How Did Opinions Get In Our News?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 мар 2024
- Breaking the News on Independent Lens: www.pbs.org/independentlens | #BreakingTheNewsPBS
Watch on the main PBS RUclips channel: • Video
Even though objectivity is seen as the gold standard for news coverage, OpEds and commentary have been part of the news landscape since the early days of America - and it's not always easy to spot the difference between facts and opinion.
*****
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/DonateORIG
*****
Breaking the News: Press Pass is a four-episode digital series digging into how early journalism in America laid the foundations for the noteworthy topics, opinions, investigations, and stressors embedded in the news today.
Subscribe to PBS Origins so you never miss an episode! / pbsorigins
And keep up with PBS Origins on:
Facebook: / pbsdigitalstudios
Twitter: / pbsds
Instagram: / pbsds
INDEPENDENT LENS is an Emmy® Award-winning PBS documentary series. With founding executive producer Lois Vossen, the series has been honored with 10 Academy Award nominations and features documentaries united by the creative freedom, artistic achievement, and unflinching visions of independent filmmakers. Presented by ITVS, INDEPENDENT LENS is funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Acton Family Giving, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Ford Foundation, Wyncote Foundation, and National Endowment for the Arts. Stream anytime on the PBS App. For more visit pbs.org/independentlens
#Documentary #PBSShortDocs #BreakingtheNews
Executive Producers: Carrie Lozano, Lois Vossen
Director/Host: Danielle Bainbridge
Producer: Hilary Giorgi
Writer: Keahnan Washington
Assistant Researcher: Linnea Valdivia
Senior Creative Producer: Andrea Bloom
Creative Director: Carol Paik
Vice President, Marketing and Communications: Lisa Tawil
Director of Programming (PBS): Gabrielle Ewing
Executive in Charge (PBS): Maribel Lopez
Director of Photography: Erik Ljung
Teleprompter: Philip Aronson
Assistant Camera: Corey Clark
Editor: Dave Yim
Motion Graphics: Matt Dunne
Fact Checker: Yvonne McGreevy
Sound Mixer: Pavel Sinev
Additional Footage:
Library of Congress
National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution
CNN
Fox News
MSNBC
Paramount | Comedy Central
Huffington Post
The New York Times
Alamy
Washington Post
Getty Images
Shutterstock, Inc.
Rand Corporation
ABC Education
The Guardian Foundation
Independent Lens Funding Provided By:
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Acton Family Giving
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
Ford Foundation
Wyncote Foundation
National Endowment for the Arts
Breaking the News: Press Pass is a co-production of Elleinad, Inc and Independent Television Service (ITVS), with funding provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and the Park Foundation. This program was produced by Elleinad, Inc and Independent Television Service, which is solely responsible for its content.
We need more social education like this everywhere.
It is everywhere its on the internet all people have to do is be open to learning
_"Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion man."_ 😛
@@jimrobinson9979 Why did you put quotes around that? That's not how you use quotation marks.
That's literally what the "Public Broadcasting Company" is for, but people still have to subscribe to it.
@@JeighNeitherThey're quoting a famous line from the film The Big Lebowski! Would highly recommend, really good movie lol
As usual PBS has to step up where mainstream news has screwed up in media literacy training
Weren't you paying attention? That isn't their job, which is to make money by selling their product.
@@richsackett3423PBS is weird. I do think they make some revenue by advertising, but they are also funded by the public directly and by the government .
Because PBS is funded by the public while mainstream media is funded by corporations with political agendas.
they should get more funding tbh
PBS should get more funding, I mean
I remember when I was in grade school (3rd, IIRC) there was an entire lesson on discerning factual statements from opinions, and I thought it was the dumbest thing I ever had to sit through. There were a few examples that could be a bit tricky for 8-year-olds but it seems this kind of teaching is needed today more than ever.
What year was this? I recall a similar lesson in 3rd grade, ~1962. We spent class time separating opinion from fact, learning writing styles, studying propaganda (maybe a holdover from the previous decade McCarthy-HUAC repressions), and we each produced a newspaper front page with articles we wrote (copied? plagiarized? rewrote?). It's a very distinct memory for me.
Thanks for corroborating,@@memathews. I didn't add this detail but it sounds like a similar lesson - we were also learning about reporting and "Who, What, When, Where, Why (and sometimes How)". I don't recall making our own newspaper page but could have. This was around 1982-3.
Kids do learn this sort of thing in English or history classes. When you learn about creditable sources. Unfortunately most people don’t care because “when will I use this in real life!?” Not understanding they’re constantly being bombarded but information and if they don’t learn how to tell the difference between a good source or a bad source and opinion from facts then they’re going to be falling for all kinds of crap
I think we learned about fact vs opinions for most of my elementary school years. That was in the 80s. We also were tested on being able know what sources to use for research (encyclopedia, almanac, research article, etc).
I never thought about it until now that my age group was one of the last age groups to do all of our research with factual books. I don't think we were allowed to use the internet as a source when I was in college.
@@memathewsthey still taught these things in the late 90's/early 00's, though I suspect the apathy of the students erases it from their memories
I quit the news for a while because I wasn't finding much news just opinions. Now I spend a lot of time on fact checking websites as they seem to be both current and factual in what they are saying.
Lol that’s a great workaround
I'm in the same boat. Would you mind listing some of the sites you view?
Local news does the news. They label what's an opinion. Even large publications like the NY Times.
Given that it's impossible for the human to be unbiased, how do they teach you to become aware of your own, and other's, biases, whenever you fact-check websites? I'd assume it's an essential thing to teach given that historians also need to be taught to be aware of these things as well.
@@Im-BAD-at-satire While I do think it's difficult to cast aside your bias, it helps to take a structured approach to news. Think of taking into account questions like:
By who was it written? Who are the stakeholders? What are the incentives and motivations of the parties involved? Am I missing a voice? Does the writer have access to all relevant sources? How does this correlate to previously written information and why is it different? How will this age? How easy is it to verify the information provided?
As a teen, I went to an international school when most of my friends were taught at a local European school. The difference in how we were taught American history (wars, colonisation, etc) was absolutely wild. But it did help understand how writer's bias impacts the factual knowledge taught at schools.
I believe strongly that critical thinking skills are a necessity, and should be taught at all levels of school. With so much data bombarding us daily, most of it contradictory, we all need to understand how to evaluate the source material and how to weigh differing opinions. Thanks for this video.
yeah, but it seems like it needed to be taught some decades ago. If my in-laws are evidence of education standards in the 70's
I agree. Did you know that schools in Finland have taught *media literacy* from the childrens' first year through graduation? It's to fight Russian propaganda. They were invaded by Russia long ago, but never forgot. Very smart of them!
@@rridderbusch518 what a good idea!
Someone was speaking about media literacy. Wow, this is just as essential as teaching kids to use the keyboard. It is nuts that this country does not first agree on facts, and THEN start giving opinions. (This video did not address deliberate lies, but "media literacy" would go a long way towards exposing lies.)
We do teach critical thinking in schools! But there’s two big issues that hinder our good lessons from taking effect: most kids didn’t back then or don’t now give a damn; they just want to get back to their phone, friends, planning their next drug binge, etc. AND we can’t undo in seven hours what a lifetime of poor parenting and media bias did over 18 years!
When TV shows said "Who needs history? It's all in the past.". Now we people who don't understand fact from opinion.
Faulkner said the past isn’t even the past, it’s still with us, it’s the present.
The hilarious thing is how people see anything and everything as an ‘opinion’ especially when it comes to non-negotiables. There isn’t a middle ground for every topic under the sun.
Name one.
@@sirsplintfastthepungent1373 Abortion. Queer Rights. Thriving Trans Lives. The Shape of The Earth.
@@sirsplintfastthepungent1373 you, right now.
@@sirsplintfastthepungent1373Human factors are worsening climate change
@@DancingTiger by making literally all environmental issues apart of some vaguely distant existential threat worthy of incessant alarmist rhetoric, immediate and specific environmental destruction is allowed to persist because it isn't catastrophic enough to warrant public attention.
I remember it starting when cable tv became a thing. Fox News started the first news like opinion segments. They became so popular that they took over that channel and then it spilled over into everywhere else
I think it may have been a combination of AM Talk Radio, the shift to TV News divisions needing to become money making concerns and then piling on Cable News channels with a 24 hour cycle.
@@irishhi8333as I like to say, the news may be on 24 hours a day, but that doesn’t mean there’s actually 24 hours worth of news.
Fox having news is where I put the shift, which would be in that 2000 time frame. Growing up, Fox was the "No News Channel " and they ran their best shows against the evening and late news. You had to choose between the Simpsons or Tom Brokaw. When they made the shift, all those kids were now in or just out of college and identified with the channel.
@@irishhi8333 omg I forgot about the talk radio! But you're right, they were totally biased.
These days, the real issue is ads that look and feel like news or opinion articles.
Like the way this piece ended with an invitation to view another PBS documentary?
@@gemmeldrakes2758 That’s not an ad. Why can’t you tell the difference? Quite an admission of your personal media illiteracy.
@@richsackett3423 I don't know much about it. The subject of media literacy didn't even exist when I was in school. These are concepts I am trying to familiarise myself with as a middle-aged adult.
@gemmeldrakes2758 'hey, check out our documentary' at the end of an informative video is not the same as an article or video that's been sponsored by a company and designed to promote their products.
They have a different feel/tone to them than a news article or personal opinion piece. Look for brand names and a more promotional tone, I guess? I go by feel, personally. Some news organizations state outright that they've collaborated with a brand for an article or video. Hope this helps!
I remember the daily newspaper Mom and Dad got had a page of opinion and they always had 2 articles written by people from each side. I always enjoyed reading it.
PBS is one of the few news outlets that just gives you the facts and nothing more.
Ah, but they select which facts to show. That reveals their biases, i.e. opinions. PBS isn't some machine. It's human beings, and they all seem to be on one side.
Im happy to see this woman still on pbs. Ive enjoyed the pieces shes done in the past
This series is really great, but my golly the music is loud. It's difficult to hear the speaker. Thank you for adding the closed captioning!
This was really well done. The problem though, is not opinions in the news, it's when opinions `become` the news. Most of that is our own fault. People like to be told what they want to hear. This is why the news barely even veils their bias anymore, because we've become so polarized that if they were truly objective, no one would pay attention. Inevitably they would report on something in a way the consumer doesn't like. So, they pick their market shares and tell them what they want to hear.
Blaming the consumer is asinine.
News became a business. Slowly and deliberately journalistic integrity was sacrificed to profits.
"People like to be told what they want to hear." Sure. That's in our nature. There was a time when it wasn't a problem though. So it can't be "our fault." We didn't change, the news did. And it wasn't an accident. Somebody made a decision to do it, and nobody stopped him (yes, it's a him).
@somersetcace1 I'm not speaking for myself, or for you, or for any individual. It's called a generalization, and it's one backed by research. However, being that you made it personal, I'm not so arrogant or ignorant to believe I am immune from confirmation bias.
It's not debatable... Newspapers are businesses even the non-profit ones like PBS. There was a time in American journalism where the journalism side was kept separate and sacred from the business side. It was called "the separation of church and state." September 28th, 2015, the New York Times printed a statement by Margaret Sullivan announcing they were assigning a senior editor to work and cooperate with the head of advertising. This day is to me, just my opinion, the deathblow to that separation.
Being biased doesn't make a news outlet profitable. Do I really have to educate you on this? Page views and engagement generate metrics that sell advertisement space. So to maximize that, companies have several branches each with its own bias including an unbiased one to get the super smart ones who can't be so easily fooled, lol.
Who do we blame? That's also so stupidly easy to answer, I'm ashamed to do it for you. They're publicly traded companies and their board of directors and corporate officers are all neatly listed out for anyone who is interested. There is also a list of their lobbyists available who ensure they continue to profit without interference. Have fun learning, because I'm certain you're so above it all you'll certainly look up the facts yourself.
@@daffyf6829 That was an awful lot of words to say absolutely nothing meaningful in thew context of the topic. You want to try and complicate it, be my guest, but in the end, if consumers stopped watching biased news they know perfectly well is biased, those news agencies would either change, or not be there. Period.
@@somersetcace1 it's asinine to blame the consumer. Is that short enough for you?
This would explain why the family that perfected yellow journalism owns Reddit.
I was just complaining about this the other day. I am so tired of every news segment including interviews, i.e. opinions. There are times when interviews are necessary in the news, such as to better understand what is going on or to stir up intellectual discussions. But too many times it seems that there are interviews that don't serve a purpose other than to create speculation. I just want the news to be the news, tell me what's happening in the world, not a 10 minute segment of "It could", "They should've done", "They might", etc.
My big issue with news sources these days, primarily videos but a lot of other types of media as well, is that I will see a headline, click on it and don't really get what the headline is about.
If Biden or Trump makes some kind of speech or comment, I want to see the whole of that represented.
Instead, I get an out of context video clip of Biden/Trump that on average seems to last two minutes wedged into eight other minutes of someone telling me how I should view what was said. I have little use for such nonsense.
They're all padding. I've lost count of the number of videos I've watched on news events that should have been 2 minutes long that were 5 minutes or longer, because they're padding.
"Opinion" isn't the only way to identify if an article is opinionated news or just straight news
One of the articles (I believe is from CNN) labeled the article as "Analysis" which honestly is a fancy word for opinion (although likely more informed than the typical columnist)
Usually, you can tell what the source and tone of the news item but there are times where we’re all proved wrong.
As a publisher of two small community newspapers in the southern region of Silicon Valley, we publish opinion pieces as guest columns, an editorial and local news stories in each issue. I'm amazed how many people have a hard time understanding the differences between opinion and news. A big part of the problem is that schools have taken real journalism out as an option for students to learn mass media communication skills. A lot of students are not interested in the free press. What they get is social media nonsense and they digest that nonsense as news. And so society is growing more divided because social media systems feed them only the nonsense they want, so they lack a variety of opinions in their information "diet" (a necessity for a democracy to function in a healthy manner).
Some people genuinely believe that there are objective opinions. Look at any discussion surrounding whether a particular movie is good or bad, for example, or whether some celebrity is attractive or not.
So glad you're back! I missed your content, Danielle!
It’s hard to miss her
A great visual essay. Like highlighting “this is an advertisement”, all op-eds should be similarly labelled. Objectivity is now a rare commodity in the news.
There is also the advent of the news aggregators. Ground News labels articles as to their accuracy, leanings (right, left, center), funding source and independent vs. corporate vs. governmental. This is very helpful for understanding the world.
RUclips ate my last comment, but I thought it was an interesting point that newspapers existed before they were used as a medium for advertising. Around @5:52 you started to hint at this but to be clearer: with so few advertisers available for print media, does the whole industry revert to the ecosystem of this "before advertising" period? Relatedly, two important names I think you missed regarding local news are the Sinclair group, and on a different tack, the National Trust for Local News.
BINGO!! This is a seriously needed bit of education for all of us. We cannot keep going the way we're going.
I remember local television stations would have a weekly segment where they would have a clearly labeled commentary or opinion segment separate from the news at the end.
I love this! Shared it with a few friends and my kids! Great bit of history and a few action items. To learn about that we read everyday and see everyday.
Thank you for this work! More Americans need to think critically about their news.
The use of ambiguities and sensationalism in the titles is a dead giveaway. Anytime they tell you how you or others feel before getting into any details is also a tell.
This was great, thank you!
One thing I’d like to see would be for opinion sections to be reserved exclusively for people who are actual experts in what they’re talking about and whose work revolves around coming up with actual solutions to those issues. The way I see it, there are way too many opinion columnists out there who don’t actually do anything other than complain about things, which they then get paid for every time a piece is published. They act like they know everything, but they’re not interested in fixing anything so much as just getting other people to feed their own victim complexes while those who are actually capable of getting stuff done have their views get sidelined or even ignored entirely. There needs to be more awareness among people (especially Americans, of which I am also one) that even a democratic society simply cannot function on the assumption that anyone can be considered an expert on everything and that talking about stuff is not the same as actually doing something about it.
This video was absolutely delightful to watch! Thank you so much for making it!
Jon “News Comedian” Stewart 😂
As someone who's spent a lot of time in archives, reading through old newspapers, there's always been opinions in our news
Excellent video.
The way I tell something is an opinion is if there is name-calling in it.
"The sky is blue" vs "those who think the sky is blue are bigots."
This is so essential to know. There should be a class required to pass in high school.
As long as I can get my kids an exemption on philosophical grounds. The rigid dichotomy between fact and opinion relies on dubious assumptions that lead to overly simplistic categorizations.
Thanks for this. I was frankly becoming disillusioned about the news media, so it's a relief to hear that others are noticing this sad trend.
I did not know this about newspaper layouts, I wish I had learned this as a kid :0 Thanks!
These days, if I'm looking for an opinion, usually I'm actually looking for a discussion, so I go to places like Reddit. It often draws people from all over the spectrum of an issue, and often times there'll be people all too haopy to bring sources and receipts.
Blogging has blurred the lines between opinion and journalism. And the click-bait way to increase readership and revenue has brought us back to the days of yellow journalism.
Using those four headlines, made the point about the blurring of the fact/opinion line very clear! “What to know” is shorthand for “What, in this writer’s opinion, you should know.” “American universities need to rethink”, to perhaps “may choose to rethink”. Choosing to use “haters”, is a writer negatively characterizing the opposing opinion, which in that writer’s opinion is incorrect. Would the only opinion piece be titled; “SATs need to present options” make this headline news?
Great stuff! PBS is a national treasure.
this was enlightening and really helpful!
I am loving this series
The ability to discern meaningful sources of information from meaningless sources is another rare trait. "My pastor says," "I saw it in a dream," "Fox News said," and some popup trash article online, are not reliable sources. Neither are politicians, nor commercial research, nor advertisements. Unfortunately, people tend to parrot influencers who parrot canned soundbites prepared by some kind of hustler.
Thank you
This is a fabulous topic and you laid it out beautifully in this video.
I studied journalism in college and took an entire course about this kind of media literacy. The difference can be so hard to spot. You can have an entire article that looks like fact until in the very last paragraph or even last sentence where they use all the facts they've laid out to back up some kind of persuasive statement-that makes it an opinion article.
As edifying as ever.
Primarily why I don’t watch most news networks anymore. “Here is 5 minutes of the news, followed by a 10 person panel opinion segment of strangers telling me what to think”. I just can’t.
1:56 and when Hamilton threw Burr under the proverbial bus
I respect you for putting this out as a news thing
This should be apart of required reading for all high school students
This was excellent
Great summary!
Thank you PBS, our only saving grace, educating and reeducation society.
Opinions have been in the news since before I was born. In my opinion, my mom always told me this never volunteering opinion. If nobody asked you about it, I think that is completely lost on people
Commentaries, opinions and ‘alternate facts’
lead to higher ratings.
This is great ! Keep educating the masses. I have been saying for years now that news companies have adopted the soup opera , reality tv show business model .. “ stay tuned “!
Its when news organizations realized they could make a profit, so they started pulling all kinds of shenanigans to keep people watching, which meant making the news more interesting, which meant pandering and sensationalizing. We are now at the point where a majority of Americans honestly believe the purpose of the news is to entertain and tell them how to feel.
I hate it.
And we are not going back any time soon.
But even "neutral" news is biased. How news stories are framed, which news stories even get printed at all, is different based on the editorial decisions made by the news organization - based on their opinions. That's why it's important to have a diversity of voices and identities represented in your news feed.
Our brains can't save us now.
@@guyfierimtwi I don't understand what this means, are you agreeing with me?
@@laceisaverb Yes, I am. I think hearing what you said however made me think of how our brains like what we hear only when "we" agree with it. Basically, I believe the confirmation bias supports your opinion.
Opinion:
I assume that's what algorithms are trying to do, play into that when the CEO's of these big companies/their workers create them, not that I would know(The soical dilemma on Netflix reminded me of it). Also, I feel like youtube comments have gotten really stale and downright stupid or boring to read the replies from so I recognized that with your comment so I feel I am taking more time to write this comment.
great video!
Great source to compare headlines on the same topic is Ground News.
@3:46 - Ayyyy Quad Cities ❤
The numbers at the beginning, on how many Americans can distinguish fact from opinion, are absolutely horrifying.
40 years ago, when I was in college (and ya know, WWW only stood for Wicked Witch of the West), I had a history project which involved looking at microfilm of the local city paper from the 1880s. And the really shocking thing to me was that the front page was divided into 6 columns, the first five of which were entirely ads! And even inside the paper there were often "articles" that were just testimonials about patent medicines, and not marked off from the actual news in any way.
Great video!
Great summary
This is one reason I like watching John Oliver, I know he's a comedian doing deep dives into subjects, and he's boldly opinionated... And doesn't pretend otherwise.
I find my most trusted news sources to be PBS and BBC news. I do still look at what other souces say, and the tone with which they're delivered. Critical thinking is necessary with all information we're presented with throughout the day, not just news we consciously ingest.
I did some extra-curricular journalism starting in Jr. High, so I feel well-equipped to tell the difference. The problem is that bias is always present. So at the end of the day, I rely on Grandma Grace's 2nd law: Figures don't lie, but liars can figure.
Whoa. I was falling asleep and RUclips automatically played this. My eyes were closed and I was sure I was listening to Britney Brosky. Am I the only one who hears the similarity?
People love opinions because we're social creatures. We'd like to think we're independent thinkers, but when it comes down to it, we just want to be told how to think. Fact-checking? That's not my job! That's why we have journalists... right?
God bless PBS and CSPAN
Good topic
Exactly 🎉
For one thing, people got tired of hearing “fact or opinion” and then being told NO that’s YOUR opinion NOT a fact. Which is equivalent of being told YOU’RE WRONG. But then it drove news outlets to be like “yes or no? Right or wrong? Left or right? Black or white?”. Which always existed but became amplified by new technologies that made it easier for people to access news articles.
Helpful
This is a vital topic that needs to be understood.
Took long enough
The way "motive" did...like knowing a motive ever stopped future events or somehow can or will 🤨🤦♀️🙄🤦♂️
Moral evaluation is the job of every journalist. Swindling is the job of every sponsor in the market.
Thank you, algorithm, for showing this very informative video to me 😊
There is definitely a crisis of public confusion of fact with opinion, not only in media, but in the thought processes of individuals. This is largely due to the realization by media companies that emotions are more compelling motivators of attention than information, therefore are more profitable. Viewers are financially rewarding those providers who are most successful at manipulating their emotions.
I didn't know you were back. ❤
Opinion pieces require less groundwork and pundits have the potential to earn far more money than journalists.
I think the issue is really just that I don't know what I'm going to get until I click on the article. That bugs me.
Great program. Its important to detect slanted wording too. Headlines may read: "John Doe TRIES to ..." as opposed to "John Doe WORKS to". The former implies the subject is starting from an inferior position.
On the positive side one could say "John Doe makes gains in..." vs. "John Doe SMASHES....". Opinion is implied that its "all over" in the latter. Encouraging and discouraging readers is not reporting news.
❤your rhetoric
When I agree, I take it as fact. When I disagree, it is only someone’s opinion.
5:01 Every day is a school day.
An issue is how fake news and opinion has found common ground through their appeal to emotions, especially highly charged issues, and repetition, creating reality from frequency of hearing a fact vs accuracy of the fact.
Great video, you have a fan.
The partisan newspapers I understand, it's the people who confuse me. Why would a highly educated professor, scientist, ot engineer become a mouth piece for one side over the other? Shouldn't the smartest among us act as the bulwarks against self interest?
Of what use is the intellectual class in public discourse if not to cut through the BS of leaders, strongmen, schemers, and hucksters and act as the filters of society who see through all the tricks?
4:18 Got to say, Horace Greeley is sporting what could be the silliest beard I've ever seen. I'm glad that style didn't catch on!
Gurl you're rocking! ❤🎉
Get in our news? That should read become our news.
I've been taken in a couple of times, but I always look to see the sources cited. If there aren't any, or it only cites itself then I assume it's either fake or an opinion. The only exception is when one of the newspapers found old Trump tax forms in their archives and shared them. They had no other sources they could cite because it was evidence they had acquired and reported on. Even then, I wanted to see other sources taking about Trump's tax information to see what other sources had information on his spending habits and at the time auditing status.
All news is opinion, simply by the choice of what to report, which facts get left out, and which comparisons to make.
Kinda like how a network built by the Koch brothers would happily want you to believe Tucker Carlson is somehow comparable to Rachel Maddow.
Distillation of nuance down to and easily digestible black and white, e.g. "all media lies to us (because of bias)!!" isn't helpful.
What are you trying to say? Are opinions useful? How do you define fact vs. opinion? Why use Carlson and Maddow as examples?
@@thirdbells why use them for examples? Did you not watch the video?
@@thirdbells do you think using facts on people who are impervious to them is helpful?
If my goal was to make reprehensible opinions more common, and acceptable because I'm counting on the mere exposure effect working to my advantage, do you think it would be smart of you to continually berate me with facts?
@@kitsmashing3267 weird how you think that's a valid rebuttal
@@kitsmashing3267thank you for saying I'm right.
Nothing else you said is worthy of response.
I think you overlooked the importance of wire services. They were the first non-partisan news organizations because they had to sell their reports to as many papers as possible to be profitable.
Nice review. I believe there is a 3rd category now --- Hard Propaganda. We need similar training in the schools for all social media. "Misinformation'" is a continuum with partial facts, omitted facts, distortion, misrepresentations, quoting out of context, and the omission of stories. Social media isn't going away, the government can't police in official narrative. We need to teach people we all are responsible for our own opinions and what we chose to believe. The truth is hard work.
Look at the political leanings of the owner(s).
Media literacy programs need to be in all schools. It is an unavoidable part of our lives, now, and it only makes sense to teach the youngins how to interpret it all.
RUclips should be held accountable for their news tab, giving equal and sometimes higher importance to opinion segments as they do to factual reporting of events.