Quote:
Originally Posted by visualalert  It matters hugely if the organization falsely represents itself as "just the facts, ma'am" while selectively promoting and repressing stories to fit a political agenda. Some people actually still believe that to be the case.
I'd say if an organization has a left or right wing tilt that's just fine. If I read The Nation I know I'm getting lefties. If I read National Review I know I'm getting righties. They're both honest about what they produce. But there are still, amazingly, people out there reading Time and Newsweek who think they're getting unbiased journalism. That is, at best, unethical. |
i'm with you on that....it makes me chuckle how the 'indy' media (
Indymedia.com for an imaginitively-titled example) habitually presents the diametric opposite of the mainstream viewpoint. and presenting that as 'independent' as opposed to just 'contrarian' IS unethical. in the end i suppose you just have to have diverse sources. actually i always found The Economist had fairly objective-sounding politics coverage, and i liked how the articles were anonymously authored.