Posted on 10/25/2017 7:01:41 PM PDT by GuavaCheesePuff
What happened? When did journalism become "unrealiable" for some people? What the hell is going on? Why is it becoming irrelevant? CBS hired Jeff Glor for CBS Evening News, no one cares. What's going on?
https://pagesix.com/2017/10/25/cbs-evening-news-didnt-hire-a-big-star-because-the-network-is-frugal/
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/sign-of-the-times-cbs-names-jeff-glor-evening-news-anchor-and-nobody-cares/
For me it began with Dan Rather, and his persistance in trying to win an election, debunking George W.
The 2000 election with the hanging chad was the turning point in journalism imho.
Who’s Jeff Glor? Should I know? Should I care?
Maybe it was always unreliable and it’s just now that we have the means to point it out.
Walter Cronkite.
Vietnam.
They’ve been hard Left for a very long time.
But in terms of just making stuff up, I think the George W Bush era (2006?) when the media agreed that the US economy was “the worst since Hoover” is the first time I just sat up and said, “That’s just a complete lie with no basis in fact”. And the media totally ran with it. Didn’t care.
It started in ‘48, we didn’t catch on until Rather, thanks to Buckhead.
I knew they had a “bias” from about 1980.
I understood they were blatantly partisan in 1995, after the Republican revolution in 1994.
I expected big changes; the Republicans started to deliver them; then the establishment media came down on them like dump truck full of garbage.
Dates back at least as far as Cronkite.
1932 when the NYT won the Pulitzer prize for Walter Duranty’s phony reports whitewashing Stalin’s Ukranian genocidem
Mid 1980s, when the two-paper markets ceased to be, the old owners kicked their buckets, and the 60s college commies crashed the party and started running the show. At least they used to have a pretense of truth. No more. It’s spittle for the leftist lickspittles now.
Started with Bush Sr. but Bill Clinton took advantage of it.
The networks make their money from advertising- pretty much ALL their money.
That advertising is mostly from international companies who are not interested in American views but world views.
The media’s news reflects that.
I’d say the turning point was halfway through Bush’s second term when the Dems used funding the Iraq war to get everything they wanted.
And the media covered up their blackmail.
When Cronkite said that we had lost the Tet offensive. We had beaten them badly, a real thrashing. They had nothing left.
Walter Cronkite.
Vietnam.
—
Yep. That was exactly what I thought when I saw the question.
Definitely Cronkite but who won a pulitzer that was retracted by the NY Times for fake news? Walter Duranty. Remember Cronkite’s “death talley” during Viet Nam? Made you think soldiers were numbers, not humans, fathers, brothers, husbands, friends; absolutely shameful on the part of Cronkite.
That’s a good starting point.
Perhaps going back even further, Hearst’s incitement of the Spanish-American War.
More recently, their constant repetition of the twin lies of the ‘92 presidential campaign - “Worst economy in 50 years” and “The candidate’s character doesn’t matter”.
A guess would be around 1890. There was some good journalism but also some yellow.
It got worse in the 1920s and then seemed to do a little better until the 60s.
Since then it has been about 80% crooked on subjects which are political or religious. By crooked, I mean they lie. Sometimes just outright lies and sometimes by misleading but technically true. A good example of the latter was an Andrea Mitchell story on assault rifles.
She may have outright lied too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.