begin oe_protect.scr
Sinister Midget <phydeaux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> On 2006-11-15, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
>> Wrong Yesterday Wrong Today Wrong Tomorrow
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| I just got through watching a segment on the Today Show on NBC
>>| highlighting the launch of the Microsoft Zune.
>>|
>>| First of all, I thought journalists were suppose to reveal their
>>| affiliations with any product if such an affiliation exists.
>>| Microsoft owns a stake in NBC ie MSNBC News Network.
>>|
>>| [...]
>>|
>>| Second, all the side by side product comparisons showed 4th Gen iPods
>>| with monochrome screens with no song selected or playing, while the
>>| Zune was playing a video.
>>|
>>| [...]
>>|
>>| This isn't the first time NBC has misled its morning viewers with
>>| puff pieces about the Zune.
>> `----
>>
>> http://fixyourthinking.com/2006/11/wrong-yesterday-wrong-today-wrong.html
>
> Oh, no. This is obviously fabricated. Erik sez there's complete
> journalistic freedom at MSNBC. Erik sez they value their reputation as
> news bunnies and non-shills too much to allow themselves to be tainted
> by supporting their masters' bottom lines.
>
>> This reminds me more than ever before of Stallman's suggestion never to
>> follow mainstream media because it's controlled by companies and delivers
>> their interests.
>
> It applies commercially, politically and socially. There's no such
> thing as honest, unfiltered news.
Yes and no; the UK has some very very strong laws about bias in news.
Whilst you can take the fully philosophical viewpoint to argue that
there is no such thing as truth, or right and wrong, if we take a step
back to a more reasonable world, this system does work fairly well, and
there is certainly the opportunity to complain about coverage and so on.
Similarly, advertising is controlled by the advertising standards
authority, and has to meet very exacting rules (apart from for beauty
products where you can say what you like, pretty much).
Finally, the newspapers are controlled with respect to honest coverage
of facts, although they are not required to be unbiassed politically, as
the radio and television media are. The newspaper watchdog will insist
on corrections and retractions being printed as required.
Of course, there are also libel laws and similar, which provide
protection, but the system is not really much use on a "day to day"
basis, it's more for major issues.
>You get what they want you to get,
> packaged in whatever way necessary to meet their own set of internal
> (and often external) agendas.
>
> Print and broadcast media ponder the question as to why their audiences
> shrink, as well as why they don't rule the roost any more. For some
> strange reason they like to point to everything as a cause except for
> their own often transparent dishonesty.
>
If you live in the US, I can see that being the dominant issue.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Save gas, don't eat beans.
|
|
