http://gamingtrend.com
October 24, 2014, 10:35:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Balance vs. Bias in the Media  (Read 876 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Sepiche
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 723


View Profile
« on: November 11, 2004, 07:48:14 PM »

Pretty interesting article about how, in an effort to give both sides in scientific arguements, the media is giving generally unsupported scientific theories much more clout than they should have.

http://www.cjr.org/issues/2004/6/mooney-science.asp

Also echos Jon Stewarts thoughts from Crossfire that the media does nothing more than sit on the sidelines and let people say whatever they want.

s
Logged

And when he had failed to find these boons in things whose laws are known and measurable, they told him he lacked imagination, and was immature because he preferred dream-illusions to the illusions of our physical creation
SpaceLord
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 249


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2004, 09:02:14 PM »

This is also a concern for public policy, especially in public schools. "Intelligent design" is a good example of this.  :x
Logged

There's no place like OO, there's no place like OO. frown
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1617


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2004, 09:10:51 PM »

Yeah, this nonsense notion of "balance" which is let Side A have their say and then let Side B have their say is entirely why (television, mostly) journalism in modern America is so problematic. The news media SHOULD have a bias -- a bias towards empirically verifiable truths. The print media still does a pretty good job of this, particularly more thoughtful publications like the New Republic.

But treating "Intelligent Design" and evolution as if they were equally potentially valid and equally deserving of consideration is absurd. One is science, the other is religion dressed up in a funny outfit.

We need to find away to re-instill a passion for the truth for the sake of truth, right for the sake of being right and a desire to tear down those who lie and mislead in our media. People who try to support such absurd notions as creationism/ID, geocentricism and the like should be TERRIFIED of the media, for the media should be all about tearing apart arguments and showing who's right, not just reporting what talkingheads have to say.
Logged

Balshazaar
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 396


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2004, 09:46:26 PM »

I'm no creationist, but the problem with your argument is that people who believe in creationism have faith in that belief, and understand it to be the truth through faith.  To them, it is no less true than 'science,' which they may also describe as faith-based -- just that the faith is not based in religion.

Furthermore, there are more than a few journalists that are god-believing bible-believing reporters.  They also attempt (like any good reporter) to be truthful in their presentation.  The problem is in the definition of truth.  If you don't believe in god, then there's no way that you can understand how they define truth.

I have my own, private beliefs about religion.  I do not choose to practice organized religion.  I do not believe in creation.  I choose to believe that our concept of evolution is closer to the truth.  Yet, I am of one ilk, they are of another, and for me to blindly tell them that their beliefs are trash is the same thing as them telling me that mine are.  I am also not a moral relativist.  I do believe that there is a 'right' and a 'wrong,' yet who am I to impose that on others, and who am I to demand that the media follow my pattern of beliefs?

In truth, the media that are privately owned have a responsibility to present the bias of those who own the organizations.  If people disagree, then they should start their own media outlets to provide their own bias.  Governmental-based media outlets should only ever report facts about what has happened while presenting theories as what they are: theories -- be they religion or science based.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2004, 09:54:49 PM »

Nice post, Balshazar.

Is it me, or has "big" news orgs toned down their anti-Bush/anti-war slant since the elections were over?

It's almost as if they've given up on pushing their agendas for now.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.102 seconds with 33 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.023s, 2q)