1. SPS Accounts:
    Do you find yourself coming back time after time? Do you appreciate the ongoing hard work to keep this community focused and successful in its mission? Please consider supporting us by upgrading to an SPS Account. Besides the warm and fuzzy feeling that comes from supporting a good cause, you'll also get a significant number of ever-expanding perks and benefits on the site and the forums. Click here to find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
You are currently viewing Boards o' Magick as a guest, but you can register an account here. Registration is fast, easy and free. Once registered you will have access to search the forums, create and respond to threads, PM other members, upload screenshots and access many other features unavailable to guests.

BoM cultivates a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. We have been aiming for quality over quantity with our forums from their inception, and believe that this distinction is truly tangible and valued by our members. We'd love to have you join us today!

(If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you've forgotten your username or password, click here.)

How Reliable Are Your Media Sources?

Discussion in 'Alley of Dangerous Angles' started by Chandos the Red, Jan 13, 2004.

  1. Chandos the Red

    Chandos the Red This Wheel's on Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    Messages:
    8,252
    Media:
    82
    Likes Received:
    238
    Gender:
    Male
    Remove all ads!
    I'm curious as to what all of you think about "advocacy" journalism and if it represents a valid way in which a democracy (or republic) can function. This article points to the use of "experts" from so called think tanks with an agenda, rather than academics. The media should be able to function independently of any politcal group or party, particularly those in power. Does this cross the line between propaganda and news? Or is it a valid way for the media to operate?

    http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman/2004/040107.html
     
    Chandos the Red, Jan 13, 2004
    #1
  2. Blackthorne TA

    Blackthorne TA Master in his Own Mind Staff Member ★ SPS Account Holder Adored Veteran Pillars of Eternity SP Immortalizer (for helping immortalize Sorcerer's Place in the game!) New Server Contributor [2012] (for helping Sorcerer's Place lease a new, more powerful server!) Torment: Tides of Numenera SP Immortalizer (for helping immortalize Sorcerer's Place in the game!)

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2000
    Messages:
    10,416
    Media:
    40
    Likes Received:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    Personally I don't have a problem with it as long as the "experts" are identified. That way I can be aware of possible bias, and look elsewhere for an opposing viewpoint from other "experts".

    The problem is that I believe many people are lazy in this day and age and take "facts" from so-called "experts" at face value when many times they are really opinions/interpretations from somebody with an agenda. I think many don't go looking for an opposing viewpoint, and just hear one side of a controversial subject.
     
    Blackthorne TA, Jan 13, 2004
    #2

  3. Jschild Gems: 8/31
    Latest gem: Skydrop

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    My biggest problem with the media is the repeating of lies. Someone says something that is a lie, then all the media is repeating it for months, then they fully realize it is a lie and just stop talking about it and never retracting it or apologizing for it.
     
    Jschild, Jan 13, 2004
    #3

  4. ejsmith Gems: 25/31
    Latest gem: Moonbar

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2001
    Messages:
    2,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    I usually approach media from an intelligence standpoint. Verify everything. Even the mis-information. Dis-information. And liberal alarmists.

    And let me tell you, right now. Trying to verify just how much Mary Magadline and James Carville hate each other is tough.

    Plus, you have to do some interpretation for yourself. NPR is valuable, and it is usually excellent, but it's from a university standpoint. Phd's have their own view of the world, and their view is the only correct one, and it does not interact with anything else around it.

    Sometimes, you can't isolate a variable.

    Sometimes, the world isn't a control group.
     
    ejsmith, Jan 14, 2004
    #4
  5. Arabwel

    Arabwel Screaming towards Apotheosis Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2001
    Messages:
    7,965
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Female
    For me, cross-referencing is the key. Checkin as many sources as possible, it is somewhat possible to find the "truth" out there. I am not saying that if someone says black and the other says white means that grey is the truth. Rather, it's a means of calibrating.

    For one, i could take a less-serious and not-really alleyworthy example; Here in Finland several magazines from the most notorious gosspimongers to the THE youth's magazine were perpriating rumuours about two actors having a falling out after some events of debate happened in one gala or another. Well, for some reason, both actors' web sites deny the falling out.

    This is a bad example, but in my opinion gossipmongering is hat many of these so-called experts and news sources engage in. Or words to that effect anyway.
     
    Arabwel, Jan 14, 2004
    #5
Sorcerer's Place is a project run entirely by fans and for fans. Maintaining Sorcerer's Place and a stable environment for all our hosted sites requires a substantial amount of our time and funds on a regular basis, so please consider supporting us to keep the site up & running smoothly. Thank you!

Sorcerers.net is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to products on amazon.com, amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk. Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.