I think CNN and even worse MSNBC, just have got to the point that they hate Trump and any Republicans so bad that they will amp up ANY negative story on someone on the right. They don't care to investigate if it is true or not.

This does put them somewhere between "Fake News" and "purely lazy and should be fired". 

I look at "Fake News" as the crap you see on social media that is easily determined wrong with a 5 second google search. We all have FB "friends" that share this stuff as gospel truth on both sides of the aisle. Think Alex Jones, Vox, etc.

Do I think CNN has gone that far? No, but they have got somewhat too close to call them legitimate journalism anymore, that is for sure.

Oh, and I am with you on Trump, he's that type of guy you want to have a few drinks with just to see what stupid shit he would say.

posted by kizer permanente

Was it intentional, which is against every journalistic measure? Or was it pure laziness?.. Report now, investigate later. Now I know these aren't mutually exclusive. It could be a little bit of all.  -They purposefully mislead people. There is not a chance in hell anyone actually believed Avanetti had anything on Kavanaugh about the absurd sex ring stuff. They want things to be true so they just run with it, regardless of any sort of investigating or facts to back it up.
Why would a major news network go all in like this? -Bc the left still eats it up. 
What did they think their end game would be? -They got a ton of coverage off of it and no one who watches them religiously cares that they lie
What do you think, if anything, will be any repercussions for the network? -0 repercussions and no one will care in a week

Oh, I forgot about how CNN threw Avanetti out there spouting the absurd sex ring BS. 

That did push them even closer to Fake News.

One thing has become clear over the last 2 years, of the 3 major 24/7 news channels (MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News), Fox News has been now proven to be the most balanced of the 3.

https://nypost.com/2019/03/25/mueller-madness-the-media-pundits-who-got-it-most-wrong/

Pretty priceless

I often wonder how so many news outlets use the same catch phrases and talking points simultaniously.  Do they call each other up and share their ideas?

I often wonder if the heads of these networks have secret meetings to keep up naratives that most people know are BS

Watching the montages of all them using the same words and catchphrases is hilarious.  I am not sure who the puppet master is, nor when the daily emails go out to the talking heads with the day’s phraseology.  I also wonder who coaches them on the facial expressions to use, especially the ‘stunned, dumbfounded’ look; the women do that one pretty well.

Frankly, I think all of the 'major' news outlets are spewing 'fake' news.......

I define 'fake' news as that is slanted by a political or personal lean, rather than 'real' news which is simply stating the facts of what has happened.

Fox, CNN, PMSNBC, etc etc etc all practice this....it's just which lean you have that determines what you listen to.

I come across this thread right after watching Tim Pool's about this very thing:

I think the Trump Bump probably constitutes the largest share of the pie of reasons. Before Trump, CNN's most avid viewers were the people sitting in airports and doctor's offices. After Trump CNN's ratings went up a bit, their online site got a huge uptick in clicks and therefore ad revenue.

In the vid above Zucker comes out and says that they are only reporting the facts as they know them and that they are not investigators. 

All news media outlets suck. They’re interested in making money and running the show like a gossip magazine makes money. They have zero interest in telling the public actual news. Too opinionated and bias. And that goes for left and right wing media. Don’t pretend like Fox News doesn’t do the same shit CNN does. 

to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

posted by kizer permanente

to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

100% true. When I say Fox is "more" fair and balanced than the others now I am excluding all of the prime time opinion shows for all 3 networks. I am only talking about the actual news shows. CNN and MSNBC hacked up the Russia journalism for sure even on their news shows.

posted by kizer permanente

to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

That is a huge part of it. As others have said on here, Fox does do a respectable job when it comes to at least attempting to have some sort of balance...when it comes to straight news. But they also provide a home to Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham and others who exist solely to keep the batshit-crazy-n-stupid people excited, which proves to make it so that left wingers won't take them seriously as a remotely balanced organization because the guys who aren't !!!!!ALL R, ALL THE TIME!!!!! don't get the headlines that the nutcases do (both outwardly or inwardly, as fucking Hannity is about the station mascot despite being pure trash).

There was a survey shortly after the election, and I think updated recently....that the non-opinion shows, which is roughly 45-55% on Fox/CNN (lol, like 10% on MSNBC) and NBC/CBS/ABC news were all over 90% negative on Trump.  Fox was around 50% negative.  When it came to Obama, Fox was around 38% negative while the other networks averaged less than 15%.

I don't believe any of the news is unbiased. I'm beginning to wonder if it ever was. Ben Franklin owned a news paper, wrote articles with pseudonyms and used his position with the post office to get it delivered and spread his views. 

posted by FatHobbit

I don't believe any of the news is unbiased. I'm beginning to wonder if it ever was. Ben Franklin owned a news paper, wrote articles with pseudonyms and used his position with the post office to get it delivered and spread his views. 

Opinion and bias has been creeping into fact-based journalism for years.  Now "journalism" and opinion pieces are almost indistinguishable.  And with that has come a lowering of ethics and standards.  Worse, we are seeing it start to corrupt the sciences, as well.  Everything is being weaponized for political propaganda.

Sure, straight factual news can still have plenty of bias in terms of what stories you choose to cover and how much coverage you devote to it.  But that's something that easily melts away with a decent cross-section of sources.

I miss the days you could watch CNN or Fox and get actual news unrelated to politics.

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Long read, but worth it.

posted by gut

There was a survey shortly after the election, and I think updated recently....that the non-opinion shows, which is roughly 45-55% on Fox/CNN (lol, like 10% on MSNBC) and NBC/CBS/ABC news were all over 90% negative on Trump.  Fox was around 50% negative.  When it came to Obama, Fox was around 38% negative while the other networks averaged less than 15%.

I remember that study, but it was completely ignored by most MSM because it didn't fit their narrative. 

Objective studies have proven that Fox's news shows are far more balanced than the others, but everyone just believes its "Hannity, Tucker, and heck, they used to have Glenn BECK!".

posted by jmog

Objective studies have proven that Fox's news shows are far more balanced than the others...

That's always been pretty clear.  Not Hannity and that other garbage.  But when you realize just how much in the bag the other media sources are for the Dems, then you understand why they all so relentlessly attack Fox.  Fox, and to a lesser extent Rush, are pretty much the only opposition out there to the Democratic propaganda. 

It's unfortunate that Fox still does have Hannity and the like.  But the core audience, like their counterparts on CNN and MSNBC, are people with a psychological need to be outraged.

By the way, is the most concerning/alarming thing in all this coverage the former Obama officials who made the rounds telling blatant lies unopposed?

You have a former CIA director saying he KNOWS there is evidence....in order to deliberately undermine a sitting POTUS.  It's mind blowing.

posted by QuakerOats

 

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Long read, but worth it.

Taibbi should get the Pulitzer for this piece that was erroneously given to WaPo.

posted by QuakerOats

 

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

 

Long read, but worth it.

 

I read that yesterday. You're right it is a good read. I think it draws a fair comparison to the two events, also. And it also shows that, with every generation there is the same big media misguidance that happens.

posted by gut

By the way, is the most concerning/alarming thing in all this coverage the former Obama officials who made the rounds telling blatant lies unopposed?

You have a former CIA director saying he KNOWS there is evidence....in order to deliberately undermine a sitting POTUS.  It's mind blowing.

Shocking, and soon to be revealed is the extent of the spying, colluding, lying, and complete abuse of power.  Keep the popcorn nearby.

posted by QuakerOats

 

 

Shocking, and soon to be revealed is the extent of the spying, colluding, lying, and complete abuse of power.  Keep the popcorn nearby.

I doubt we will ever know. Accusations will be made, yes. They've been made all along and guess what? Nothing ever comes of it.

posted by CenterBHSFan

I doubt we will ever know. Accusations will be made, yes. They've been made all along and guess what? Nothing ever comes of it.

Something like this, everyone just gets up there and pleads the 5th.  Congress is completely impotent in its ability to uncover corruption or cover-ups.  You have to have a special prosecutor, but both sides generally avoid it if at all possible because there clearly are too many abuses on both sides.....and god forbid if special prosecutors become the norm we might actually clean-up Washington.

I think the #1 reason Congress is afraid of special prosecutors is maybe as many as half of them have used their office to enrich themselves.  Heck, it's probably almost 100% but some abuse it much more than others.

There has never been (and hopefully never will be) a time when we needed a special prosecutor more …….we absolutely have to investigate the entire genesis of the Russia hoax, and all the abuses and the cover up, and the high-ranking officials who severely tarnished this nation must be put away.