CNN.. Fake News or lazy?

kizer permanente Senior Member

1,309 posts 18 reps Joined Aug 2017

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 9:12 AM

So I find CNN interesting right now... Trump starts the Fake News crusade against them and they inexplicably decide to prove him right. Now it's no secret I don't like Trump. I think he's legitimately stupid. And it irritates me because he's the worst kind of person.. He's stupid and thinks he's smart. Which is why it's so crazy to me that CNN decided to go full retard and prove him right. They reported conspiracy after conspiracy and welcomed conspiracy theorist after conspiracy theorist on their show for the last 2 years. Was it in the name of ratings which would be inevitable with a growing, furthering left party? Was it intentional, which is against every journalistic measure? Or was it pure laziness?.. Report now, investigate later. Now I know these aren't mutually exclusive. It could be a little bit of all.
But what say you?
Why would a major news network go all in like this?
What did they think their end game would be?
What do you think, if anything, will be any repercussions for the network?

jmog Senior Member

7,737 posts 52 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 10:11 AM

I think CNN and even worse MSNBC, just have got to the point that they hate Trump and any Republicans so bad that they will amp up ANY negative story on someone on the right. They don't care to investigate if it is true or not.

This does put them somewhere between "Fake News" and "purely lazy and should be fired".

I look at "Fake News" as the crap you see on social media that is easily determined wrong with a 5 second google search. We all have FB "friends" that share this stuff as gospel truth on both sides of the aisle. Think Alex Jones, Vox, etc.

Do I think CNN has gone that far? No, but they have got somewhat too close to call them legitimate journalism anymore, that is for sure.

Oh, and I am with you on Trump, he's that type of guy you want to have a few drinks with just to see what stupid shit he would say.

iclfan2 Reppin' the 330/216/843

9,465 posts 99 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 10:12 AM

posted by kizer permanente
Was it intentional, which is against every journalistic measure? Or was it pure laziness?.. Report now, investigate later. Now I know these aren't mutually exclusive. It could be a little bit of all. -They purposefully mislead people. There is not a chance in hell anyone actually believed Avanetti had anything on Kavanaugh about the absurd sex ring stuff. They want things to be true so they just run with it, regardless of any sort of investigating or facts to back it up.
Why would a major news network go all in like this? -Bc the left still eats it up.
What did they think their end game would be? -They got a ton of coverage off of it and no one who watches them religiously cares that they lie
What do you think, if anything, will be any repercussions for the network? -0 repercussions and no one will care in a week

jmog Senior Member

7,737 posts 52 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 10:13 AM

Oh, I forgot about how CNN threw Avanetti out there spouting the absurd sex ring BS.

That did push them even closer to Fake News.

One thing has become clear over the last 2 years, of the 3 major 24/7 news channels (MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News), Fox News has been now proven to be the most balanced of the 3.

QuakerOats Senior Member

11,701 posts 66 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 10:37 AM

https://nypost.com/2019/03/25/mueller-madness-the-media-pundits-who-got-it-most-wrong/

Pretty priceless

Spock Senior Member

5,271 posts 9 reps Joined Jul 2013

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 11:06 AM

I often wonder how so many news outlets use the same catch phrases and talking points simultaniously. Do they call each other up and share their ideas?

I often wonder if the heads of these networks have secret meetings to keep up naratives that most people know are BS

QuakerOats Senior Member

11,701 posts 66 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 11:14 AM

Watching the montages of all them using the same words and catchphrases is hilarious. I am not sure who the puppet master is, nor when the daily emails go out to the talking heads with the day’s phraseology. I also wonder who coaches them on the facial expressions to use, especially the ‘stunned, dumbfounded’ look; the women do that one pretty well.

wkfan Senior Member

1,850 posts 13 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 11:14 AM

Frankly, I think all of the 'major' news outlets are spewing 'fake' news.......

I define 'fake' news as that is slanted by a political or personal lean, rather than 'real' news which is simply stating the facts of what has happened.

Fox, CNN, PMSNBC, etc etc etc all practice this....it's just which lean you have that determines what you listen to.

CenterBHSFan 333 - I'm only half evil

7,259 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 11:44 AM

I come across this thread right after watching Tim Pool's about this very thing:

I think the Trump Bump probably constitutes the largest share of the pie of reasons. Before Trump, CNN's most avid viewers were the people sitting in airports and doctor's offices. After Trump CNN's ratings went up a bit, their online site got a huge uptick in clicks and therefore ad revenue.

In the vid above Zucker comes out and says that they are only reporting the facts as they know them and that they are not investigators.

SportsAndLady Senior Member

39,070 posts 24 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 11:58 AM

All news media outlets suck. They’re interested in making money and running the show like a gossip magazine makes money. They have zero interest in telling the public actual news. Too opinionated and bias. And that goes for left and right wing media. Don’t pretend like Fox News doesn’t do the same shit CNN does.

kizer permanente Senior Member

1,309 posts 18 reps Joined Aug 2017

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 12:33 PM

to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

jmog Senior Member

7,737 posts 52 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 12:42 PM

posted by kizer permanente
to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

100% true. When I say Fox is "more" fair and balanced than the others now I am excluding all of the prime time opinion shows for all 3 networks. I am only talking about the actual news shows. CNN and MSNBC hacked up the Russia journalism for sure even on their news shows.

Heretic Son of the Sun

20,517 posts 204 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 12:44 PM

posted by kizer permanente
to add... I don't think you can have a 24 hour "news" network and be fair and balanced. You can't fill 24 hrs without interjecting opinions for most of it. Opinions will always be biased and largely inaccurate.

That is a huge part of it. As others have said on here, Fox does do a respectable job when it comes to at least attempting to have some sort of balance...when it comes to straight news. But they also provide a home to Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham and others who exist solely to keep the batshit-crazy-n-stupid people excited, which proves to make it so that left wingers won't take them seriously as a remotely balanced organization because the guys who aren't !!!!!ALL R, ALL THE TIME!!!!! don't get the headlines that the nutcases do (both outwardly or inwardly, as fucking Hannity is about the station mascot despite being pure trash).

gut Senior Member

18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 1:09 PM

There was a survey shortly after the election, and I think updated recently....that the non-opinion shows, which is roughly 45-55% on Fox/CNN (lol, like 10% on MSNBC) and NBC/CBS/ABC news were all over 90% negative on Trump. Fox was around 50% negative. When it came to Obama, Fox was around 38% negative while the other networks averaged less than 15%.

FatHobbit Senior Member

9,058 posts 68 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 1:56 PM

I don't believe any of the news is unbiased. I'm beginning to wonder if it ever was. Ben Franklin owned a news paper, wrote articles with pseudonyms and used his position with the post office to get it delivered and spread his views.

gut Senior Member

18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:02 PM

posted by FatHobbit
I don't believe any of the news is unbiased. I'm beginning to wonder if it ever was. Ben Franklin owned a news paper, wrote articles with pseudonyms and used his position with the post office to get it delivered and spread his views.

Opinion and bias has been creeping into fact-based journalism for years. Now "journalism" and opinion pieces are almost indistinguishable. And with that has come a lowering of ethics and standards. Worse, we are seeing it start to corrupt the sciences, as well. Everything is being weaponized for political propaganda.

Sure, straight factual news can still have plenty of bias in terms of what stories you choose to cover and how much coverage you devote to it. But that's something that easily melts away with a decent cross-section of sources.

I miss the days you could watch CNN or Fox and get actual news unrelated to politics.

QuakerOats Senior Member

11,701 posts 66 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:08 PM

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Long read, but worth it.

jmog Senior Member

7,737 posts 52 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:15 PM

posted by gut
There was a survey shortly after the election, and I think updated recently....that the non-opinion shows, which is roughly 45-55% on Fox/CNN (lol, like 10% on MSNBC) and NBC/CBS/ABC news were all over 90% negative on Trump. Fox was around 50% negative. When it came to Obama, Fox was around 38% negative while the other networks averaged less than 15%.

I remember that study, but it was completely ignored by most MSM because it didn't fit their narrative.

Objective studies have proven that Fox's news shows are far more balanced than the others, but everyone just believes its "Hannity, Tucker, and heck, they used to have Glenn BECK!".

gut Senior Member

18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:24 PM

posted by jmog
Objective studies have proven that Fox's news shows are far more balanced than the others...

That's always been pretty clear. Not Hannity and that other garbage. But when you realize just how much in the bag the other media sources are for the Dems, then you understand why they all so relentlessly attack Fox. Fox, and to a lesser extent Rush, are pretty much the only opposition out there to the Democratic propaganda.

It's unfortunate that Fox still does have Hannity and the like. But the core audience, like their counterparts on CNN and MSNBC, are people with a psychological need to be outraged.

gut Senior Member

18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:27 PM

By the way, is the most concerning/alarming thing in all this coverage the former Obama officials who made the rounds telling blatant lies unopposed?

You have a former CIA director saying he KNOWS there is evidence....in order to deliberately undermine a sitting POTUS. It's mind blowing.

gut Senior Member

18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 2:29 PM

posted by QuakerOats

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Long read, but worth it.

Taibbi should get the Pulitzer for this piece that was erroneously given to WaPo.

CNN.. Fake News or lazy?

Login

Register