Mage246 said:rejenorst said:Cheers man. I am glad I am not the only one who is willing to look critically at our side of the media as I was expecting to get flamed for that last post lol
You posted mostly about Voice of America. Everyone knows that Voice of America is a mouthpiece of the US government. That is its official role. Everyone also knows why it exists - to enable the US government to introduce its viewpoint to foreign audiences who might not otherwise have the option to hear it.
Your bit about the Iraq War fails to establish any scenario in which either the press reported something because the government made it report something or that the press did not contradict something that the government was saying that it knew was wrong.
Does the government have a viewpoint, does it advocate for that viewpoint, and does it give preferential treatment to those who either share those viewpoint or are uncritical of it? Yes. No ****. 100% of the human population of the planet is engaged in the same process when it comes to their own personal viewpoint. The same is true of organizations and government. That is not interference with the press. There is no requirement stating that the press should have any and all access that they want. No one said being a reporter was supposed to be easy.
The only important questions for determining government interference are:
1) does the government suppress critical opinions? No.
2) does the government require that the press parrot its viewpoint? No.
3) does the government engage in systematic falsification of data (as in, as general policy) to prevent the press from discovering the truth? No.
Everything else is up to the press to figure out and for the viewer to decide on.
I think you are drawing a bit of an artificial line there Mage, though since this is getting a bit off topic maybe we should start a new thread . . . Propaganda? Are we all just Brain-washed Proles?
Even without direct government "intervention" there are myriad subtle ways to interfere in freedom of the press. Couple cases in point.
1. Sheryl Attkisson resigned from CBS. Evidently she was one of (if not the only) journalist there who really wanted to dig on the Benghazi story more (which to me was a feeble right-wing attempt to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, but nonetheless . . .)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/03/sharyl-attkisson-to-leave-cbs-news-184836.html
Sharyl Attkisson resigns from CBS News
Close By DYLAN BYERS | 3/10/14 2:36 PM EDT
CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has reached an agreement to resign from CBS News ahead of contract, bringing an end to months of hard-fought negotiations, sources familiar with her departure told POLITICO on Monday.
Attkisson, who has been with CBS News for two decades, had grown frustrated with what she saw as the network's liberal bias, an outsized influence by the network's corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting, several sources said. She increasingly felt like her work was no longer supported and that it was a struggle to get her reporting on air.
At the same time, Attkisson's own reporting on the Obama administration, which some staffers characterized as agenda-driven, had led network executives to doubt the impartiality of her reporting. She is currently at work on a book -- tentatively titled "Stonewalled: One Reporter's Fight for Truth in Obama's Washington" -- which addresses the challenges of reporting critically on the Obama administration.
(WATCH: POLITICO interviews Sharyl Attkisson)
Feeling increasingly stymied and marginalized at the network, Attkisson began talking to CBS News President David Rhodes as early as last April about getting out of her contract. Those negotiations intensified in recent weeks, and her request was finally honored on Monday.
Reached by phone, Attkisson described her resignation as "amicable." She said she will now turn her attention to the book, which is being published by HarperCollins, a division of NewsCorp (and not by Simon & Schuster, a division of CBS Corporation.)
Sonya McNair, the senior vice president for communications for CBS News, said in a statement: “CBS News veteran Sharyl Attkisson is leaving the news division to pursue other endeavors. We appreciate her many contributions and we wish her well.”
(Earlier on POLITICO: The Attkisson approach)
But Attkisson had become a polarizing figure at the network, sources there said. While some championed her relentless dedication to investigations -- ranging from defective Firestone Tires to the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal -- others saw evidence of a political agenda, particularly against President Obama. (The bulk of Attkisson’s work since 2009 has focused on the failures or perceived failures of the Obama administration, including the administration’s failed green energy investments and the attack in Benghazi, though she has reported on several Republican failures as well.)
Others have suggested that CBS News itself was politically biased: "It's no secret that Sharyl has been unhappy about CBS's lack of interest in investigative reporting, especially when it comes to stories about the Obama administration," a source close to Attkisson said.
(50 POLITICOs to watch: Sharyl Attkisson)
Attkisson's frustrations aside, the network maintains a dedicated investigative unit, which produces packages that appear across CBS News programming.
Attkisson joined CBS News from CNN in 1993. She served as an overnight anchor for two years before becoming a Washington-based correspondent, a position she held until this week. She has won five Emmy awards for her reporting on Fast and Furious, the Red Cross, Republican fundraising, TARP and border patrol.
An earlier version of this post said Attkisson has won two Emmy awards. She has won five.
Sharyl Attkisson resigns from CBS News
Close By DYLAN BYERS | 3/10/14 2:36 PM EDT
CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has reached an agreement to resign from CBS News ahead of contract, bringing an end to months of hard-fought negotiations, sources familiar with her departure told POLITICO on Monday.
Attkisson, who has been with CBS News for two decades, had grown frustrated with what she saw as the network's liberal bias, an outsized influence by the network's corporate partners and a lack of dedication to investigative reporting, several sources said. She increasingly felt like her work was no longer supported and that it was a struggle to get her reporting on air.
At the same time, Attkisson's own reporting on the Obama administration, which some staffers characterized as agenda-driven, had led network executives to doubt the impartiality of her reporting. She is currently at work on a book -- tentatively titled "Stonewalled: One Reporter's Fight for Truth in Obama's Washington" -- which addresses the challenges of reporting critically on the Obama administration.
(WATCH: POLITICO interviews Sharyl Attkisson)
Feeling increasingly stymied and marginalized at the network, Attkisson began talking to CBS News President David Rhodes as early as last April about getting out of her contract. Those negotiations intensified in recent weeks, and her request was finally honored on Monday.
Reached by phone, Attkisson described her resignation as "amicable." She said she will now turn her attention to the book, which is being published by HarperCollins, a division of NewsCorp (and not by Simon & Schuster, a division of CBS Corporation.)
Sonya McNair, the senior vice president for communications for CBS News, said in a statement: “CBS News veteran Sharyl Attkisson is leaving the news division to pursue other endeavors. We appreciate her many contributions and we wish her well.”
(Earlier on POLITICO: The Attkisson approach)
But Attkisson had become a polarizing figure at the network, sources there said. While some championed her relentless dedication to investigations -- ranging from defective Firestone Tires to the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal -- others saw evidence of a political agenda, particularly against President Obama. (The bulk of Attkisson’s work since 2009 has focused on the failures or perceived failures of the Obama administration, including the administration’s failed green energy investments and the attack in Benghazi, though she has reported on several Republican failures as well.)
Others have suggested that CBS News itself was politically biased: "It's no secret that Sharyl has been unhappy about CBS's lack of interest in investigative reporting, especially when it comes to stories about the Obama administration," a source close to Attkisson said.
(50 POLITICOs to watch: Sharyl Attkisson)
Attkisson's frustrations aside, the network maintains a dedicated investigative unit, which produces packages that appear across CBS News programming.
Attkisson joined CBS News from CNN in 1993. She served as an overnight anchor for two years before becoming a Washington-based correspondent, a position she held until this week. She has won five Emmy awards for her reporting on Fast and Furious, the Red Cross, Republican fundraising, TARP and border patrol.
An earlier version of this post said Attkisson has won two Emmy awards. She has won five.
2. Networks devote 100 more coverage to plug Obama's "between two ferns" fake interview than they do to the actual problem
Now both of these deal with "liberal media bias," which is of course prime rhetoric for the right. But I'm quite confident that we could easily find equivalent issues of imbalance in coverage and consideration from right-leaning media.
You don't have to say anything to be biased. In fact, not saying anything might reflect bias.
. . . anyway, maybe this can be a fun thread for us to discourse through
