The state of American journalism

Discussion in 'World News, Current Events & Politics' started by Chary, Jan 12, 2018.

  1. SG854

    SG854 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    953
    1,007
    Feb 17, 2017
    Jamaica
    This was the video I was talking about.
    So it seems like a different guy, or is it the same guy? I dunno. Don't feel like clicking on videos right now to figure out.
    But interesting video though.

    He seems cool from the 1 video I saw. I'll watch the video you linked later on.
    His stuff is interesting.
     
    Last edited by SG854, Jan 14, 2018
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  2. brickmii82

    brickmii82 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    522
    590
    Feb 21, 2015
    United States
    Well, Fox News without a doubt. I just don’t see how President Trump ties into the topic, other than they had a lot to do with him garnering support during and after the GOP primaries. I can support that argument wholeheartedly. But, my point is he’s a byproduct of the propaganda, not the proponent.

    I wasn’t glossing over your posts, I read them thoroughly and offered a different perspective, and pointed out your mistake in claiming that Fox was the father of fake news. You then attacked me for it, which is poor debate practice. I know another someone who attacked people during debates constantly....

    See what I’m getting at? I’m mostly on your side, just like most average Americans at this point. But attacking rather then questioning or debating will only push folks to the other side. Right into the arms of the people you despise. You need to rise above the status quo if you want people to hear you out and consider your viewpoint, because as stated repeatedly, the status quo is shit right now.
     
  3. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    4,315
    3,109
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    That wasn't a mistake, though. Only Fox tries to sell people shit and claim it's refried beans. Other programs outside Fox News at least source their information and/or mostly just regurgitate yesterday's headlines from sources other than themselves. This is all of course ignoring how scary it is in the first place that an entertainment channel dictates government policy. No other news channel has that kind of power, yet as the article I linked points out, Fox News and its viewers (Trump included) like to keep playing the victim regardless.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Jan 14, 2018
  4. brickmii82

    brickmii82 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    522
    590
    Feb 21, 2015
    United States
    Well, I can certainly concede that Fox is by far the largest perpetrator in pushing out agenda driven propaganda. But saying that they’re the “father of fake news” insinuates they invented/pioneered fake news. They obviously spew GOP rhetoric at an ungodly level, but they certainly didn’t invent fake news. Maybe a better term would be “news labeled propaganda,” perhaps? They definitely fathered that.

    Unfortunately they’ve become extremely successful, and other networks are following suit. Then you have Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter which, if you ask me, are really the primary tools used for spreading “news labeled propaganda.” And it’s on both sides of the fence now. It’s sad really, and I don’t see it changing anytime soon because of the money involved and power over peoples minds.

    On a side note, seeing Roger Ailes and Bill Oreilly get shitcanned made me feel quite joyful. :grog:
     
    Last edited by brickmii82, Jan 14, 2018
    TotalInsanity4, Xzi and DarthDub like this.
  5. Whole lotta love

    Whole lotta love Advanced Member

    Newcomer
    85
    86
    Jan 7, 2006
    United States
    Yes it is certainly possible. I do it all the time with educated conservatives.

    This is exactly why we need to be intellectually honest.

    This is also false. You yourself cited that Snopes article that uses scientific data to support it's claim that far-right violence has been more damaging that far-left violence.
    Scientific data is in no way "third-hand".
    Video evidence is also not "third-hand", which is a very good thing as it's increasingly more available. For example, I wouldn't have been able to disprove that other poster's claim that the white supremacist who ran over 20 protesters did so out of fear without video evidence.

    What are the other facts you want to bring up? I don't feel overwhelmed at all. You have only brought up one piece of evidence in this whole discussion.

    what do you think a beneficial debate would look like?
    One where everyone just says what they feel is true without anything to back it up?

    Conclusions should be drawn from evidence (i.e. from studying the real world), not the other way around. This is how I have come to my conclusions which is why I can back everything up with evidence.

    I would certainly concede to being wrong. I am concerned with truth, not being right.
    For example, I used to think Antifa were just as bad as the far right extremists, but I did my homework and realized that that is not the case.
    Almost everything I believe to be true about the world came about from recognizing that I was wrong about an unfounded belief I previously had.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  6. brickmii82

    brickmii82 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    522
    590
    Feb 21, 2015
    United States
    Now the Wall Street Journal and President Trump are bickering over whether he said “I probably have a good relationship with Kim Jung Un,” which WSJ claims to be the case, or, “[I’d] probably have a good relationship with Kim Jung Un” in their latest interview.
    Here’s the audio...
    https://mobile.twitter.com/WSJ/status/952404617261961216/video/1
    Honestly I heard “I’d.” But, this certainly ties into your point and this thread


    @Xzi
     
    Last edited by brickmii82, Jan 14, 2018
  7. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    4,315
    3,109
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    If it was "I'd," it would've been followed by an "if" statement, which it was not. WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, they're not out to intentionally smear Trump with false stories. Matter of fact, published stories tend to disappear when they're too critical of Trump.

    The audio is even worse than I expected. He slowly pronounces Kim, Jong, and Un as if they're three seperate names. Like he's reading it and can't recall the person behind the name.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Jan 14, 2018
  8. gamesquest1

    gamesquest1 Nabnut

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    gamesquest1 is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    14,222
    9,590
    Sep 23, 2013
    I don't have any doubt that he said "I'd". see if you can claim to mishear you can try twist a statement, I cant remember the story but there was another story a year or so ago where news outlets where just running with a story saying someone said one thing and again it was clear to most that they were misquoting, and people jump to the ....no maybe he did say they are all scum we cant possibly know, even though he has cleared it up, lets just keep going with this as its a good way of smearing them based on a questionable "miss-hearing" of a statement

    even if someone I disagree with made a statement and it was kinda unclear but if you slow the speed down and hold you head under water it sounds like he said some racial slur, I would mock anyone trying to encourage stupid stories to prove a fake point, go with your strongest argument not silly childish "oooohhhh maybe he said poopy"
     
    Last edited by gamesquest1, Jan 14, 2018
  9. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    4,315
    3,109
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    You'd have to be hearing what you want to hear and not what he actually said, then. "I'd like to believe I can have a great relationship with Kim Jong Un" makes sense as a sentence, but that's not what he said, he didn't use any qualifying words like that. Trump's next sentence was, "I have great relationships with a lot of people." So even if it was "I'd," that still sounds dementia-esque in context: "I'd have a great relationship with Kim Jong Un (if/but?). I have great relationships with a lot of people."

    I didn't hear even the slightest "d" sound in the audio clip, either, so I'm not sure where you're getting this. They released it because it verifies their story, and the only time Trump cares about something this much is when he's lying about it.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Jan 14, 2018
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  10. GreatCrippler

    GreatCrippler Greatness Fallen

    Member
    1,400
    213
    Mar 27, 2010
    United States
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    Comparing the current state of journalism to any other era in history (Even recent history) is not possible. The world is not the same one it was in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. We are all spoiled due to the ability to immediately find 200,000 views that agree completely with anything we believe, and 200,000 more that say you are a moron for not seeing it the exact opposite way. Modern media is not specifically better or worse than it used to be. It's just different.
     
    Xzi likes this.
  11. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    475
    610
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    Listen very closely. Turn your headphones up. The "d" in "and" is present at the end of "I", which means it's "I'd." I'm chalking this up to the static from the microphone regarding what WSJ put there for subtitles, but when you focus on the subtitles of course you're going to hear/not hear subtle shit. I think that represents the media as a whole pretty well though -- when you just listen to exclusively what people tell you and don't listen for yourself, you end up missing important shit.

    I'd break it down in Audacity but I doubt you'd do anything but dismiss it since it goes against your misconceptions about Trump's dementia.
     
  12. gamesquest1

    gamesquest1 Nabnut

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    gamesquest1 is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    14,222
    9,590
    Sep 23, 2013
    IMO I clearly hear "I'd", and tbh this is the pretty childish nonsense that makes people look like idiots, OHHH HE SAID A WORD WRONG!!!!! BUZINGA!!!! we got him now gooiiisssss
     
  13. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    475
    610
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    What are you talking about? You can objectively discern standards in journalism, their rise and their decline, in comparison to other time periods and their respective standards. You're basically saying "the time was different and so were the people so you can't compare standards" which isn't really an argument. You haven't demonstrated *why* they can't be compared. Comparisons require differences, which is what you compare.
     
  14. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    4,315
    3,109
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Okay, then read the rest of what I said and realize that quote is still retarded with "I'd." Time to impeach on the 25th. Well, it would be if Pence wasn't just a soulless mannequin.

    And now we can check right-wing owned media off the list as sources you'll find acceptable/credible. That leaves...zero sources you'll find credible when reporting something negative against Trump. I'm starting to sense a pattern.
     
    Last edited by Xzi, Jan 14, 2018
  15. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    475
    610
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    Snipping the rest of your post since it's just some incoherent rant. Great job comparing a misquote to the mentally handicapped. Reported.

    Anyways, the lack of an if-statement following it does not invalidate his comment. I can't believe society's standards have fallen so damn low that they can't figure out with current events someone saying "i'd probably have a good relationship with X" is dependent upon the current events without something like that being explicitly subtitled and explained to them.

    The 'd' is there mate.
     
    gamesquest1 likes this.
  16. GreatCrippler

    GreatCrippler Greatness Fallen

    Member
    1,400
    213
    Mar 27, 2010
    United States
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    It's all about resources. Modern journalists do no function the way that a journalist in the past would have. You can't fact-check on google 20 years before it existed. You can't see 20 streams from different angles on the President in 4K when a single Analog camera was used to film him. It's like dragging an IBM tech from 1985 in to 2018 and saying "troubleshoot Windows 10 for me would ya?" It's a completely different job now than it was then. Technology alone makes that true, and that doesn't even take into account changing social climates, and relative beliefs of both major parties that are typically the topics of these "fake news" stories.
     
  17. Xzi

    Xzi Virtual Bartman

    Member
    4,315
    3,109
    Dec 26, 2013
    United States
    Spiraling Out
    Nice attempt at concern trolling. Not reported because I'm not a whiny child.

    I'm willing to accept the "d" was there, if you're willing to accept that then sounds like he trailed off to a different thought without completing that one first. Which still sounds like the early stages of what my grandma's dementia was like.
     
  18. MaverickWellington

    MaverickWellington *BRAAAPPPPT*

    Member
    475
    610
    Nov 24, 2017
    United States
    "Hey, these things happened. Write about them."
    "Hey, give us your opinion on this. Write about it."
    "Hey, study this, report on it."

    "LOOK ITS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT JOB OKAY!!!"

    So what if the resources changed? Construction work isn't suddenly not construction work because the tools, or materials have changed. The same people get the same training and education to do the same kind of work. To say you can't compare standards because the resources have changed is not a fair argument. In fact it's a counter-productive argument. The very fact that it's different gives proof that it can be compared and you can see what one side is doing better, or worse in comparison.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    I have the strangest feeling that you're going to be on your death bed and still screeching to your family about Trump's dementia or something irrelevant like that. You don't seem all that concerned about the numerous times Obama or any other president stuttered a fuck ton without their teleprompter. This sounds like the definition of a reach.
     
  19. gamesquest1

    gamesquest1 Nabnut

    Member
    GBAtemp Patron
    gamesquest1 is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    14,222
    9,590
    Sep 23, 2013
    I would say the biggest change is that now many reporters act with impunity, the reputation of the media is in the crapper anyway, so when everyone expects you to write dog crap articles why would an employer care to get rid of idiots who get caught out writing crap.....infact its better for the media to write clickbait BS to try keep their relevance, I see MSM as nothing more than well funded fan blogs for either side of the argument, both sides do the same stuff and both sides try to put on the blinders to see/hear what they want to see/hear
     
  20. GreatCrippler

    GreatCrippler Greatness Fallen

    Member
    1,400
    213
    Mar 27, 2010
    United States
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    You're over simplifying it. A forklift driver from 30 year ago couldn't function a modern lift. Modern cranes have computers in them. It's still labeled as the same job, but it is not done the same way. You could not hop online in 1985 and find 20 guys on GBAtemp to argue with you, and 20 more to think you're a genius. Times change, people change, industries change. You cannot compare the past to the present equally and expect direct comparisons. How much info on any given news story can you find from your phone right now? 10 years ago? 20?