Tricks the media use to (attempt to) fool their audience

Status
Closed

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,080
Europix
#31
....RT France ...
Nitpicking: RT France is a Russian media in French, and it officially made it clear before starting it's activity that is representing a Russian POV.

Good article thanks ...
You're most welcome

... They should not support any candidate ....
Agreed.

... Likewise they overwhelmingly present and support only one position on various topics.... Which is not supposed to be their job.... They are in those cases doing propaganda rather than informing the public..... And that is the point really..... Hence when someone says "oh but the media is different you cants generalize", it does not really work that way... Since Tulius is from Portugal , the article you linked shows 66% of articles against Brexit and 6% in favor... That's 11 to 1....
Disagree. Entirely.

Listen, You started the discussion on principle bases. So I will remain on principle bases too.

Any Media, even the most independent, the most balanced, have one characteristic that it's universally true: it's public.

An European media is intended to Europeans, to Europe/Europen country).

If it's analysing Brexit, it will analyse it from an European POV. I am interested by repercussions on me, not on a Brit.

And I don't think someone has to analyze a lot for understanding that one of the world's top economy, top financial, top military leaving EU will most likely bring more problems than benefits to EU. It's why I said that most EU media being "against" Brexit isn't an argument. Brexit not being a good thing, it's simply the truth.

A POTUS that promoted "America First", that contested multilateral/bilateral agreements during his campaign might be very good for Americans but is most likely an issue for Europeans. As I am an European, I am mostly interested on how it's affecting me, not how it's affecting the Americans. As the EU media is addressing me, not Americans, it will present what is most probably the truth: Trump isn't the best candidate for me, an European.

In conclusion, I still believe that You are wrong in chosing Your arguments.


...And that's one of the main issues... Lack of real diversity of opinions coumpounded by biased treatment (i.e those who do hold differemt opinions are not treated the same way as those who hold the same opinion that the media itself has)
Muah ...

Lack of diversity of oppinions isn't in the media. It's in what we read, more precisely in what we choose to read. It's enough if You open Le Monde and Marianne and RT France to have diversity of opinions on a silver plate.
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,228
#32
When facts dont agree with us too bad for the facts

Best illustrated by this recent doctored image on one of the French public TV channels

A sign that read "Macron get out" has been edited to remove the offending "get out"... This of course is not the only such case.

The fact that this photograph HAS been edited shows that there are people who are actually paid to edit photos (or videos) before showing them on screen.... And they do so through a political prism (i.e. let's not show what we politically dont agree with).

This case also illustrates the usefulness of social networks.... these can and have on several occasions brought to light information that was either concealed by the media or faked by the media as in this case




 
Likes: sailorsam

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,228
#33
Any Media, even the most independent, the most balanced, have one characteristic that it's universally true: it's public.

An European media is intended to Europeans, to Europe/Europen country).

If it's analysing Brexit, it will analyse it from an European POV. I am interested by repercussions on me, not on a Brit.

And I don't think someone has to analyze a lot for understanding that one of the world's top economy, top financial, top military leaving EU will most likely bring more problems than benefits to EU. It's why I said that most EU media being "against" Brexit isn't an argument. Brexit not being a good thing, it's simply the truth.

A POTUS that promoted "America First", that contested multilateral/bilateral agreements during his campaign might be very good for Americans but is most likely an issue for Europeans. As I am an European, I am mostly interested on how it's affecting me, not how it's affecting the Americans. As the EU media is addressing me, not Americans, it will present what is most probably the truth: Trump isn't the best candidate for me, an European.

.
The above are opinions, to which everyone is entitled, not facts. For example it can be argued (its another opinion) that an "America first" president is good for other countries, since America will then meddle less in other countries affairs.
Second, contrary to what you are claiming, the european media has been mostly presenting brexit as negative for Britain will all kinds of doomsday predictions ..... not presenting it from the perspective of impacts on the rest of the EU countries...

But regardless of this , the media should be neutral on these points.. It is not.. And it is overwhelmingly on one side of the issue... this is what the french call "pensee unique" (or "the party line").... which kind of kills the argument of the so called diversity of the media....
 
Likes: sailorsam

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,228
#34
When all else fails, just make the story up

but make sure the story is aligned with the media's worldview

https://www.handelsblatt.com/today/...tml?ticket=ST-771549-vSwGdIN66ByITGKXGGTL-ap6

This gentlemen faked stories, but made sure they were aligned with media group think.. Not only did he fool (or not , who knows) Der Spiegel, he got recognition and prizes from CNN, Forbes and others... Once again Media group think..... Once again the so called diversity of the media fails the most basic of tests.

When he was debunked, Der Spiegel initially tried to shut down.... the debunker (so had they really been fooled or they did know?).... only when that did not work and the evidence of wrongdoing was too overwhelming to ignore did Der Spiegel come out with apologies and mea culpas.... Except we have heard those sorts of apologies before.... and it has not helped.....

From the above article

The Relotius case echoes incidents in the US, such as Jayson Blair. The young reporter made up or plagiarized dozens of national reporting stories for the New York Times before being unmasked in 2003. Washington Post reporter Janet Cooke won a Pulitzer Prize in 1981 for a story about an eight-year-old heroin addict that was so moving Washington police went on an all-out search for him, but couldn’t find him because he didn’t exist. Cooke gave back the prize. Stephen Glass was a rising star at The New Republic, a left-leaning weekly on politics, until a Forbes investigative team in 1998 revealed many of his stories were hoaxes.
 
Likes: sailorsam

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,401
Portugal
#35
Unsourced, really ?

Can you name major european media that supported the candidacy of the current POTUS

Can you name major european media (outside the UK) that are/were supportive of Brexit ? Can you source say 5 articles in major european media that talk about the positive effects of brexit ? as opposed to the hundreds that talk about is potential negative effects ?

Can you name major european media that are/were supportive of -say- Assad or Qaddafi as opposed to the hundreds of articles that are supportive of the opposition to Assad or Qaddafi (or simply against them for unexplained reasons) ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election

In this piece you'll see that one US presidential candidate got 17 times less! endorsement than the other from newspapers and magazines
The numbers get even worse when you look at circulation .... so its well above 90% as I stated.....
Yes, your previous post was unsourced. Now you have a link, that really shows that Trump had much less endorsements in Newspapers and Magazines than Clinton in 2016, which in my perspective is not that surprising since Trump presented itself as an anti-system politician, and it seems that using the social media networks and not the Newspapers worked on his benefit. Anyway the link doesn’t seem to cover a still relevant part of the Media, the TV, and I have the idea, not sourced, that the things in the TV weren’t so much unfavourable to Trump. At least from this side of the Atlantic I get that idea when I see Fox News.

As for the endorsements in Europe, you should note that they are not that common outside the Anglo-Saxon world, in many countries they are even seen as unnatural, and would shock the readers, since the goal/ideal there still exists is to see the Journalism as impartial, fact checking, and sourced based, and it is often defended that the endorsement goes against that ideal. Even in circles in Europe that usually give endorsements, Trumps line of speech “America first” and all those slogans in that direction can’t gather much support outside the USA, unless adapted to a local politician. The Media are a mirror of that.

Besides in a more generic view, thee way that Trump treats the truth and the journalists also didn’t help him to gather sympathies among their circles but it seems that his electorate liked this approach.

As for your other questions, “Can you name major european media (outside the UK) that are/were supportive of Brexit ? Can you source say 5 articles in major european media that talk about the positive effects of brexit ? as opposed to the hundreds that talk about is potential negative effects ?”

and

“Can you name major european media that are/were supportive of -say- Assad or Qaddafi as opposed to the hundreds of articles that are supportive of the opposition to Assad or Qaddafi (or simply against them for unexplained reasons) ?

For the first, the reasoning is quite similar, why should the Media in the other UE countries support a thing that is not beneficial for the respective countries? Only the Media that is consistently against the UE supported it. No surprise here. Besides, the negative effects will be seen not only in the UK, but also in the other UE countries. Any divorce affects both parts. As for “benefits”, well that is another discussion, but if the long run the path was to walk to a United States of Europe, in a federation or a confederation, an exit of that path doesn’t seem to bring many “benefits”.

As for support to Assad or Qaddafi… I really don’t understand the relevance of the question. In comparison was there in the USA a strong support among the media for those two dictators? Why should the European press, or the press in the EU, support two dictators?

Back to Trump, and his endorsements, or lack of it, he really initiated, or should I say popularized a new Era of the relations between populist candidates and the press. And currently the press is treating the Trump clones, like Bolsonaro, in a different way, because there is a winning wave, and some press (and much probably the corporations behind it) doesn’t want to loose that train.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,401
Portugal
#36
I wouldn't disagree with this statement, but I personally expect a more unbiased account from the professionals within the media than I would from social media websites and their posters, who are typically not considered professionals under rules of ethics.
And I agree 100% with you here Rodger.

Unfortunately, like I pointed out the traditional Media has been changing in the last 20/30 years, and not for better, due to technological and social changes, and the professional ethics seem to be eroded. But from a position of noting those huge problems, to a position of turning the traditional Media as a source of Evil, treating them all equally in information quality, and pointing them as the source of the alternate reality that we live today goes an huge step.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,401
Portugal
#37
Since Tulius is from Portugal , the article you linked shows 66% of articles against Brexit and 6% in favor... That's 11 to 1....
Not surprising at all, the public option in Portugal is still most in favour of the European Union construction, and even if that support to the EU seems to be decreasing due to all the recent events and the EU positions in many themes (we had a Troika period here).

The Media and the Journalists are still a reflection of our society. For instance, the only two political parties represented in the parliament in Portugal that are against the EU are the Communist Party and the “Bloco de Esquerda” (Trotskyist /New left), all the center and right of the political spectrum is in favour of the EU (at least still is… since 1986).

Beside, there is a general consensus in Portugal that the Brexit will be bad for Portugal. The UK is a strong commercial partner, there is a huge Portuguese community working in the UK that can be affected (it already has), there are also many UK residents in Portugal (many retired ones), and the UK is quite relevant to the Portuguese Tourist revenues.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,080
Europix
#38
The above are opinions, to which everyone is entitled, not facts. ...
I'm not sure how saying that media has a specific public can be dismissed as being an opinion, not a fact:
... For example it can be argued (its another opinion) that an "America first" president is good for other countries, since America will then meddle less in other countries affairs...
Of course it can be argued that it can be better for other countries. It remains to be seen if it's true.

But, as I said, European media will focus on effects on Europe. As South American Media will focus on South America for example.
...Second, contrary to what you are claiming, the european media has been mostly presenting brexit as negative for Britain will all kinds of doomsday predictions ..... not presenting it from the perspective of impacts on the rest of the EU countries...
IDK.

Personally, I've heard (I'm a huge radio listener), I've red a lot about the probable/possible effects on Europe.

It's maybe that we read/listen different media?

...But regardless of this , the media should be neutral on these points.. It is not.. And it is overwhelmingly on one side of the issue....
this is what the french call "pensee unique" (or "the party line").... which kind of kills the argument of the so called diversity of the media....
Muah, ... "pensee unique" .... I'd say rather that You are in a "proces d'intention" approach.

Two years from Brexit referendum: I don't see exactly all working out sweetly on neither part. I see on both sides issues still not solved, while new issues are appearing.

Two years for the new administration: I see issues and tensions accumulation in the cross Atlantic relationship. Issues getting stronger, new issues appearing, not that many solved ...

Sometimes most of media being on the "same line" can be simply that the reality is on that line?
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,228
#39
Muah, ... "pensee unique" .... I'd say rather that You are in a "proces d'intention" approach.

Two years from Brexit referendum: I don't see exactly all working out sweetly on neither part. I see on both sides issues still not solved, while new issues are appearing.

Two years for the new administration: I see issues and tensions accumulation in the cross Atlantic relationship. Issues getting stronger, new issues appearing, not that many solved ...

Sometimes most of media being on the "same line" can be simply that the reality is on that line?
Here is the issue... If you are generally on the same wave length as the media's world view, as you seem to be, then you are of course not bothered by the way they push this world view.. .. Media that simply reinforces your own opinions is useless....But really you should then be focusing on media that has a different worldview to yours. This is why I daily check on Al Jazeera, whose world view is entirely different to mine as well as other media...

As for "proces d'intention" the media themselves have admitted both in the case of the US electio nand of brexit that they were biased and each time promised not to do it again... only to fail again and again.... So its not even a matter for debate that the media have group think...
 
Likes: sailorsam

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,228
#40
Not surprising at all, the public option in Portugal is still most in favour of the European Union construction, and even if that support to the EU seems to be decreasing due to all the recent events and the EU positions in many themes (we had a Troika period here).

.
I strongly doubt its the same ratio.... 11 to 1 in favor ?
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions