Liberal Media Needs to be Better to be Above Reproach

http://www.newsweek.com/melania-trump-orders-removal-near-200-year-old-tree-white-house-759120

I think this is the link you were going for. I agree that it is a clitckbait title and it's a "meh" story about an old tree that should have fallen years ago finally being removed.

I also agree with your point that when there are so many legitimate things to complain about, trying to spin a mundane story like this with a headline that suggests that it was a decision made on a whim is part of the reason people struggle to defend the media today.

 

No media cares about the truth. They only care about surviving because many are critically endangered and truth doesn't sell. That's an indictment on republicans and democrats because eat it up. Party of truth amirite?!

 

That something isn't wingnut news doesn't make it liberal news. That's just a fake duality that wingnut news, Breitbart, Fox News, Infowars, Gateway Pundit, etc, requires to give their own sites a sense of legitimacy. It's a tired tactic. Quite boring.

 

I got the google 404 error. Fakesites!

Did you guys know that there are professional men who write titles for articles with a flare or is it flair? for the dramatic. All they do is write headlines and not the story with the intention to get you to read. Many people don't know that.

 

Why does this apply to liberal media but not conservative media?

 

Because conservative media is for bigots, lunatics, and losers.

 

With all due respect, what an unadulterated load of bullshit. I was going to say unadulterated nonsense, but it didn't seem adequate. I don't know why you post this sort of "oh, woe is me, they're all out to get me," crap, but you seem obsessed by it. You sound like just another a lunatic spouting off about some conspiracy to lie to the public. If any such thing exists beyond your active imagination, it is coming from the far right that supports the guy you spent a lot of time defending, the chump in the White House, when he bothers staying there. Mr. trump. Yeah, that guy, Liar in Chief.

The majority of this country's media, not the fringe you seem to spend an inordinate time reading, but the well known mainstream media, are working to expose the corruption and very possible treason of Mr. trump and those closest to him. When you and those like you lump the media all together, you damage a major part of the protections the founders enshrined in our constitution. It's protections insuring freedom of the press were no accident. The founders knew what they were doing. While they couldn't have guessed at what the future held 200+ years later, they understood the danger of tyrants. You seem to have lost whatever handle you may have once had on the importance of the 4th estate, in my opinion.

 

Trying to blame me for the media's failures LOL!!! With all due respect, get a facking clue! The media is horseshit and it's their own fault. They didn't adapt to new tech, getting owned by new media, constant headline sensationalism, yellow journalism, partisan organizations, journalistic integrity and ethics at an all time low, etc...

And I had this opinion long before Trump ran, won, and took office. They've been **** for a long while now because they are all bleeding money and trying to survive. That goes for all types of media by the way.

 

I would rather read about the president's diet coke and ice cream habits but to each their own.

 

'New media' is Facebook memes, tweets and youtube channels that try to search every nook and cranny of the WWW to push a certain agenda to target a certain audience. 'New media' is clickbait titles trying to generate the most clicks.

I don't want traditional news media to 'catch up to New media'.

 

You misunderstood as usual. New media sucks but it's winning and these orgs are under pressure to be more like New Media which means we have double the trash. Just proves my point further that trusted media cannot be trusted to not behave like New Media. They have no integrity, they just chase the money to survive. I almost can't blame them except for the fact they pretend they don't. That's what pisses me off. Chase the money and survive but just be honest about and don't say you don't. At least I could respect you for being honest and truthful.

 

I’ll just stick this here: The End of Trump and the End of Days https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/26/opinion/trump-liberals-armageddon.html

 

Publications like WSJ, WaPo and NYT are doing the opposite of your claim. They are still subscription based news media which means they receive their revenue from subscribers rather than clicks.

That difference by itself makes all the difference in how a publication pursues journalism and reporting.

Never completely trust news media that relies on ad revenue and clicks.

Which is funny and ironic because I'm certain the that 'news media' you trust are completely dependent on ad revenue. I suggest you follow your own advice and 'follow the money'.

 

LOL I can't beleive you used those examples!!! WSJ used fake news to try and destroy the biggest youtuber (new media) around. WaPo is owned by Bezos, a Hilary Nut Rider. NYT is the best of the crap sure but Chomsky(mainly Martin) wrote a book and noted that NYTs had biases... Biases driven by Corporate interests so Chomsky agrees with me. Martin was even more critical, his book is called Manufactured Consent for godsakes. I've read it and I agree with him! Read the book, you will learn a lot and maybe learn to start thinking for yourself.

Maybe if you used Reuters or Al Jazeera (English only, Arab side is corrupt trash) I could agree with you. While not perfect they seem to be decent.

 

Now here is a great example of a member of the media being balanced and above reproach...



The last time I saw a reporter gush so much about someone it was on the cover article of Teen Beat about Davy Jones...

 

24 hour news is a horrible thing. Too many "news" sources trying to make money through clicks causing journalistic integrity to go out the window.