points by Peteragain 2 days ago | 0 comments
It's rambling, but highlights a point. The big picture IMHO is that news as we ingest it is like history. History is viewed through a lens of the present and its concerns. News is viewed through the same lens, filtered by the concerns of, not journalists, but what journalists think we are concerned with. Real journalists (IE investigative) don't present "facts", but interpret "facts" against a world view. Good journalists state how they do that. Just to put the cat out and see what happens, Michael Moore is definitive at this, irrespective of whether or not you agree with his world view, at least you know what his world view is. I've just had a piece of Reform UK advertising through the mailbox, and it is printed in the format and style of news. Nice trick. I guess that is what 70 million GBP of overseas funding buys you.
[–] soperj 2 days ago
[–] Peteragain 2 days ago
He's not the only one. And as I said you at least get told his bias. The BBC (see the trump court case) edited time lines and claim to be unbiased. The idea (not mine; "critical discourse analysis" I think) is that all news is biased and the right way to report is to state the bias up front.
[–] mentalgear 2 days ago
claims as these require sources .
Is he though?
I thought it was pretty well known he's manipulated timelines, selectively edited interviews and staged things.
He puts his world view first and makes the facts fit that view.