• brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    97
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Too often they treat what these people say as if it the news itself. Unbiased, and a source of truth. Reporting has just become gossip repeating the worse people say.

    • Fluffy Kitty Cat@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      7 hours ago

      This really is a big problem, “look at what this person said” type stories are basically how Donald Trump Rose to power, his words quoted as if they were the news itself, without any sort of filtering to fact checking. If he had simply been reported as lying without repeating the LIE his power would be significantly reduced

      • ferrule@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        but how do you do that when the maga base all believe there is a big kabal against them. If the reporters just say the politician lied the base will claim the reporter lied.

        either they need to call out the politician on the first lie and not let it go further until they respond with the explaination or you give them absolutely no air time, not even stating they lied. make them responsible or invisible.

    • Eldritch@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s a consequence of access journalism. And the false notion that neutrality is possible. The grain of wood is biased. The proteins that make up our body and its biological functions fold in a biased way. The fundamental particles and fields of the universe have biases too.

      There is nothing wrong with bias as long as it is biased in favor of the truth. Performative neutrality, presenting two positions weakly/lazily as equally plausible. It has no value. If we lived in a society where individuals not only had the time, but desire to independently research everything for themselves as well. This wouldn’t be such a problem. But we don’t.

      People read reporting and articles to be informed. When the reporting doesn’t present anything definitive other than party A said one thing and party B said another thing. Then the reader simply chooses the one they prefer. Regardless of the facts.

    • adj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Totally agree. Way too many stories are about the quote itself.

      Person says subjective or demonstrably true or untrue objective thing

      vs

      Demonstrably true objective thing (with person substantiating)