[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] I’d opine that the news business of the present is probably far different from that of the past, especially given the rapid encroachment of social media and the internet. The Drudge Report was certainly something of a game-changer during the CLinton Administration and I believe we’re seeing a return of the more sharp-elbowed and less objective days of the distant past……
There was an interesting series of articles following the Breivik attacks in Norway, many of which asked if the present attitudes towards Islam contributed to, or even facilitated the attack…..
I believe the days of truly objective and, more importantly, non-partisan journalship are behind us, and all of us, intentionally or not, now feed our confirmation bias by finding those sources that support and advance our “beliefs”.[/quote]
This is definitely true, although I believe that the Internet “news sources” (such as Drudge), for the most part, were largely created to counter the mainstream media’s reporting of events, whether or not that reporting was accurate. I wasn’t following Drudge back in the 90s, but I’ll ask you: Was Matt Drudge responsible for keeping the Monica story going for as long as it did, or was it simply a case of the MSM attempting to keep ahead (aka, keep up with) of what was being reported on Drudge?
While I realize there are serious economic considerations, I’m disgusted by the MSM’s abdication of its responsibility to report the news in an objective way. While some of the general news stories are written in an objective manner, they are so concerned with being called “liberal” that they go to ridiculous lengths to prevent that from happening (and it doesn’t work!). Also, the news is surrounded by so many opinion pieces, and the comments of readers, that it’s difficult to discern objectivity. In addition, I find the starring roles being assumed by reporters and columnists on TV news and pundits shows, that I can’t trust anything that they write.
The whole Norway thing, with the endless speculation….no, declarations……of an Islamic perpetrator, was pretty disturbing. This was an across-the-board action on the part of all forms of media. Although I have to admit to some amusement when reading a thread on FreeRepublic.com: 150 posts of ever-escalating hate directed at the Muslim perpetrators, interspersed with declarations of the brave among them of what they would do/ what the US should do to ALL Muslims, including US citizens…..UP TO THE POINT when someone wrote in that it was a blond-haired blue-eyed native of Norway who represented a Christian militant group who had been responsible. The board immediately fell silent. It was like those old SNL Roseanne Roseannadanna skits: “Oh!….Never mind.”
As for the feeding of our confirmation bias, I think simply recognizing that we do that is a significant accomplishment. Once I realized a couple years back that I was doing it, I made an effort to stay off websites that had opinions most closely aligned with mine, and went out of my way to research those that didn’t. It can be very difficult to read some of this stuff sometimes. But I find that I’m getting a much better overall picture of what’s going on. And I also have a more accurate picture of what’s happening at the grass-roots level.
