Posted on 10/28/2024 1:05:46 PM PDT by MosesKnows
When Do Media Narratives Become Deceit? I have a generational problem regarding “news”. My problem is that the networks’ opinion of the facts has replaced the facts of the matter, which in my time was news, the facts.
The newspaper reported the facts on the front page along with the editorial page and an op-ed page, in opposition to the editorial. We also heard radio commentary on those facts from Commentators.
This was the first rule for news reporters.
Rule #1: A straight news lead should be a single paragraph consisting of a single sentence, should contain no more than 30 words, and should summarize, at minimum, the most newsworthy "what," "where" and "when" of the story.
From the information provided in the first paragraph, one may form their own opinion from what they know. They could then listen to a Commentator to compare opinions.
When did the media start skipping the "what," "where" and "when" of the story and go straight to the opinion and not the opinion of the reporter, but the opinion of the network?
I believe we accepted partisan “spin” to a point but what prompted my question is my curiosity when does “spin” in the media become “deceit” in the media?
My first notice of downright deliberate, orchestrated, and executed deceit was that Donald Trump mocked a person’s handicap. I believed the narrative because the media told me that is what he was doing. What was Trump reacting to? Why didn’t the media report what prompted the incident, or any back-story.
I later discovered that there is likely another reason to mock that person. The point is that Trump may have mocked the person’s handicap or the person’s poor memory.
Here is what is missing from the media, an investigative report comparing the two points of view.
A: The moment they are broadcasted...
To answer the title question: As soon as they are printed or aired. And today that’s the vast majority. Even if real facts are used, there is most likely a slant in how it’s stated or what facts are omitted.
When???
- when you see the media hack move their lips.. THATS when..
50 years ago...
It was when they'd report that no WMD's were found yet because Bush lied. Then they'd report that our troops were attacked with sarin gas because Bush was too incompetent to protect our troops. Then a day or two later they'd report no WMD's found in Iraq -- hoping their readers/viewers would completely forget that they had recently reported as news that our troops were attacked by sarin gas -- because Bush lied about WMD's. They'd then report that our troops were attacked by mustard gas because of Bush. Then again say no WMD's in Iraq cuz Bush lied.
I realized that the drive by media didn't have to keep their lies straight; They expected their readers/viewers to follow along like sheep without the slightest critical thinking skills. Basically, the biased media had trained their cult followers to just accept whatever "news" they were told even when it was obviously a lie.
It goes back to at least FDR. They covered up he was an invalid pre-war. Not just some, all.
I’m of that generation and share the authors opinion.
However, I don’t seriously think news reporting has ever been truly objective.
They have been doing it for decades.
Ford Pinto on NBC — totally staged for the benefit of the broadcast. 1993.
I never followed left wing publications back in the day and the MSM has pretty much fallen into that category now. Any truth or sanity they publish or broadcast now is an exception rather than the usual crap they produce. FR is basically a clearing house for their stuff. We point out the obvious lies and dismiss them to dumpster they belong in.
Dang. You beat me to it.
Media rarities are written by Satan
“Ford Pinto on NBC — totally staged for the benefit of the broadcast. 1993.”
And when NBC blew up a Chevy pick-up Truck.
Yet.....people still watch those commie stations.
Yellow journalism is a style of reporting that uses sensationalism and exaggeration to grab the reader’s attention and sell newspapers. The term originated in the late 1800s in New York City, where it was used to describe the reporting techniques of two rival newspaper publishers, Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst. [Google.]
The question really is:
When does deceit become a violation of the public trust and misuse of the public service charter that governs their broadcast licenses?
-PJ
“Narratives” are always deceit.
No one... and I mean NO ONE... goes into journalism because they just want to be objectively informative.
People are attracted to influence.
If you ask them why they got into it, they will almost always include something like “I just wanted to make a difference”.
That is just another way of saying that they wanted to shape how people look at things.
By my recollection, about the early 1960's. About the time all networks added a commentary with the "news".
The media has always been deceitful. If it doesn’t meet their narrative it does not get reported.
I’d draw the line back in the 50s. Supposed MSM news has gone down hill for decades and unwatchable since Obama ran for President.
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.