American News vs. Trump

[Blur4stuff]

so what they blurred a political shirt in a news piece about a baby in a hot car...

also, trump ran for president to self promote, not actually be president. so it doesn't matter.

[ezgeze]

Why? It was created specifically to ensure fairness for candidates/parties during elections. Granted, it's largely pointless now since it only applies to news programs and most of what the 24 hour networks run isn't considered "news programming" (i.e. Anderson Coopers show got an exemption some years back) so they can pretty much do whatever they want, but the idea behind the law is quite sound.

First, it would depend on which topic you are referring to. Are you talking about the Equal Time rule or the Fairness Doctrine? Lets assume that for now its the Fairness Doctrine.

Back when the channels for communication were limited one could make the claim that the fairness doctrine would be necessary. However considering the age that we live in and the nearly unlimited number of news sources the reasoning behind the fairness doctrine is for the most part insignificant. Also the fact that the constitutionality of the law has often been questioned and the FCC report from 1985 stating that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.

So while it may sound like a good idea, one needs to actually visit the results of such laws. Often they have negative results that have opposite effects intended.

[zenkai]

First off, anyone using the terms "wake up" or "sheeple" can GTFO.

Secondly, I never mentioned a right wing conspiracy. I mentioned that the right wing has been busy undermining "the mainstream media" for the last couple decades. The left has been undermining Fox News. The difference there is that the Left has been going after specific outlets, while the right has been consistently just saying "the mainstream media," making it so that people can claim ANY outlet that says something they don't like is biased. In fact, you just did it yourself.



"The media" isn't full of shit. There are many biased organizations out there, but you can't blanket accuse all of the media of having horrible bias.

That's a real problem if you're looking for any objective facts.

Then you need to "wake up" I read the same story on several news sites just to get the fact and each one has their own tone. For instance, in most news sites they at first wouldn't report it was an armed security guard that stopped a shooting in Arapahoe High School shooting. I didn't even notice it until another site pointed it out, and sure enough I went back and read it the stories and it pretty much said "he just gave up" without even mentioning the shooter was cornered with a gun.

Only a fool would read one news site and take it as gospel.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/149624/ma...eive-bias.aspx

[Rooflesstoofless]

so what they blurred a political shirt in a news piece about a baby in a hot car...

also, trump ran for president to self promote, not actually be president. so it doesn't matter.

Journalistic integrity means you don't actively censor something just because you or the hack in the editing room don't agree with it. If his shirt isn't newsworthy there is no reason to censor it.

Let's put it this way: If they didn't censor the shirt would we even be having this discussion? Because "Trump supporter saves baby" would probably disappear off the front page in a few hours considering how many firefighters and police support him (cringe).

[May90]

Then you need to "wake up" I read the same story on several news sites just to get the fact and each one has their own tone. For instance, in most news sites they at first wouldn't report it was an armed security guard that stopped a shooting in Arapahoe High School shooting. I didn't even notice it until another site pointed it out, and sure enough I went back and read it the stories and it pretty much said "he just gave up" without even mentioning the shooter was cornered with a gun.

Only a fool would read one news site and take it as gospel.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/149624/ma...eive-bias.aspx

So, you've gone through "several sites" and now think that all sites have horrible bias? Niiiiiice!

[Reeve]

Then you need to "wake up" I read the same story on several news sites just to get the fact and each one has their own tone. For instance, in most news sites they at first wouldn't report it was an armed security guard that stopped a shooting in Arapahoe High School shooting. I didn't even notice it until another site pointed it out, and sure enough I went back and read it the stories and it pretty much said "he just gave up" without even mentioning the shooter was cornered with a gun.

Only a fool would read one news site and take it as gospel.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/149624/ma...eive-bias.aspx

I don't read just one news site. I use Google News and I read multiple stories about the same occurrence. That doesn't mean that all media has horrible bias. I'd even suggest tone differentials are not in themselves "horrible bias."

[Blur4stuff]

Journalistic integrity means you don't actively censor something just because you or the hack in the editing room don't agree with it. If his shirt isn't newsworthy there is no reason to censor it.

Let's put it this way: If they didn't censor the shirt would we even be having this discussion? Because "Trump supporter saves baby" would probably disappear off the front page in a few hours considering how many firefighters and police support him (cringe).

it would be an advertisement to have a big trump shirt in the middle of the screen

that's probably why he wore it

and if you want to bring integrity into the mix then Trump shouldn't be allowed any kind of media attention because of how harmful he is to the country

[zenkai]

So, you've gone through "several sites" and now think that all sites have horrible bias? Niiiiiice!

The majority news sites.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't read just one news site. I use Google News and I read multiple stories about the same occurrence. That doesn't mean that all media has horrible bias. I'd even suggest tone differentials are not in themselves "horrible bias."

All major media outlets have bias stories, not all stories are biased, it's as simple as that.

[Bakis]

Something tells me Trump voters are less likely to read multiple news outlet than democratic voters.
Flip flop Trump should by all means be scrutinised hence the 'bias' cos of all the dump shit and turn coat, vague statements he make.
Jee wonder why he is under the microscope. Just like Clinton on emails and Benghazi.

90% of your media is shit, deal with it.

[May90]

The majority news sites.

Then, what is the problem? If it is only a majority, then find a site that doesn't belong to this majority!

[zenkai]

Then, what is the problem? If it is only a majority, then find a site that doesn't belong to this majority!

Why don't you point me to one that's 100% truthful or doesn't lie by omission.

[hydrium]

"Orwellian Censorship"???? Does this clown even know what that means?

A free and open society allows private organizations the ability to broadcast what they choose.

"Orwellian Censorship" would be the government forcing a private media organization to show the Trump logo.

You mean kinda like how MSNBC was told to stop criticizing Hillary and they next day they swapped to an almost vitriolic hatred of Trump?

If you think the media isn't controlled and told what to report then you need some eyes opened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PStpvviPgxk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

[May90]

Why don't you point me to one that's 100% truthful or doesn't lie by omission.

Because I can help it!

[Gestopft]

You mean kinda like how MSNBC was told to stop criticizing Hillary and they next day they swapped to an almost vitriolic hatred of Trump?

If you think the media isn't controlled and told what to report then you need some eyes opened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PStpvviPgxk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

People all over the country thought of the same bad joke, what a conspiracy...

And I wouldn't be doing my due diligence if I didn't ask...who exactly controls the news?

[hydrium]

People all over the country thought of the same bad joke, what a conspiracy...

And I wouldn't be doing my due diligence if I didn't ask...who exactly controls the news?

Useful idiots are useful.

[Gestopft]

Useful idiots are useful.

But tinfoil hats never are.

[Rooflesstoofless]

it would be an advertisement to have a big trump shirt in the middle of the screen

that's probably why he wore it

and if you want to bring integrity into the mix then Trump shouldn't be allowed any kind of media attention because of how harmful he is to the country

Wearing a shirt in news story isn't an advertisement. Name brands in music videos, commercials, and other such things where licensing agreements have to be taken into consideration, is.

Don't get me wrong, I think Trump is a POS...but even if I don't like someone or their views I think a line is definitely crossed when we actively censor them in our news. Stooping to the level is never a good idea.

[Aggrophobic]

Go to CNN.com right now, and find me one shirt with a brand blurred out. You say they'll blur out Nike? Check out the sports section.

- - - Updated - - -



That was my point, Hillary supporters don't save babies.

Right, right, of course. She's the devil and all that.

[Incredibale]

Liberals 10 years ago: "there's no liberal bias in the media"

Liberals now: "of course there is, reality has a liberal bias"

[Jimmy Woods]

It's surprising to see pro-Trump CNN censoring a Trump t-shirt. CNN has become pretty unwatchable over the past year since it took it's hard turn to the right and fact free reporting, but apparently it's still worth watching to make a blog complaining about how your political beliefs are being persecuted. Maybe we need a panel of 3 Trump supporters and 3 Hillary supporters to argue over how this controversy is lining the pockets of the Clintons. It's pretty funny that CNN whored itself out to Trump considering CNN has been losing viewers to MSNBC because of it's pro-Trump coverage, yet it's not "pro-Trump" enough for Fox News viewers to switch over. A-wah wah wah to them. Hopefully CNN can fail and replaced by real journalism.