in political news

we often discuss peoples standards/values/beliefs in terms of conservative or liberal,, but as Igor has mentioned before there are fewer people who fall strictly in one category OR the other as there are those who toggle among and between the two

of those who do fall very devotedly and strictly within one box or another(I call them extremist) ..they seem to have media sources who pander to their ideals on the regular

for instance

Fox seems to report to conservative extremists
HuffPost seems to report to liberal extremists


This does not mean that either source does not also provide valuable information, it only means they can be counted on to slant that information towards a specific narrative every time,,,


Do you believe the integrity of our news media(by this I mean all methods of media from cable and internet to published news ) is diminished by an OVERABUNDANCE of extremism pandering to a certain consumer base?

Do you believe the value of our news media , considering such pandering, is declining due to an undereducation of the average consumer in things like

1. Discerning fact from opinion?
2. Discerning truth from allegation?
3. Understanding context?



and might we as consumers influence media to create news with integrity by becoming more educated on these things and 'pandering' ourselves to those sources that still try to report the news and not create it?

I'm conservative, but I don't think I'm an extremist. I watch Fox because they don't spout the liberal BS found elsewhere. (HuffPo, MSNBC, etc., etc.)

US (and world) politics is getting more and more like a football game, where the fans on both sides try to outshout the opposing fans. One side cranks up their volume, and then the other guys crank up their volume in response. It just gets louder and louder until the game ends. Sometimes there are fights in the parking lot.

"What a field day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly saying, 'hooray for our side'"--Buffalo Springfield, "For What It's Worth"

There's a middle ground, and fortunately, there are still some people who try and reach compromises.

I am probably neither neatly conservative or liberal

I have personal christian values but do not believe in laws that impede EITHER the religious or non religious

for instance, my christian values believe lying is wrong and should not be supported by laws, but should also not be PUNISHED by laws(except where contracts and vows/oaths are concerned)

similar to other things I believe are wrong, like certain sexual behaviors and lifestyles

an extremist conservative may go so far as outlawing certain unchristian things

an extremist liberal may go so far as to mandating the government validate and support these things




I Try not to watch much Fox because they seem so spout so much extreme conservative 'bs'

and I try not to read much huffpost because they seem to spout so much extreme liberal 'bs'

This is a very involved subject. It's very important to me, both because of my background (educated to be an Historian), and because I derive my greatest satisfaction from getting things accurate, rather than just pleasing myself.



Absolutely, though I wouldn't use the word "extremism" in this way. The fact that some people don't realize that they are biased as hell, doesn't mean that they are extremists. A lot of the most damaging people to our society, are the biased moderates.

Anyway. The biggest problem I think that the US has right now, is that a heck of a lot of people THINK they are well informed, when they are not even remotely informed, about a lot of very important issues. The reporting from EVERY venue is so deplorably poor, I find that I have to read at least a dozen differently oriented sources before I can work out for myself, what did and didn't actually happen. And I have a more extensive than many existing knowledge of world history to start from.

Has the news gotten vastly worse over the time I've been alive? I'm not really sure. As a never ending student of history, I know that news has ALWAYS BEEN BIASED. Always, whether it was a mostly-free press, or a pure propaganda arm of a government. People who report the news to us are people first. Subject to the exact same kind of self-blindness that lots of people are (there are none so self-unaware, as those who think only ONE kind of people are biased).

I am entirely certain that news reporting was MADE to get worse, during the 1960's, by one particular movement, which had nothing directly to do with freedom of the press or anything related to that. That is, the still ongoing financial fad, of all corporations insisting that every aspect, department, segment, or division of their business be based around making a profit. I remember distinctly how that led to the news department of each corporation shifting from trying to get accurate stories to everyone, to trying to get ratings on the evening news. And that led directly to pandering to scandal mongering, shocking headlines that turned out to be wildly overblown, and to sharp reductions in investments in investigation of stories.

Something else seems to have led a lot of people to decide that taking sides is more important than finding solutions. And once people take a side, they seem to want to refuse to even listen to alternate possibilities, almost as though they fear that if they so much as give a fair hearing to the other side, that somehow magically their side of things will be defeated. That, and lots of people refuse to think their own stances about things through to their logical conclusions.

I'm sure that most people CAN understand context, because even the ones who are expressing the most intensely biased viewpoints, are including context in their attacks on the people they hate. They just refuse to use the same attention to context on the people they want to defend. or vice versa, as the case may be.

I hope so.
No one should simply assume something informing them has "integrity."
Then it becomes too easy to be used for things like propaganda.

IMO I think it's better for people to assume a lack of integrity than to take it for granted.
That's human nature, to start simply assuming past performance guarantees future results of similar quality.

Unless you put all "media" under benevolent altruistic tyrant government control, with government licensing, with constant government watchdogs and enforcement, constant surveillance, and constant control, you're never going to get the "media (...all methods of media from cable and internet to published news)" to act according to, anywhere near, a "good" standard of "integrity."

Other than that, the consumer of "news" still has a responsibility to verify their own beliefs and what they take away from "news" or "media."

You are not entitled to (news) "media." There is no right to know what is going on everywhere at any time given to you in a convenient, timely, manner.


I believe the value of our news media is whatever the producer and consumer decide it is.


As consumers, not really.
As parents, siblings, teachers, bosses, friends, cultural representatives with direct access, to those who go forth and get careers in disseminating "news media," influencing their values, norms, morals, yes.


Good luck with that.
k-12, the most formative years of a persons life, spent in compulsory education...and you're bringing up undereducation in basic abilities, pointing out a decline?

Yeah, sure, if people would just all group together hold hands and focus on becoming more educated on these things and pander ourselves to those sources that still try to report the news with integrity, not create it, and all news reports are completely and absolutely transparent so we know all motives and driving forces and sources and reasons and context to every news story, then sure, we can change the world!

I grew up believing that the news was suppose to be fair and impartial ..Seems everyone in the news these days has an opinion and have no problem expressing it.Well ya know what they say about opinions..As far as any position I have.. are mine and I don't go much in for stereotyping. I am one.

Y'mean that old saying comparing opinions to some portion of the human anatomy? "Everyone's got one." (And there may be another line added, depending on which anatomical feature is mentioned.)

I've heard that applied to excuses, too. It's another of those pithy sayings I learned in the Air Force.

I'm the oddball.
NEWS stands for North, East, West, South.
It is meant to provide facts about the world around us.

A dam broke in Gains County yesterday. 140 people died, 569 people were injured and there was $400,062.00 in damages to local personal and business properties.

That is NEWS.

James Joe told the dam builders there were weaknesses in the design but they didn't listen. The dam was built using a poor design because mayor Tomason was hiding the money in a personal endeavor to get rich. His construction business will oversee much of the rebuilding process.

That ... IS NOT NEWS.

Today's NEWS is opinion based on a fact. It uses opinions of certain people to influence how we understand the world around us.

Headlines are worded to grab attention.
Instead of
"Dam Breaks In Gains County"
it might read
"Gains County Disaster Results From Get Rich Scheme"

I'm an oddball because I don't pay attention to the NEWS anymore.
If I am interested in finding out what happened, I dissect the NEWS to the bare facts, then I form my own opinions.

I concern myself with the world in my range, in the moment. I have done this for years and the world has not fallen apart. No matter my opinion, there is little I can change. If I could, I would. Shoulda, coulda and woulda, Didn't.

Have you heard any reports of the Philippines fitting isil in the city?
No!

Conservatives are "right" and for some reason liberals are "left" , I guess some people just don't agree with people who are right and are left to try to get people to see thing their way.

I think the labels were created by conservatives

the creators made theirs the 'right'

lol

kind of like racial labels,,, the creators made theirs the purest

Well, "right" and "left" originated in a parliamentary house early on. The Royalists (who wanted the King to remain in power) were seated on the right side of the room, and the people who wanted self-rule by the people were seated on the left side. Once that slang was established, the names stuck no matter where people were seated.

A lot has changed over the decades since the original ideas of Liberalism and Conservatism were established, but one generality seems to be the same. The Right back then, as now, thought that a small group of the Most Important People (decided by wealth) should be in charge at all times, and the Left thought that control of the government should be decided by a much larger and more inclusive part of society.

thank you for another history tidbit Igor

In the UK it's conservatives on the right, labour on the left and liberals seen as the centre party.
There are different stages depending on how you feel, far right, centre right. far left, centre left etc

A 3 or 4 party electoral system better reflects the peoples governing wishes

These 2 (Dems & Reps) just pass the football back & forth, nothing ever changes, one blames the other and vise versa... vicious circle. American can't seem to include a third party in their electoral system.

I think it's orchestrated to keep it this way, politicians need to keep it this way, keeping the odds at 50/50 to run the country

Yes, the only problem is here is where as with your way it's at least 50%
Who get there way it could potentially be only just over a third so even more people are disappointed!

Yea, I bet in 2016, ALL voters would have welcomed a third candidate with open arms lol

Another problem arises with many of these terrorists groups is that they have been manufactured by successive governments to fight 'proxy 'wars then when they have been used Then disgarded.

Lol definitely, we had a vote, or referendum on leaving Europe, it was a close vote but the outcome was to leave . a few are calling for another vote on it, but how many do you have to get the outcome you want?
It's a democracy and that's how it works!

Lol definitely, we had a vote, or referendum on leaving Europe, it was a close vote but the outcome was to leave . a few are calling for another vote on it, but how many do you have to get the outcome you want?
It's a democracy and that's how it works!