Unethical Press?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Does anybody else think the national media is out of line when they publish stories about "what happened" at the DNC before they actually happened?

I'm referring to this story on Yahoo:


DENVER - Barack Obama promised a clean break from the "broken politics in Washington and the failed presidency of George W. Bush" Thursday night as he embarked on the final lap of his audacious bid to become the nation's first black president.


news.yahoo.com...

Only problem with the story is that Obama didn't speak yet. So how can news outlets publish stories in the past tense as if he already gave his speech?

Are there no longer journalistic standards anymore?




posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:38 PM
link   
All of the news outlets got the hi-lights of Obama's speech earlier today. It's not so much unethical as it is "filler" for the 24/7 cable news channels.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
All of the news outlets got the hi-lights of Obama's speech earlier today. It's not so much unethical as it is "filler" for the 24/7 cable news channels.


I know they got the copy of the speech ahead of time, but to print a story in the past tense and release it before the fact online is crossing the line, imo.

If a news outlet prints a story claiming that something happened when it didn't happen yet, how can they have any credibility. Don't they have journalistic standards? All they would need to do is state in the story that this is what Obama is *expected* to say tonight. Instead, they released the story stating it already happened, which is false.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
If you look at it in that sense, then yes, they probably should not have said it in the past tense. But, have you looked at any of the televised coverage tonight? Every pundit, commentator, and talking head on the air now is picking apart the "talking points" of his speech and praising it, griping about it, complaining about it, etc. They have to have something to do, something to say, something to speculate about.

Do we have an unethical press? Of course, but not just because of this instance. I don't think that a lot of real journalism exists any longer. You get the stand from the left or the stand from the right.....and good luck finding the real truth in any of it.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


I usually avoid watching television. I'm sure the pundits needed something to talk about all night. I'm really not very interested in listening to self-proclaimed experts tell me what they think.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   
This has been going on since at least Sept. 11 2001.

BBC Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens.



I wonder...what other scripted 'news' the complicit media has sitting on the shelves, just waiting to dish out to the willing believers?

Ethical media? Oxymoron?



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TaZCoN
 


I forgot about the WTC7 newscasts.

I remember watching the 9/11 live broadcasts and thinking that the news was being "spun" way too early considering what had happened.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Har Har Har!

Come on people! Don’t you know what the media’s entire function is? Have you not read the Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, “Poor Richard’s Almanac”?

The purpose of the media is “Propaganda”, not the news, the truth, or what most Americans think. Don’t believe me? Then read the following books and get the scoop from the horses mouth.

The Franklin Coverup by John W. DeCamp
The Crowd by Gustov Le Bon
Public Opinion by Walter Lippmann
The Dialog in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesqueieu by Maurice Joly
Manufacturing Consent by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky

Or simply buy a copy of any Graphic Designers or Journalists professional trade publications and read the editorials sections. All of them are filled with sentences like, “We need to use our positions of influence to make the world a better place by promoting (insert propaganda)?”

It’s not about professionalism.
It’s not about the truth.
It’s not about the real news
Instead,
It is all about what they want you to believe, support, and purchase with your money. It is about influence and control.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hot_Wings
 


I agree, but at least the media used to TRY to make it look like it was real. Now they don't seem to even bother with a pretense of professionalism.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


The answer to your question is no. I was watching Chris Mathew's coverage of the DNC today long enough to hear them compare Obama to "The Dark Knight"
and McCain to "The Joker". So no, there are no more standards.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join