I would say it's pretty much similar, sometimes even worse. I think the internet is more efficient in obtaining actual information versus opinion pieces though. Google News for instance pulls news headlines from all major news sources. It cuts out the commercials and talking heads, so you can just read an article and digest it yourself. There's ad blocking software that takes care of internet ads, if you're having trouble with that. But like you say it is still subject to similar problems of cable news. The issue I have with cable news is they very clearly try to do the thinking for the people so they don't have to do it for themselves, hence what I was saying about how network news has a majority opinion pieces and sometimes factual reporting. It all falls under the mainstream, which rarely if ever wanders out of the narrow paradigm. If you're just looking for current events, national and international, the internet is more efficient than cable news.
I'm going to check Google News out. I enjoy, or should I say I'm entertained by listening to some talking head's opinions on network/cable news programs. I have fun poking holes in their interpretations of events, kind of like what we do here. I guess what they say could be interpreted as telling people what to think but if that's their goal it's not working, at least not in this house. Thanks for the discussion
Anytime. Google News is neat, you can customize it to your liking, like if you always want to see news on sports and never want to see news about pop culture. If you look at the ratings for some of those shows, like the O'Reilly Factor and Rachael Madow, they're through the roof. Without any hard supporting data, I would wager that most people tune in to those shows because they want their own biases reinforced. I think you and I are in the minority when we watch things and have the ability to think for ourselves. More power to you for that. Personally I'm not entertained by it, I don't have the patience to watch talking heads.
no news for me... i practice aggressive ignorance. the news upsets/scares/depresses/confuses me. and i seem to be doing just fine without it wouldnt u agree.
I just saw your edit. I certainly wasn't referring to you. I was referring to those people who don't listen to any news and only hear things via tweets and blogs. I think the internet is a wonderful place to follow up on stories I hear elsewhere. Without it I'd have to depend on the credibility of the news source like in the good ol' days. Sometimes I look for more info and sometimes I take a leap of faith, like with most of Megan Kelly's stuff. If she goes too far someone will give a conflicting opinion elsewhere.
I get my news from the local, very liberal, radio shock jock. He supports the mayor in the nearest city to me and she is THE DUMBEST CUNT I'VE EVER SEEN. A product of the inner-city ghetto, lol. Sometimes I watch NBC nightly news but it (and all other news outlets) will be dominated by the prez elections for the next 1.75 years so I won't go back to that until December 2016. The 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill was great -- the nightly news hardly talked about politics/government at all. Well, until after a week or so when Obama extorted $20 billion from the oil company. Aside from that, I run into mildly interesting "news" on the internet. Otherwise, the rest of the world can go fuck itself.
I'm about drained from political bullshit and bullshitters - from both ends of the political spectrum. The incessant barrage of opinionated fallacies and hyperbole takes a toll. I have family and friends on both sides and I almost run to hide in my textbooks and drugs. I used to be a warrior but anymore, people are so majorly fucking hypnotized by the incredible (usually non-credible), I'm almost at the point where it's a total waste of effort and energy to even bother. I guess I still have some inner need to vent. Which is why I even bother posting. Things are so astonishingly down the rabbit hole of the bizarre that I can't help but react. It's like, YOU'VE GOT TO BE SHITTING ME!, nearly every day. And the distorted "reporting" media digestion and regurgitation of almost any issue or event is particularly infuriating. Needles to say, I'm not very optimistic about our future. There are too many people with vested interests in exacerbating problems rather than fixing them. Add to that a healthy measure of incompetence and you have a recipe for mayhem. What cohesion we once had as a society has been shredded by the annoying habit of agenda junkies to escalate problems in order to posture themselves as the problem solvers. Such pretentious bullshit knows no bounds. As long as we continue to drink from the poisoned wells of ideological, agenda-driven propaganda, these malicious endeavors to fool people into believing lies and distorted half-truths in order to garner votes and thus expand power will continue unabated. The major candidates have already begun putting on their phony masks and are polishing their charades in prep for the 2016 elections. Unfortunately, given the propensity of so many Americans to become strangely hypnotized by so much hyped fallacy and downright bullshit, I see no return to sanity a long, long time - if ever. When political powers can gain even more power from some endeavor - even a counter-productive one that further fragments an already compound fractured society - the power mongers have repeatedly demonstrated that they will exert every effort to wrap it in a pretty package and sell it to the gullible. As long as it enhances their careers and so-called legacies, that's all that matters. And the sorry-ass media has repeatedly either looked the other way or offered a crucial helping hand in the wrapping.
You make some very good points. If fighting the good fight makes you happy then fight, if it doesn't then let it be. Focusing on the injustice in the world will only make you frustrated and bitter. Practice acceptance, it truly is the key to happiness.
If more than one news outlet are running a similar story, it's very unlikely that they are all independently researching that story. What's more likely is that one news outlet is getting their info from another news outlet, and so on. For example, my husband works in the ever controversial nuclear industry. Our local small. town newspaper will publish a story, with inaccurate information. That story is then picked up by larger city papers. Those newspapers aren't doing independent research, they get their info from our (inaccurate) local paper. And so on. In other words, just because something is published in more than one place, doesn't mean that it's any more accurate or true. You need to find the original source.
For a long time I was in an established daily pattern of checking BBC, Al Jazeera, CNN, and news.com.au for my international news. I dropped CNN first -- I'm not sure if it became bullshit or if it was always bullshit and I finally started noticing. Shortly thereafter BBC changed its format and I stopped paying mind to its bullshit as well. Then I started reading Vice, and I largely stopped checking other news sources except for when I desired differing points of view on certain events. Now I don't read the news at all. I occasionally check the local paper if there's one in English available, and otherwise I get my most important news from fellow travellers in the hostel common room. Most of that news has to do with the next village over, or directly neighboring countries.