ADDED: Here's the WaPo opinion piece on that segment: "CNN’s Brian Stelter blindsided by co-author of Fox News study" by Erik Wemple. CNN's Brian Stelter was "blindsided" because the researchers who were expected to criticize Fox News proceeded to say CNN does it too.
Stelter said: “And basically, you’re proving what we’ve sensed for a while, which is that Fox viewers are in the dark about bad news for the GOP” [said Stelter].
But the professor, Joshua L. Kalla, said: “On the flip side, CNN engages in this partisan coverage filtering as well as that we find. For example, during this time, the Abraham Accords were signed, and these were the agreements where Israel, the UAE and Bahrain signed a major peace agreement. And we see that Fox News covered this really major accomplishment about 15 times more than CNN did. So we established both networks are really engaging in this partisan coverage filtering. It’s not about one side, it’s about the media writ large.”
As Wemple puts it: "Stelter objected that this was a venture in bothsidesism."
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
Instead of bashing Tucker Carlson - like good Pavlovian behaving cog hivemind loyalists to The Party! - they should watch.
This is an example of why paying for CNN or any TV news - is so absurd. You'd have to pay me to watch this stuff. And if you want me to watch brian stetler it'd be extra.
CNN needs to sharpen its focus and programming. I’m not in the business, but tell me how a weak-suck opinion show called “The Tater Factor” couldn’t be a hit.
On the good side, it looks like CNN+ is going to be an epic flop.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10712411/CNN-faces-big-cuts-streaming-service-draws-10-000-daily-users-following-launch.html
A few years ago, our "professional journalists" began reporting routinely that various political statements were "false" or "debunked" or "without evidence".
This reporting reminds me of my experience reading Soviet newspapers many years ago. Our "professional journalists" in the 21st Century remind me of Communist propagandists in the 20th Century.
CNN does this all the time. They act like propagandists.
They do not have to do this. They do it because they are arrogant and unprofessional. They justify themselves by declaring absurdly that they are protecting Democracy from politicians like Donald Trump, who lie all the time and whose lies must be exposed and denounced constantly.
These "professional journalists" deserve all the contempt they get now from the public.
What a surprise! People are influenced by the "news" media. I don't watch any of them, but it is clear from internet links that the fare at Fox is broader in scope than that at CNN. Remember "mostly peaceful," Hunter's laptop, etc.?
The defining characteristic of the progressives I know is that they are at the same time ignorant and incurious. That is why they don't engage in political discussion choosing rather to spout talking points (from the leftmedia) before getting angry.
Hard to believe this guy is only 36. He better learn to code. Fast.
Hard to believe this guy is only 36. He better learn to code. Fast.
An outfit that lost 90% of its audience when it came off airport terminal TVs is in no position to criticize anybody. I mean a captive audience that's held there behind the TSA wall isn't really an audience.
Watching Tater's brain react instantly to suggestion that CNN engages in partisan filtering as well with a pat phrase: "both-sides-ism". He comes with pre-installed cut-outs to prevent any critical thinking about his own corporation's failings. The perfect post-modern Elect.
Iman said...
CNN needs to sharpen its focus and programming. I’m not in the business, but tell me how a weak-suck opinion show called “The Tater Factor” couldn’t be a hit.
I wish they'd put me in charge of CNN! I have ol' Tater dressed in bib overalls doing the farm report everyday at 3AM!
The looming midterms must seem terrifying to the Democrat media. Wouldn't surprise me to click by CNN and see a shoop of Trump popping his head out of a Russian tank ala Mike Dukakis.
so, a professor from U Cal Berkley doesn't like Fox News, and interprets data to put Fox in bad light?
color Me SURPRISED!!
I don't suppose it was intentional, but the volume went way down when the bearded guy started to talk.
The other guy's COVID example wasn't too convincing. Yes, some other countries did better than us. Some other countries are easier to seal off. Some states did better than others. You might get a more nuanced view if you heard both sides, but CNN wasn't more accurate than FNC and didn't give a fuller, truer picture of the situation. They dismissed or ignored reports that US COVID statistics had been inflated. Also, if you really followed the foreign reports how could you possibly vote for the blowhard who blamed every death on Trump?
I'm not watching that. I pay for access to the Intertubes and thereby to Althouse, but don't waste my time on known liars, shills, and ideologues like Tater Boy.
Paying me is the only way I'd watch CNN.,
“I wish they'd put me in charge of CNN! I have ol' Tater dressed in bib overalls doing the farm report everyday at 3AM!”
Now THAT is must watch TV, northofthe101!
A new logical fallacy - the "both-sidesism fallacy": Your criticism of my reasoning is incorrect because I asked you to focus on my opponent's reasoning.
CNN, FOX, PBS, NBC, ABC, etc. Bias. Nay, prejudice. With a side of bigotry. What are all of the above.
CNN is the left-wing version of Fox News but isn’t one-tenth as good at it.
Both sides-ism used to be called "hypocrisy" and "Don't be a hypocrit" and "Don't castigate others for something you do yourself"
Now it's "Whoa whoa whoa you are justifying how they behave cause my side does it too. Don't do that. Lets stay focused on what others are doing wrong"
It's the most beautiful position of those who refuse to look self-critically or acknowledge personal/team failings.
The guy on the right may be a robot. Or a human head bolted on top of a mannequin. The eyes.
Heh. The host did not like that. I like how the host said "bothsidesism" as though he thought the term referred to anything that addressed people on both sides of an issue. Ha ha ha
Both-sidesism is the left's way of saying, "Yes, we're being hypocritical but it's wrong for you to point that out and we should keep focusing on how the right is awful while ignoring the fact that the left is doing the exact same thing."
I take both-sides-ism to mean that "you are falsely accusing my side of the same thing in order to appear neutral".
I take "what-about-ism to be "let's not distract from my opponents failings by pointing out that we do it too".
YMMV
If you watch Tucker long enough, you know some of what CNN is saying, and I suspect the same goes for CNN.
I haven’t seen the study, but just going on what I heard on this segment, that study was flawed.
"He better learn to code."
He'll have to learn how little his opinion matters first. Computers don't care how smart you think you are. They don't care how evolved you believe yourself to be. They don't even care if you get invited to all the right parties. They will do your bidding only if you tell them what to do in a way they are designed to understand. You don't get points for voting for the right party.
I appreciate that the study authors presented a viewpoint far more mid-stream than the twittersphere has come up with. Good on them.
Stelter and the dweeb on the left really believe that CNN is the One Voice of Truth and Fox is a purveyor of myths. It's obvious by their expressions when the guy on the right mentioned as an example the Abraham Accords. He could also have mentioned that the exalted vaccines were a product of Trump efforts and innovative ways of getting the Feds out of the way of smart folks, despite Biden and Harris throwing shade on the project until it became time for them to benefit from the shots. I don't recall CNN calling out Dems for that particular atrocity.
They really believe their sh!t don't stink.
I'm sure there are lots of things that FOX News viewers don't know. But, I'm also sure that I could make a list of things that CNN viewers don't know. Also (maybe an even longer) one of things they know that aren't so.
Brian Stelter was grilled by some UChicago students and it didn't go very well for Brian.
Framing, steering, and the providence of handmade tales.
The issue is not that Fox has a bias. It swings to the right whereas almost all other media swings to the left.
The issue is that the leftist media tells blatant lies (or mistakes as they call them) to support their agenda. I would be interested in demonstrable lies that Fox has told in support of a conservative agenda.
If you want to make your case, please differentiate factual lies from opinions.
So, it has nothing to do w/the $$ offered?
I think it has to do w/the $$ offered.
The proper response to the Bothsidism argument is to reply "So you admit you are doing the exact thing you are criticizing someone else for doing?"
As others have mentioned, you'd have to pay me to watch CNN...
But in fairness you'd have to pay me to watch Fox too...
It's just such a _slow_ way to be informed about what the sheep at the office will consider "the most important thing" this week.
It looks to me that Brian Stelter (who is a potato) was blindsided because he neglected to read the actual paper or otherwise prepare.
I read the paper. This was not a surprising development to me.
Back in 1964, when the NYT opinion page (or whatever they called it) was filled with disinformation about what Goldwater was saying, I could go to the news pages of -- wait for it -- the NYT -- and find out what Goldwater actually said. Now, we expect every "news" source (print, TV, twitter, facebook, blog, etc., etc.) to provide "all the news that fits our ideology"; and they DO. Do we -- The People -- really want news, or do we just want to read other people telling us that WE are RIGHT, and those other [fill in your own curse words] are WRONG?
Remember "mostly peaceful," Hunter's laptop, etc.?
==========
every time they reported "mostly peaceful" there was fire/mayhem raging in the background = /unmostly/ part.
so they were honest - more fool the viewers etc.
Have Brian Stelter and “the Gimp” from Pulp Fiction ever been seen together in the same room?
Wouldn't it be nice if we could hear experts from both sides instead of being lectured to by people in the same position for years and years and years?? Fauci is a liar, and he is so protected by the elites, it is ridiculous. https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/04/the_doctor_who_exposed_faucis_fallacies_and_got_harassed_and_fired_from_hhs_for_telling_the_truth.html
What @dbzdak said.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा