell the truth, acknowledge the honesty. If they argue in good faith, engage with the ideas in good faith.
In the end, this stuff is not that hard for people that actually care about the truth. It doesn't seem like the media does anymore. Instead, they're mostly engaged in tribalism: signaling loyalty to the tribe, disseminating dogma and asserting the moral superiority of the tribe. No wonder trust is so low.
Re: Media trust hits new low
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. This is not a new phenomenon; it’s been happening for a looooong time. Look at the difference in how white and Black newspapers reported on the Tulsa race massacre [1]: ”More Than Two Hundred White and Colored Men, Women and Children Were Killed in the Bloody or Horribl…
> white and Black It was when the New York Times decided to start capitalizing black but not white I knew they were done being objective and had turned to activism. Their explanation that all black people worldwide share a common culture but all white people do not is just absurd. They’re not a serious news organization and haven’t been for some time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/05/insider/capitalized-black...
I think it was rather nuanced. Several reasons given:
1) The capitalization of Black has already been accepted by the mainstream - NYT is catching up with the times
2) Other names on American minorities with a shared heritage is already capitalized, like Latino and Asian.
3) African-American is capitalized, but not as inclusive as Black.
At no point, except when referring to some early 20th century worldview, are they talking about all black people worldwide. I read the article as a purely American POV.
Re: Media trust hits new low
#160maybe I'd have trust in media, if they provided balanced view from various sides and not push their agenda, also hiring any kid which can type sentence with autocorrect, but make basic logical errors doesn't fill me with trust in such media