Comments on: And they call US spin doctors? Part 1 of 6

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:12:20 +0000

Thanks for contributing, Bill. Without giving up too much of what is to come, the point of the series is at least in part to point out how we have come to settle for what is perceived as interpretation and assuming such “news” even remotely represents what is real. The increasing distrust for the media exists for reasons frequently beyond political bias.

It is, as I will point out, also partly because of a need, deliberate or otherwise, to distort information based on personal bias, and even to outright invent “news” — also for the same reason. Politics could have something to do with it, but I think what’s to come will show that this is well beyond the tired debate of media political bias, one that really doesn’t interest me that much.

It has to do with the problems associated with embedded news structures, our cognitive limitations and a high level of defensiveness by the main culprits of misinformation.

By: Bill Sledzik

Bill Sledzik — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:05:48 +0000

Newsweek’s skewing to the left shouldn’t surprise anyone, Bob. Nor should it bother us. Every media outlet has a slant, since the very nature of journalism requires editorial judgment and analysis. Science may reduce bias with double-blind studies. Journalism is a different animal.

The weekly news mags long ago realized their job is to interpret the news, not to report it. You simply can’t “scoop” anyone when operating on such a long leadtime.

I know the cover shot of Palin isn’t flattering. But it reflects a view widely held by folks on both sides of the aisle. If she is to be one of the standard bearers for a major political party, then she’s going to have to hold up to scrutiny — or in this case — a little ridicule.

Confession: It was George W. who drove me from the GOP about 9 years ago. But it was Sarah’s appearance on the ticket that kept me from returning. But as you were quick to point out, this lady’s shortcomings are many. It’ll be fun to watch!

By: Rich Becker

Rich Becker — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:36:27 +0000

Bob,

Perfectly presented. During the last decade, mainstream media has all but tossed objectivity aside in favor of catering to those searching for affirmation. It leads to higher ratings and circulation in a world of diminishing ratings and circulation.

Count me among those interested in your next post on the topic.

All my best,
Rich

By: Bob

Bob — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:54:36 +0000

I consider there to be a vast difference between peer-reviewed science and what tobacco companies did. The point is that properly conducted peer-reviewed science has considerably more controls against bias than what occurs in newsrooms.

I’m not sure what your point is about Rush Limbaugh. He’s irrelevant to the point of this series as far as I am concerned. The point is how news is spun as a normal part of the news business. Surely that is evident. If not, I hope it will be in the next few posts.

By: Lamar Aiazzi

Lamar Aiazzi — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:41:04 +0000

Uhhh, scientists spin results all the time. Remember the scientific studies that found cigarettes didn’t cause cancer. Double blind indeed. Rush Limbaugh doesn’t spin the news? Newsweek, as far as I can tell hit the nail on the head. Sarah Palin is dangerously ignorant. While this isn’t a problem if she remains a private citizen, but as a national representative or leader she’s baaad news.

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:53:35 +0000

Ike,

Please do!

By: Ike

Ike — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:33:18 +0000

Bravo! On the money, waiting for the rest.

(Will we have any room to skewer the broadcasters? If not, I’d love to write the addendum…)