Originally posted by seanD
View Post
There is a huge difference between a source that has pledged itself to only produce information from a certain point of view, and an organization that will try to present information as it is without changing it to suit a particular ideology. Breitbart, AIG are extremes of the latter. CNN, MSNBC, FOX, the WSJ, WPO, NYT are instances more in line with the former. This is just the reality of the situation. When MM trots out a breitbart article, I know up front that I can't trust anything in it to be the actual truth - though that does not mean what they write is always false. With legitimate news organizations, while I may need to cross check them with other outlets to filter out underlying bias, I am much more likely to get something relatively honest wrt the subject matter of the article. Especially if it is a paper based news outlet, as opposed to a TV based news outlet.
So you can dismiss that reality if you want. Those are your 'true colors', but I prefer to face reality head on with very very heavy value on truth as opposed to a fantasy bubble with a high value in reinforcing what I already think is true.
Comment