Thread: Sooooo.................

Tweet

.........you trust the media do ya?

Having been interviewed three times myself, this isn't as far fetched as it seems.




Subject: A motorcyclist is riding by the zoo......

A motorcyclist is riding by the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning
into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket
and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming
parents. The rider jumps off his bike, runs to the cage and hits the lion
square on the nose with a powerful punch. Whimpering from the pain the
lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her
terrified parents, who thank him endlessly.

A reporter has seen the whole scene, and addressing the biker, says;
Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I saw a man do in my whole
life.

Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this
little kid in danger, and acted as I felt right.

Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, you know,
and tomorrow's papers will have this on the first page. What motorcycle
do you ride?

A Harley Davidson.

The journalist leaves.

The following morning the biker buys the paper to see if it indeed brings
news of his actions, and reads, on the first page:

BIKER GANG MEMBER ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH.

Trust the media?????? Not since Walter Cronkite retired!!!! I took some journalism courses, guess the new media must have missed the "objective reporting" part of their classes....or maybe they just don't teach it that way anymore?????

Originally Posted by Dave Severson

Trust the media?????? Not since Walter Cronkite retired!!!! I took some journalism courses, guess the new media must have missed the "objective reporting" part of their classes....or maybe they just don't teach it that way anymore?????

I think in most cases "objective reporting" has been replaced with "Agenda based reporting"

Originally Posted by ceh383

I think in most cases "objective reporting" has been replaced with "Agenda based reporting"

AMEN brother!

Like the old saying goes, believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.

true very very true...

I gave up watching the national news years ago. Just couldn't take it anymore. They all have their agendas and theirs and mine are no where near each other. I catch the local weather and the traffic in the early morning and that's it. When Peter Jennings, who was not an American citizen, but was taking home a 7 figure American salary every year, said tha American voters had a childlike temper tandrum when they threw out a lot of congressional democrats in 1996, I decided enough was enough. Haven't watched any national news shows since, and don't feel like I really missed anything either. Rather spend the time with my cars or my family, both will be more satisfying.

You see the slant on a "story" that the people manufacturing it want you to. They use certain editted video sequences and sound bites to portray what they want to. The tone and inflection of verbiage is employed to subliminally make you prejudiced to whatever point of view they set out to make.

We don't see the same stuff that Europe sees and vice versa plus different narration and dialogue accompanies things. Stories are "spun" differently for the intended market. It's just they way an pickup truck is marketed- a workhorse that can take it or a comfortable, safe cruiser for your family. That's how they warp the news to say what you finally hear.

In the West news became part of network ratings strategy decades ago. It's all about the sponsors' money now and ratings versus other news shows instead of a simple service to broadcast the news as it once was. It's nothing but a dog and pony show.

We are not the only ones who "see" the worn out parlor tricks..........
Free Movies & Documentaries - Orwell Rolls in His Grave (2003)



Looks like the first signs of persecution for SEDITION..................this is banned from television,I have seen worse stuff on kids shows...This is another attack of free speach,one of the first was the felony hate crime for callin someone school yard derogitory slang for gay.......yes thats right ....a FELONY hate crime for calling some one Names.........
Recently banned on mtv music video

News??? You do have to be kidding. "If it bleeds it leads". Don't know who said it, but unless there is irrefrutable information - such as mayhem or death, there is no truth in media. And as Bob's thread opener said, even that can be twisted. In the morning I watch the weather, get a general idea about what's going on then turn that 'one eyed monster off'. In the evening, again the weather, a few minutes of 'Fair and Balanced'(??) news from Fox, then watch Jeopardy before I either go back to my shop or settle in for the evening with a good book or magazine. We get the local morning paper 3 days a week of the 7 printed, Friday - Sunday. I look at the obits to make sure I'm not there, the comics(which for sure are not for kids any longer), might look at the sports and I'm about done with it. This newspaper used to be center of the road, but is about as left as Hillary. The other local paper is a Hearst paper which moves it further left to about Obama (and I believe thay endorse him as well). Not good -

like what don henley said, "dirty laundry" "kick em when they up, kick em when they down"

just like how the media has crammed this global warming GARBAGE down our throats! enough is enough!!!!

I know first hand how the media can lie, since i, and others i know, have made the news a time or two, ive seen how they twist things! Its funny when you were there , and you get to hear the "real" story from the media!

The lesson I learned is that they edit in/out what they want. About five years ago a local TV station wanted to interview me about the question as to whether folks needed to buy high test gas. I prepared what I thought was a very short set of comments recommending that folks wanting to save on the cost of premium could get a tune up to adjust timng and/or do the "ping test" going up a hill and trying to accelerate without changing gears or downshifting to decide if they needed high test. Then I made a tinker toy model of the branched form of octane. The whole interview was less than ten minutes and I figured they would edit it some but when it aired they had whittled it down to just one sentence with me holding a model that had no explantion. Aside from the subtle manipulation of political views, there is a diservice to general science so they let you say what you want and then they edit out one or two sound bites and that is it! Sooo, if you get a chance for an interview be prepared to say your main point in ten words or less and get to it right away. Don't give them material to edit other comments, just make your point in a few words and that is it. Sure they have Bosses/Editors and time deadlines but you need to avoid giving them too much material to manipulate. My pet peeve is when TV reporters mangle the pronunciation of the names of chemicals and they make it so apparent that their background includes very little science (many have law degrees or a degree in Communication), yet there they are trying to "inform" the public in a newspaper vocabulary of 1000 words or less in an age that depends on technology. Still when you retire try to catch Bill Hemmer and Megan Kelly on FOX in the 10-11 AM slot, they do a pretty good job in a lively way, so there are good reporters. Did I just use more than ten words?

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

I've had some experiences as well. Some bad and some not so bad. You would be wise to always assume the worst though. Like, how do you know Uncle Bob ain't an under cover media operative just trying to lure some of you saps into saying something that his editor can twist into a major security threat?

(Twilight zone music here) Kitz

Wrong thread Jon, the conspiracy, um, uh, oh........stuff, is across the hall.

It would be easy to get cynical about this media stuff. I saw this obvious joke as good commentary (humor always seems to work best when it incorporates real life situations) on how we should be willing to dig deeper whenever we see/hear a news account. It's also important for what we get from the internet. As in this story, the reporter could defend him/herself as being "accurate" by saying the guy did ride a bike, the lion was from Africa, and the kid was supposed to be lunch. But context has meaning.

Don, what you say has great merit, any time we put our comments in the hands of editors we're at risk. I once got a call from one of the local TV "consumer advocate" reporters. He asked his question wanting my feedback. I told him that his premise was wrong, that the condition/product he was doing his report on was not as he wanted to present it. I offered several non-biased sources to refute his position, and I naively thought that would cause him to present the facts (I was much younger then ). When I tuned in to see his report his agenda was clear. Facts be damned, he was on a crusade! That episode along with many others has caused me over the years to seek out multiple sources of info on any matters that are of import.