Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Unfortunately, in today's media environment, that makes them vapid and dull, because there is no room for a "responsible" centrist position. It simply doesn't exist, so they have to invent one.
edited 14th Oct '15 8:24:15 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I think the problem is that most people would rather have sensationalism than honesty.
CNN has been panned repeatedly for filling time with inane drivel; their coverage of many major crises (the loss of that Malaysia Air flight, the Boston Marathon bombing) has been just absurd. They spend tons of money on fancy graphics, send their reporters down on submarines, stick them in flight simulators, everything they can think of to keep people interested in a story that has no new real information.
Their political reporting is mired in false centrism, insisting on presenting "balanced" views of stories that really do boil down to one side being balls-out wrong.
edited 14th Oct '15 8:42:49 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Maybe they should do like MSNBC and put all drivel on weekends.
CNN ain't without its faults, to be sure (and Blitzer and Cooper both need to go, seriously), though I think thats more to do with the fact that they have multiple news channels (the other two have dedicated business channels, but CNN has that and more). HLN is all sensationalism, CNN International covers news in a useful way but only foreign affairs, etc. etc....
Also, not a fan of the channel's boss these days.
The problem with 24-hour news networks is that they have to fill all 24 of those hours, 7 days a week, with something. And because they are funded by advertising, that something has to bring in ratings, so it has to appeal to a hypothetical audience that exists somewhere in the minds of boardroom executives.
It's not for nothing that folks like Jon Stewart have talked about CNN as that network that you watch because you're stuck at the airport.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The thing is that they could easily fill airtime with legitimate news, but doing so would require digging out that old thing called "investigative journalism". It's expensive, and carries risks, and they have become too timid to do it any more.
There are tons of stories that aren't being told because they aren't "sexy enough", but that leaves huge holes when all the networks can talk about is whatever is on the front page... over, and over, and over. Even MSNBC does it; every single program last week could talk about nothing but the House leadership crisis, repeating the same news for hour after hour. Enough already!
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I'm going to have to differ with you on one thing: it's not about the personalities that face the camera, necessarily. I'm quite certain — well, I hope — that Blitzer and Cooper could do a better job if they were given better material to work with. The networks were eaten up by their executives; reform would have to similarly come from the top down. Firing Cooper won't help if his replacement is just as inane.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"A lot of what these 24-hour news networks do is just a bunch of heads talking at each other: People giving their opinions and predictions on current events without actually delivering any new information. This is where a lot of the spin comes in, too.
And don't get me started on the Crawl.
They do practice journalism in that they gather information and present it to the public, but the news media has increasingly over the past couple of decades stopped investigating stories themselves and instead relied on information provided directly by the subjects of those stories, or leaked by insiders. Those sources are often unreliable, not infrequently lying, and almost always driven by an agenda.
To the degree that real journalism is still practiced, it involves performing due diligence on the information provided by media sources to verify it. Some of the worst news media embarrassments have come when it was revealed that they failed to perform that due diligence in the rush to air a story.
What makes it even sadder is that the investigative part of journalism has, historically, been the part that has been most effective at reigning in the excesses of people in power. The fear that some reporter might snoop through your affairs and pull out a juicy story is an amazingly strong deterrent.
That fear hardly exists any more; it's all about leak control — keeping insiders from spilling the beans. You keep the press on your side by becoming known as a good source of material for the viewers, and a good source of lucrative jobs once they retire from the media. Once you've captured them in this way, they won't go snooping around lest they risk the largess being cut off. The media will do far more to censor whistle-blowers than you could ever dream of.
edited 14th Oct '15 11:51:22 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The Democrats: The Party of 'Democratic Socialism'?
I didn't watch the debate so I can't tell you if the article is correct in it's critique of Sanders's foreign policy, or for that matter anything about the debate, but it is impossible to disagree with the first half of it's conclusion,the Democrats are shifting to the left. The thing is though, it seems as if the media is reporting on the situation.
"Democratic socialism" is a description of what we do in this country, right now. The fact that we have nationalized industries, redistributive taxation, social safety nets, single-payer health insurance (Medicare, Medicaid), etc. is ample evidence of that.
Just because some jackasses on the right have tainted the word "socialism" doesn't mean they get to change its definition.
In a weird way, for Sanders to claim that label is something of a null statement, semantically. We are all democratic socialists unless we favor complete repeal of all forms of redistribution and social insurance, plus complete privatization of all government functions save the military.
What makes it a radical statement is the aforementioned tainting of the word in our media. Sanders would be more properly described as an anti-corporatist. He favors the dissolution of large private institutions in favor of smaller companies, plus nationalization of many industries that serve a broad, vital public role. Clinton, clearly, does not.
What was ignored in the CNN debate was the statement by... I believe it was Chafee... that the Republican party shifted away from him, forcing him to change sides. That has gone mostly unremarked because it is the truth.
The Democrats have stood mostly rock solid on ideological principles since the 1970s. Nothing proposed by any candidate today is in any way new. Single-payer healthcare was first seriously considered in the thirties as part of the New Deal, and proposed as an idea long before. Dismantling predatory corporations was a favorite stump speech of Theodore Roosevelt. Equal rights for various minority groups has been a progressive rallying cry for centuries; it evolves as public morality shifts, but it's never not there.
Even the stance on climate change and environmentalism has been fairly steady, evolving only as the scientific evidence makes the stark crisis we face more and more apparent.
If you want to prove that the Democrats have moved in any way to the left, even by the slightest measure, show me the Communists. Until then, there's nothing to talk about here.
edited 14th Oct '15 12:00:33 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Given how these things have gone, I've been wondering why CNN is allowed to run anything having to do with debates, ever. Maybe they are seen as a neutral ground between the hyper-right Fox News and the "hyper-left" MSNBC.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"