Mainstream Media as requirement for authenticity

I often find that some news brought to this great site can often be found in the MSM some 2-3 days later.

The Huffington post are the biggest culprits, I swear they must lurk here.

The thing is many of the news articles aren't found in the MSM because it's alternative news, an alternative version of whatever narrative the MSM are spouting.

I must admit though the political threads lately are a bit beyond. I appreciate it is election year, but what a choice to make. Dumb or Dumber, with people's political persuasion determining whether their candidate is the former or latter.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

MSM headlines and stories are seldom original and typically just get regurgitated around the world now. Pick an MSM source and you will find the same headlines at the next MSM source.

Alternative news and citizen-journalists don't work like that. And they don't have the resources that the MSM has to investigate original stories. Yet, they report on original stories, all the time -- inasmuch as they have the resources to do so. They also do far more digging & investigation than the MSM is willing to do.

Whether it's the MSM or another source, I still use my own mind before accepting anything as truth.

I won't & can't argue with you that it's hard to find feel-good stories anywhere. They appear to be underreported everywhere.

Again, I give the edge to alternative news and citizen-journalists, all things considered.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I give the edge to professionalism. Citizen journalists tend to insert their biases too much into what they say. It tends to be too opinionated and it is almost ALWAYS poorly sourced. I don't have much respect for alternative media.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I give the edge to professionalism. Citizen journalists tend to insert their biases too much into what they say. It tends to be too opinionated and it is almost ALWAYS poorly sourced. I don't have much respect for alternative media.

No one does bias and spin like MSM talking heads and pundits.

And I get it, you don't have respect for alternative media...maybe that's because you've never investigated a story on your own and found something the MSM missed.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Professionalism is dead. There was a time media would be the forerunners of uncovering political corruption and scandal.

We need the media we had in the time of Nixon, and we need it badly.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I give the edge to professionalism. Citizen journalists tend to insert their biases too much into what they say. It tends to be too opinionated and it is almost ALWAYS poorly sourced. I don't have much respect for alternative media.

Ha ha, ha ha.

You should read some of the scoops our great printed press come up with, here in the U.K. Almost always opiniated and poorly sourced. Where as the citizen journalists are occasional guilty of it, it is far more prevelant amongst the professional ranks.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Speaking for me now? No I don't have respect for the alternative media because there are no standards of reporting there. Anyone can report anything they want, truthfulness be damned. At least mainstream outlets print retractions. The way they do it may be inefficient, but it's better than the alternative media's angle.

a reply to: Puppylove

I don't believe that for a second.

a reply to: Puppylove

Yup.

Even the brightest members often hold out for the really fancy BS machines to agree with something they read elsewhere before then accepting it as truth.

As if truth can only be verified by the biggest liars.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Speaking for me now? No I don't have respect for the alternative media because there are no standards of reporting there. Anyone can report anything they want, truthfulness be damned. At least mainstream outlets print retractions. The way they do it may be inefficient, but it's better than the alternative media's angle.

The MSM does not always print retractions, even when they have been proven wrong and alerted to their error. I know that firsthand.

When I ran a blog, I printed retractions, corrections, and updates, whenever needed.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I give the edge to professionalism. Citizen journalists tend to insert their biases too much into what they say. It tends to be too opinionated and it is almost ALWAYS poorly sourced. I don't have much respect for alternative media.

Ha ha, ha ha.

You should read some of the scoops our great printed press come up with, here in the U.K. Almost always opiniated and poorly sourced. Where as the citizen journalists are occasional guilty of it, it is far more prevelant amongst the professional ranks.

I assume you are referring to the BBC. I just opened the BBC website and clicked on the first link I saw.
www.bbc.com...

Looked pretty cut and dry to me. No opinions. Just reporting what happened. You wouldn't be referring to the journalists' blogs would you?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Speaking for me now? No I don't have respect for the alternative media because there are no standards of reporting there. Anyone can report anything they want, truthfulness be damned. At least mainstream outlets print retractions. The way they do it may be inefficient, but it's better than the alternative media's angle.

The MSM does not always print retractions, even when they have been proven wrong and alerted to their error. I know that firsthand.

When I ran a blog, I printed retractions, corrections, and updates, whenever needed.

So because you have standards that means that the rest of the alternative media does?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

As I said, no matter the source, I use my own judgment before accepting something as truth.

I don't just look at the source and say "MSM, must be true. Alternative media, must be false."

Actually, if you read my post thoroughly you would have seen that I referred to the 'printed press' as in daily papers.

The BBC are bias enough though.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I do so too, except that I only do it for the MSM. I just don't trust alternative news. If its being said by the alt news and its worthwhile to know, then the MSM will report on it too. The alt news is SUPER dishonest.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

But I wasn't talking about the printed press. So why throw me for a loop there? Who cares about a dead medium like that anyways?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Unless their masters tell them not to. Omission is great when people like you look to them as the authority on truth.

If MSM doesn't report it, it didn't happen. Man is that a lot of power.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are missing out on a lot of truth relying on the MSM to always cover all the stories that are fit for print. You are basically putting your trust in the MSM, alone.

I choose to trust my own judgment. Whether I am reading a story in the MSM or by alternative news and citizen-journalists.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Unless their masters tell them not to. Omission is great when people like you look to them as the authority on truth.

If MSM doesn't report it, it didn't happen. Man is that a lot of power.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Professionalism is dead. There was a time media would be the forerunners of uncovering political corruption and scandal.

We need the media we had in the time of Nixon, and we need it badly.

This is so true... The professionalism is most definitely dead. 30 years ago, ABC, CBS, and NBC would be all over the Clinton scandals, etc... Now they skip it all together or spin it to cover things up.