Lisbeth Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Oh. So maybe if you don't know the difference between a tabloid and one of the most reputable newspapers in the world, don't accuse people of not even clicking on links before responding to posts? It is just a sore spot for me when people cite "facts" that, once they are out there, are almost impossible to take back. The NY Times and other MSM sources have lost all credibility with many of us due to obvious bias. "Reputable" or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OH_Homeschooler Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 The NY Times and other MSM sources have lost all credibility with many of us due to obvious bias. "Reputable" or not. I am baffled as to why anyone would post a link from a source that they considered biased/"not what it used to be" as proof of a point they are trying to make. Also, I personally don't consider those who discuss the "MSM" to be all that credible. Makes me think their only news sources are Fox/and or Rush, which are pretty darned biased. And when I'm looking for news about events like Boston, I do look to the major networks because they have more of a vetting process to what makes it on air than other sources. But I also look into a multitude of sources and investigate their legitimacy before believing what I'm reading and more importantly, sharing with others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMary2 Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I am baffled as to why anyone would post a link from a source that they considered biased/"not what it used to be" as proof of a point they are trying to make. Also, I personally don't consider those who discuss the "MSM" to be all that credible. Makes me think their only news sources are Fox/and or Rush, which are pretty darned biased. And when I'm looking for news about events like Boston, I do look to the major networks because they have more of a vetting process to what makes it on air than other sources. But I also look into a multitude of sources and investigate their legitimacy before believing what I'm reading and more importantly, sharing with others. What are the "major networks" you are referring to that allegedly have "more of a vetting process?" Just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OH_Homeschooler Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 What are the "major networks" you are referring to that allegedly have "more of a vetting process?" Just curious. Well, pretty much the networks we've all grown up with...NBC, ABC, CBS. I think those are considered the more universally known major networks. Since their news programs are not on air 24/7 they don't have to fill a whole bunch of time with pundits and conjecture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Just heard the police commissioner on the Ch. 5 news in Boston. He said that there is no suspect. He said that a lot of stations have been reporting that there's a suspect at Brigham and Women's Hospital, but that's false. The police wouldn't comment on specifics, but said that it's an active, ongoing investigation. Sue well they have something, because according to a report on CBS boston they're searching, and removed several bags from, the guy's apartment who supposedly is under guard at Brigham and Women's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I am baffled as to why anyone would post a link from a source that they considered biased/"not what it used to be" as proof of a point they are trying to make. who posted a link from the times? it was only someone stating they thought the times was credible and someone else stating their opinion it wasn't what it used to be. there is also a reason I started going to UK news sites a long time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I actually lost track of what this argument was about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OH_Homeschooler Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 who posted a link from the times? it was only someone stating they thought the times was credible and someone else stating their opinion it wasn't. No one posted a link from the times. Didn't you post a link to the New York Post (a tabloid) and when I asked if that was a credible news source you scoffed at me and accused me on not clicking on the link? Then stated something along the lines of "Of course, it's credible, it's the New York Post!" then you went on to say that the "New York Times is not what it used to be," whatever that means. (I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you simply confused the NYP with the NYT, I guess I should have taken you at face value and consider the NYP your standard of credibility). What I'm saying is that when EVERY major news organization plus the Boston PDis claiming 2 were dead (at the time you posted that link) but this one is saying 12 are dead, that raises eyebrows. So no way am I going to believe other claims from that article, such as they had a Saudi National in custody (which was not true at the time, and even this morning is not true...packages from an apartment are not a suspect. They're packages. Even now the Boston PD itself is saying they do not have anyone in custody). This perpetuates stereotypes and adds insult to injury, on a day when there was already plenty of injury. So I guess I'm just upset that people are not checking sources and sharing what they "know to be true" based on tabloid information. Oh I guess you edited your post to add this: there is also a reason I started going to UK news sites a long time ago. I guess that makes me even more confused as to why you would post a link from the New York Post if you go to UK news sources regularly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMary2 Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Well, pretty much the networks we've all grown up with...NBC, ABC, CBS. I think those are considered the more universally known major networks. Since their news programs are not on air 24/7 they don't have to fill a whole bunch of time with pundits and conjecture. Like national nightly news programs? Do many watch those anymore? I think they take their cues from the 24 hour news cycle. I don't find much U.S. media to be credible or reliable- every one of them are about being first, being sensationalist - not vetting, not facts. I can think of at least one thing/person that hasn't been vetted by our media that should have been. They are all asleep on the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momma2three Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 The satirical "news" site The Onion has a pretty brutal dressing down of The Post. http://www.theonion.com/articles/this-is-a-tragedydoes-it-really-matter-exactly-how,32076/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsBasil Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 The satirical "news" site The Onion has a pretty brutal dressing down of The Post. http://www.theonion....ctly-how,32076/ Their take(I hesitate to say coverage), but the satire pieces they have about the bombings are well done as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momma2three Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Their take(I hesitate to say coverage), but the satire pieces they have about the bombings are well done as well. I don't think I'll ever get out of my mind their "story" about "it is okay to spend the rest of the day curled up under your desk in the fetal position, crying" after the Newtown shootings... I couldn't read the article without sobbing, because it really just summed up the only sane reaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsBasil Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Yes, exactly. I feel the same way. About a lot of their take on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.