There are people in Ukraine, Georgia, and other countries formerly of the Soviet Union that are taking note of some of this populist isolationism being peddled throughout the political spectrum. And they take this really personally, especially given how much support and goodwill they've shown to the United States and other liberal democracies. I hope that Americans of good will and faith can actively participate in the primaries of both major parties, and support candidates who reject this kind of naive and dangerous isolationism. Kudos to President Biden for not kowtowing to this ascendant isolationist view, and holding firm against Russia. As a conservative, I've agreed with our President on very little, to be frank. But there is something to be said for politics stopping at the water's edge.
The NYT indeed was on the wrong side in their reporting of Sarah Palin. But I think the verdict is correct, keeping with the necessity of having a high legal standard for demonstrable defamation. That bar is kept high as to not unduly infringe on free speech and press rights in a way that violates 1A. Otherwise, we would be subject to so many frivolous lawsuits having effective veto power over constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Freedom of the press is an iffy proposition that assumes fair and balanced reporting. The media is allowed to protect criminals and traitors who give them dirt on policies, politics and politicians they hate under the guise that the informants are confidential sources. They are allowed to smear public figures who do not share their political views with no recourse. Biased reporting can be found on both sides, but the biggest audience belongs to progressive media.
Press freedom doesn't have to be premised on the assumption that news is fair and balanced, or biased. It could be either. At the end of the day, news is consumer driven. These days, most viewers want news that satisfies their confirmation biases, one way or another. What CNN and MSNBC cover news wise likely won't persuade many on the right. And what Fox News covers, won't penetrate the confirmation biases of those with left leaning views. In the case of Sarah Palin, those who were already favorably inclined towards her(and the NYT's story on her was inaccurate and just flat out lazy journalism) wouldn't have been swayed by the NYT to begin with. Those who didn't like Palin wouldn't be convinced even if Fox successfully debunked the NYT.
A free press will include things that you or I will find objectionable. They may amount to merely biased coverage, or straight up opinion journalism. They may even be operationally functioning as a propaganda outlet, guised as objective news.
The best way to want fair and balanced news coverage, is for the consumer base to demand it in sufficient numbers. One of the reasons I rarely watch the news(whether FNC, BSNBC, CNN, and other noncable news outlets) is I don't agree with their penchant for satisfying the confirmation biases of their customers. From a business perspective, I understand why they do it. Also, people need to exercise some good due diligence in exercising discernment whether certain news coverage is legitimate, or just straight up advocacy.
I watch a lot of FNC because I find it more entertaining - not because it is always the gospel truth. My wife watches ABC because she likes to keep up with showbiz stories. TV has ruined the press by forcing the written word to become more speculative and opinion driven. I have to read from at least three sources to form an opinion with any degree of confidence.
I do not believe the press should be a debate. It should be factual unless it is labeled as opinion. Views that only confirm consumer bias is mostly useless.
And I'm fine if the press chooses to label itself as factual, when not so in practice. They can cover whatever "factual" news with all the biases or flat out falsehoods to their heart's content. At the end of the day, I can choose not to indulge, and many others do the same. I do agree that news that satisfy confirmation biases are mostly useless. It will come down to the consumers of news to demand better. Vote with your feet and make your voice be heard that way.
There are people in Ukraine, Georgia, and other countries formerly of the Soviet Union that are taking note of some of this populist isolationism being peddled throughout the political spectrum. And they take this really personally, especially given how much support and goodwill they've shown to the United States and other liberal democracies. I hope that Americans of good will and faith can actively participate in the primaries of both major parties, and support candidates who reject this kind of naive and dangerous isolationism. Kudos to President Biden for not kowtowing to this ascendant isolationist view, and holding firm against Russia. As a conservative, I've agreed with our President on very little, to be frank. But there is something to be said for politics stopping at the water's edge.
The NYT indeed was on the wrong side in their reporting of Sarah Palin. But I think the verdict is correct, keeping with the necessity of having a high legal standard for demonstrable defamation. That bar is kept high as to not unduly infringe on free speech and press rights in a way that violates 1A. Otherwise, we would be subject to so many frivolous lawsuits having effective veto power over constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Freedom of the press is an iffy proposition that assumes fair and balanced reporting. The media is allowed to protect criminals and traitors who give them dirt on policies, politics and politicians they hate under the guise that the informants are confidential sources. They are allowed to smear public figures who do not share their political views with no recourse. Biased reporting can be found on both sides, but the biggest audience belongs to progressive media.
Press freedom doesn't have to be premised on the assumption that news is fair and balanced, or biased. It could be either. At the end of the day, news is consumer driven. These days, most viewers want news that satisfies their confirmation biases, one way or another. What CNN and MSNBC cover news wise likely won't persuade many on the right. And what Fox News covers, won't penetrate the confirmation biases of those with left leaning views. In the case of Sarah Palin, those who were already favorably inclined towards her(and the NYT's story on her was inaccurate and just flat out lazy journalism) wouldn't have been swayed by the NYT to begin with. Those who didn't like Palin wouldn't be convinced even if Fox successfully debunked the NYT.
A free press will include things that you or I will find objectionable. They may amount to merely biased coverage, or straight up opinion journalism. They may even be operationally functioning as a propaganda outlet, guised as objective news.
The best way to want fair and balanced news coverage, is for the consumer base to demand it in sufficient numbers. One of the reasons I rarely watch the news(whether FNC, BSNBC, CNN, and other noncable news outlets) is I don't agree with their penchant for satisfying the confirmation biases of their customers. From a business perspective, I understand why they do it. Also, people need to exercise some good due diligence in exercising discernment whether certain news coverage is legitimate, or just straight up advocacy.
I watch a lot of FNC because I find it more entertaining - not because it is always the gospel truth. My wife watches ABC because she likes to keep up with showbiz stories. TV has ruined the press by forcing the written word to become more speculative and opinion driven. I have to read from at least three sources to form an opinion with any degree of confidence.
I do not believe the press should be a debate. It should be factual unless it is labeled as opinion. Views that only confirm consumer bias is mostly useless.
And I'm fine if the press chooses to label itself as factual, when not so in practice. They can cover whatever "factual" news with all the biases or flat out falsehoods to their heart's content. At the end of the day, I can choose not to indulge, and many others do the same. I do agree that news that satisfy confirmation biases are mostly useless. It will come down to the consumers of news to demand better. Vote with your feet and make your voice be heard that way.
Ummm...ain't Fox News #1?
Lol.
Progressive media as a whole has by far the biggest audience. ABC evening news alone has nearly 8 million viewers. FNC has nearly 4 million viewers.
Week nights at 11:00 p.m.