<p>I never watch the national TV networks. The cable shows are just propoganda and the half hour evening news is just the publicity arm of the administration. There is no alternative investigative journalism anymore. No critical analysis. Puff pieces. </p>
<p>And local news is just murders and car chases.</p>
<p>As far as I know govenrment was not created for our entertianment, nor for any type of education, health care, care for elderly or intrusion in businesses. It was created to support army, police and boarder control. All other expanses are supported to make sure to take money from some and distribute them to others. Yes, we all have completely different interests. But those among us with the loudest voices get their interests covered by others. Here is the difference.</p>
<p>We watch tv or listen to radio “news” very seldom. We tend to read our “news”. </p>
<p>I turned on NPR a bit today just to do a gut check and nope - still can’t handle it. I literally think its the voices.</p>
<p>it really is sad that this country has very few if any news outlets that report the news without a slant. Probably sadder that some don’t realize that they are watching slanted news…but I guess if you agree with what is being said, you don’t recognize, or just choose to ignore that it is indeed slanted.
Another problem is that certain media outlets fail to even cover stories if they feel it might hurt their political agenda.</p>
<p>Everyone brings their own agenda and slant to everything they hear and read so it is impossible to tell whether what they hear is slanted or they are just hearing one and probably even looking for it. If you have a certain political agenda, you are going to think that not covering a story negative to the other side is biased, when it fact, it may just be that the story is not that big of a story.</p>
<p>What’s really sad is that today’s so called journalists are overwhemingly nothing more than cheerleaders for the Democratic party.</p>
<p>Shhhh</p>
<p>Hush now</p>
<p>I think 90% of the people on TV “news” are there to hear themselves talk. And mostly, they’re not worth listening to. </p>
<p>What’s worse is how often they gets the facts wrong. As news of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting came through, we kept hearing that the wrong man was the shooter (the brother in NJ), that the shooter’s mother was a teacher at the school, and that he used two handguns. I even heard the next day that the police found his rifle in the car, unused. All wrong. And where did they get these facts? From each other, not from law enforcement. </p>
<p>One rumor will pop up, someone else will report it, and suddenly that’s a source and they report it as if it were true. Much of the post-Katrina reporting was like this, telling of rapes and general mayhem in the Superdome and it was all media generated and untrue. Why should we trust this?</p>
<p>I didn’t see it but I read that the Senator from NJ was on one of the Sunday morning shows. This is the Senator who is being investigated for having sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic and had an illegal immigrant working in his office, but he wasn’t asked about any of that. Maybe the Washington media don’t want to be disinvited to parties so they don’t want to ask any tough or embarrassing questions?</p>
<p>sewhappy, I’m with you about NPR. I know I should like it, but it’s just so dreary to listen to. I even watched them live once (all things considered) and it was interesting to see Lakshmi Singh and everyone else report, but still, it’s dreary.</p>
<p>What I actually find very interesting at this moment is the scrutiny by members of the Senate of a movie up for an Academy Award. Shades of McCarthyism. But in a sort of flipped over, inside out universe. And of course, our media, for the most part finds nothing of note to report on that! Or very little mention, at least that I’ve seen.</p>
<p>I don’t see what’s particularly McCartheyist about the Congressional investigation. The move makers are not themselves targets of the investigation. The target of the investigation is whether the CIA released protected information to the filmmakers. Whether you agree or disagree, it doesn’t change the fact that investigating CIA activities comes within the purview of the Senate. It also doesn’t appear especially partisan, since it is being lead by both a Democrat and a Republican. Lastly, I imagine the news will cover it more once the questions actually start.</p>
<p>" it’s just so dreary to listen to. " - exactly my feeling, too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think <em>that</em> is probably a bigger issue than people suspect. </p>
<p>Free booze and hors d’oeuvres to supplement a reporters salary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>right…Benghazi really wasn’t that big of a story…really wasn’t talked about…until after Nov 6th that is.</p>
<p>I used to listen to NPR much more, but I agree with the “dreary” diagnosis. They drone on and on too much, especially about the Middle East. I want to scream “enough already!” Our local NPR station also repeats far too many segments and shows, so you end up hearing some local feature you have already heard. I still like some of the local shows and interviews and Morning Edition and All Things Considered. I still listen often to Prairie Home Companion and a similar show from Canada, the Vinyl Cafe. I HATE Car Talk! Instant turn-radio-off mode. I have listened to All Things Considered since 1975 when I was in graduate school.</p>
<p>We watch the News Hour on PBS but it is often boring with segments way too long and commentators droning on. We often watch the BBC half-hour newscast too. Seldom watch local or national news unless there is a big story. I turned off all radio and TV news after the Sandy Hook shootings. I just read about it a little in the newspaper. I get the New York Times now because our city paper went to pieces, just ads, murder and mayhem.</p>