Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Industry peer sent article decrying the MSMs biased reporting "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]- I don’t completely disagree that there is some bias- but then linked to some publications he views as ‘fact based’ and focused on ‘issues important to center right readers’. He claims the MSM (‘dinosaur’ media) slanders this ‘new media’ by calling it ‘right wing’ and that he can’t ever forgive Obama for some quote he made about ‘guns and bibles’. Again, I felt open to the idea of some bias so I went to these new media sites- daily caller, daily signal. It was mostly a pile of complete garbage rehashing of alleged Dem failures. Hunter laptop, Biden wasn’t sharp as a tack, Biden was involved in hunters crooked business dealings, blah blah. Seriously? This is what these ‘fact based’ publications are focused on? This is important news? What in the world? [/quote] I think that this a very interesting question and debate, and I have a lot of issues with how the MSM is handling the Trump administration, but it doesn't sound like the discussion you were having was very informed or productive. There are respected and reliable right of center media sources bit Daily Caller and most especially the Daily Signal are not among them. https://adfontesmedia.com/ is super debatable but it is a serious endeavor and a good place to start. I appreciate that it tries to take into account how fact-based vs analysis-based an organization might be. This is not good-bad, of course, only that the farther you get from just relaying of facts (AP, Reuters), the more chance of editorializing the truth. Then again, most of us like and want informed writers to synthesize material, to investigate, to present background info. So, again, these are interesting topic of debate. I also think it's interesting when you look at the Ad Fontes chart that takes into account left/right and reliability/lack of reliability, that one doesn't get any sense of the level of of the writing. Is it super accessible? Is it written for an educated audience? In any case, good question. [/quote] Where is the NYT on this list? [/quote] Welp, considering their zoomed in cropped photo whining about Trump wearing a blue suit to the Pope's funeral and never showing all the others at the funeral who did the same, I'd say it's pretty low. Everyone knows where they stand. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics