Journalist outlets everywhere are doing it, not just CNN…
I think that’s why it’s important on various unions, US and Canadian cities, and other groups to call for a ceasefire, that way the press will be less and less able to ignore it or censor it.
What? How do you even discuss the situation without using the word ‘Palestine?’
Oops, everything is Hamas now!
The truly sad thing is that there are people who believe just that.
https://newrepublic.com/post/178679/gop-congressman-brian-mast-dead-palestinian-babies-not-innocent
Oops, all berries!
If you click on the link in the post above, then you will see that they specifically talk about war to be called “Israel-Gasa”, not “Israel-Palestinian” war to avoid confusion with Palestinian Authority. Such titles are click-bates.
I admit I did not click through, but the war has expanded beyond Gaza, so calling it the Israel-Palestinian war makes sense.
Such raids Israel was doing well before the war. Israel also does not have a goal to destroy the Palestinian Authority. You are twisting facts here. Precisely because of such statements the journalists are given instructions NOT TO DO THAT.
What facts did I twist? Because all I said was that the war has expanded to beyond Gaza to the West Bank whether their goal is to destroy the PA or not. I’m not even sure why not having that goal means the war can’t expand into the West Bank. Are you under the strange misapprehension that every war is about regime change?
Also, my link was one example. There have been plenty of others.
It seems to me that calling it the Israel-Gaza war when it isn’t just in Israel and Gaza is a twisting of facts. Even Wikipedia has the sense to call it the Israel-Hamas war since at least Israel claims that’s who they’re at war against (I would argue that is also false). And let’s say that’s true. Why can’t Hamas members be in the West Bank?
Was America at war with Pakistan when it killed Bin Laden in Pakistan during the “Great War on Terror?”
Calling this Israili-Palistinian war is twisting facts. There are also shorts traded with Hezbollah, so, let’s call it Israeli Lebanon/Iranian war.
Shots traded is not the same thing as multiple incursions.
How many military operations do there have to be in the West Bank for it to not make sense to call it the “Israel-Gaza War?”
Journalist outlets everywhere are doing it, not just CNN…
It’s happening on multiple fronts:
Pro-Israel groups target US lawmakers critical of Gaza war with attack ads
I personally know people who lived under Israel’s illegal occupation of Lebanon. If America knew even HALF of the shit they get up to, we would demand all funding be cut off immediately.
They still wouldn’t care. Just look at the police as an example.
Lol, what? Our government has always been pro-genocide.
The government, yes, the American citizens, not so much.
Been making the demands of my reps since October to cut funding, but funnily enough they aren’t exactly receptive to those who aren’t military contractor lobbyists. Go figure.
There’s reports from IDF veterans that amount to eyewitness accounts of war crimes over the years. According to them the IDF does those things routinely. The example I remember off the top of my head is searching random Palestinian houses in the West Bank and of course any resistance is dealt with harshly.
Why the hell does anyone watch CNN anymore? They have a right wing slant but Republicans think it’s so far left it’s practically communist.
So who is watching it?
Every Boomer I have ever known has had a TV with a news station on just running in the background of their lives at home.
You go into their home, the TV is always on. They aren’t necessarily watching it but they have that shit rolling 24 hours a day.
As of 2021, roughly 56% of US citizens still have a Cable TV subscription. Those numbers continue to drop, but plenty of Boomers still have that TV on and running all damn day long.
CNN’s actual viewership numbers are abysmal compared to FOX News and MSNBC.
https://deadline.com/2023/12/cable-news-ratings-2023-1235682966/
CNN posted 582,000, down 19%
Ouch, in a country of 350 million people, CNN can barely pull half a million people who give a shit about their broadcast.
Ouch, in a country of 350 million people, CNN can barely pull half a million people who give a shit about their broadcast.
I don’t have cable so I don’t know… who the fuck is willing to advertise to a national audience that small? You could spend less money and have more reach on a radio station in one city.
man my parents constantly have CNN on in the background and i have no idea how they havent gone completely crazy hearing whatever the pundits are talking about all day. Not to mention the same like, 3 ads over and over again
I will turn it on during the day because for actual news events, they’re better than MSNBC or Fox.
It’s when the opinion engine kicks in that they’re useless.
I guess with dozens of different internet sources at my disposal now, I don’t trust any big corporate news network to really give me a good picture of news events, even breaking ones, because at the end of the day, they’re beholden to their corporate masters who demand that even stories that should be straight up news don’t do anything to harm anyone that might make them money.
That is something I do love about NPR and PBS. They have no problem criticizing their corporate funders and freely admit that they get funding from that corporation in a story that criticizes them.
Oh, NPR and PBS are absolutely solid, but you have to wait for them to get around to covering something, if they bother at all. :(
Right now, turning on my local PBS station it’s…
Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me… which is fine, but it’s not news. :)
Weekends are not very newsy on public radio, it’s true. But the weekday NPR stream is Morning Edition, which is basic news, 1A, which is more in-depth about current events with an attempt to be unbiased about it. Admittedly, they also do an hour of Fresh Air, but I would say the rest counts as news. And my station often breaks in if there’s something major going on.
https://www.npr.org/about-npr/472557877/npr-program-stream
I also think a lot of the things that channels like CNN put up as breaking news just aren’t. Even when they seem like they are.
I guess also because I grew up in the pre-CNN era, I don’t feel I need to know everything the second it happens. I mean it can be interesting, but if I don’t find out about it until 12 hours later, it’s not a big deal a good 90% of the time.
What I miss is Headline News. Turn on a channel, any time of the day or night, and get the equivalent of a 30 minute network newscast.
I agree. That was excellent. Originally anyway. Then it changed to ‘HN’ and had regular programming and does it even exist now?
HLN exists as a channel, but as near as I can tell it’s all true crime bullshit now.
“Look at this horrible thing this asshole got away with… OR DID HE??? Was he actually innocent all along? Or is he even MORE twisted than anyone imagined!!! Tune in to find out!”
It’s 24 hour propaganda. There’s never a time when CNN isn’t injecting their opinions and bias into a story.
Right wing? That’s the first time I’ve ever heard anyone call CNN right wing.
Even media bias fact check says otherwise. Am I missing something?
Yes you are missing something. You’re missing, for example, how CNN had GOP debates where they allowed people like DeSantis and Ramaswamy to spew their talking points unchallenged.
But airing a candidate debate is not a right-wing thing. Since when (in the last 20 years at least) has anything right-wing allowed debates from both major sides in the American political spectrum? Making an attempt to be fair is a centrist or Left-wing thing. If anything, that would further prove my point.
I can’t debate this as I don’t watch any news channels, but are you able to counter what Media Bias Fact Check (which, as far as I have seen is extremely accurate and vets their information) states, or is this a case that people on the extreme sides of any political movement see anything even slightly closer to the centre as “the other side?”
You must know that a debate between a bunch of Republican candidates that didn’t include Trump was a pointless effort that only allowed Republican talking points to be aired unquestioned. There was absolutely no non right-wing reason to have that debate. None.
I would even argue that it wasn’t pointless. Trump is certainly the biggest candidate for the Right, but there are plenty of things that could get in his way at the moment.
And “hearing them out” is a way to show that you’re not just unfairly maligning them and keeping them down by keeping them out of media that you don’t want to see. It’s also helping to split the Right, which is INCREDIBLY valuable.
Just because you can’t think of a reason, doesn’t mean there isn’t one.
How about “hearing them out” and then not pointing out all the lies they told?
Because that’s what happened.
Was there a fact-checker at the last Democratic primaries? If not, then why would there be a double standard?
And I think you may be mistaken about what these debates exist to do. They aren’t there to “check facts” and make sure everyone only has correct opinions (which I would argue that even some on Democratic side do not have). They are there to show what the candidates believe, how they behave, and how they respond to pressure. They show how they act in front of a crowd, and how they respond later to missteps during the debates. In effect, they show a good public face for judging a politician.
The simple fact is that you aren’t going to have every fact going into, say, a negotiation with China - you have to think on your feet.
It’s more accurate to describe CNN as “Fox News for Centrists”.
fucking IRONIC that these CNN staffers suddenly have a conscience and care about ‘journalistic malpractice’, but they have had no such issues with normalizing trump’s dangerous fascism and go out of their way to ensure he is given a platform.
fuck pro-israel/pro-genocide narratives, but fuck these piece of shit enablers right along with em.
REAL JOURNALISM IS DEAD at these big media outlets. They are beholden to the elite, not the truth.
Western “journalism” has reached a new low. Social media is a blessing. Even The Guardian can’t just write unbiased news.
I can’t read one article without having “Hamas bloody super duper massacre with pregnant women cut open in ovens” thrown in my face, when 200 children just casually die from an explosion in Gaza on the 5th page.
It’s such a sad state of affairs that opening Aljazeera feels more factual than any western newspaper.
CNN is home to some of the most egregious journalistic malpractice. Being pro-Israel is expected.
Actually it’s called aiding and abetting genocide.
I’m so furious at the press in my country for obfuscating the genocide and the ICJ ruling. And even more at my fucking government for aiding in the genocide directly by cutting funding to UN humanitarian aid. FUCKING FUCKERS
This is a shockingly big issue that impacts a lot of things outside of even mainstream journalism.
For instance: I’m a Wikipedia editor in my spare time. I enjoy editing Wikipedia. However, one caveat of the “notability” standard in Wikipedia is that a given page has to have a particular amount of references to it from “notable sources” (often, academic sources and big news agencies).
Unfortunately - what this means is that Wikipedia has a huge lean towards topics that essentially only pertain to areas where a lot of journalism is centered, which is often NYC and parts of the West Coast. Entire rural regions or countries will have major events ‘not qualify’ for a Wikipedia page due to the lack of “notable” references - while what are essentially inside jokes by New Yorker yuppie types will have entire pages published.
There’s just a big problem with representative coverage in media and unfortunately groups like Palestinians and Muslims are severely underrepresented
Just learned this recently after picking up on a larger than usual bias coming from CNN and subsequently did some deep research to learn what this article mentions, that they’re filtering the news through Israel.
I did not know, however, that the CEO was put into that position of power at CNN (one of the less crazy cable news networks that has a wide audience) just when it would be beneficial to Israel. That seems… convenient timing? It could just as equally have been a coincidence, but, weird nonetheless.
just when it would be beneficial to Israel
On 30 August 2023, Thompson was named the CEO of CNN
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/07/chris-licht-out-cnn-column-00100824
Licht (previous CEO) “lost” the newsroom, as people like to put it when the newsroom rebels against a new boss. A similar thing happened to Howell Raines, who was essentially ousted as executive editor of the New York Times by the newsroom in 2003 after 21 months at the top after proving charm deficient. Employees tend to resist new bosses unless given a reason to embrace them. Raines, and now Licht, provided no such reason, and suffered for it. Journalists love to complain, and they love to leak on their bosses when peeved. “Top talent began to turn on Licht,” as Alberta put it. The CNN newsroom’s dissatisfaction with Licht was already a media beat staple before the Atlantic story, which made CNN management and not the network itself the story. A bad look.
Also, let’s not pretend that CNN was fine until Israel’s need for control over American narratives. Case in point: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/10/objective-cnn-rightwing-week-in-patriarchy
Licht was trash and it spurred a lot of distrust and dislike among CNN users over the pandering to conservatives and the wannabe mango Mussolini
Sat 10 Sep 2022 09.00 EDT CNN wants to be the new Fox News and it’s not even trying to hide it. Earlier this year Chris Licht became the new CEO of the cable network and immediately made it clear that he was going to change the network’s direction. One of Licht’s first moves was to embark on what Axios described as a “Capitol Hill diplomacy tour” and others described as a Republican boot-licking tour. Licht met with lawmakers who had become wary of cable news and promised them that CNN was moving away from “alarmist” programming towards more neutral, objective reporting.
What does that mean in practice? Well, it appears to mean firing anyone who is critical of Donald Trump or Republicans. Last month CNN suddenly axed Brian Stelter’s Sunday show in a move many commentators considered politically motivated; Stelter had been an outspoken critic of Trump and was reviled by many on the right. Earlier this month White House correspondent John Harwood was fired shortly after calling Trump “a dishonest demagogue” on the air.
It’s not just who was fired that is alarming – it’s the abrupt manner in which they were fired. As the media analyst Josh Marshall noted, “The most striking thing about Licht’s firings to date is how they are choreographed for … right-wing media consumption and designed to generate mass schadenfreude on the right: the bête noires Fox has been harping on for years suddenly marched to the top of the pyramid and hurled to the ground.” Licht says he’s moving away from sensational news, but he appears to be putting on his own little drama for the right.
After purging progressive voices, Licht has just made his first big hire: announcing on Tuesday that John Miller would be joining CNN as the network’s chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst. Miller isn’t exactly an obvious hire if you’re looking to brandish your new “neutrality” credentials. The former New York police department (NYPD) deputy commissioner of intelligence and counter-terrorism is an extremely polarizing figure who made headlines in March when he testified to the New York city council that the NYPD did not, in his opinion, inappropriately spy on Muslims after the September 11 attacks. Which is a weird thing to say because Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting has clearly shown that the NYPD used census data to spy on Muslims following September 11 and the department has settled a number of lawsuits related to the illegal spying.
… article continues
Being pro Israel is dumber than being pro Palestine. It’s evil vs evil in this holy war and the citizens suffer.
Funny they decide that NOW having a slant is journalistic malpractice, do they now stop being overtly misleading on things that suit their politics? It’s been acceptable to mislead in the news since the 90s
It’s been acceptable for a lot longer than that.
Under Regan an FCC rule mandating that news represent both sides of any political issues fairly was eliminated, that basically led to the birth of the CNN and Fox as we know them today.
Cable news wasn’t affected by that though. That law applied to public broadcast news only. You just need to look back to something like the Spanish American War to see that American news has always been filled with blatant propaganda.
