Oooh! This is a great thread, because I have come to view much of the
newser's works as little more then biased, in what we receive as "knowledge".
More precisely,
the newsers seems to present half-truths, and pick people that agree with
their opinions to interview, and thus present this as the news. I completely
understand the desire for 'advocacy journalism', but when only part of the
available 'truth' is presented; one cannot properly judge, or help find
viable, solutions to problems.
This has pushed me farther to the 'right' out of frustration, then I have
ever been in my life ( not that rightward is necessarilly, truth-ward).
-Mitch
In a message dated 2/8/2001 6:12:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, amara@amara.com
writes:
<< 1) find journalist(s) whose words you trust and weigh those in your
readings/viewings
2) ask your friends and colleagues, who have spent some time in the U.S.,
questions (and then *listen* to their answers).
3) go spend some time there and experience for yourself. _that's_
the best way.
BTW: I realize that the LA Times is local, and *should* be accurate, but
it still has a slant. As for the news reports that make it over
the Atlantic (International Herald Tribune, television, etc.):
Much of the media reports that the the Americans receive regarding
European life is just as slanted and skewed as the media reports that the
Europeans receive about American life. The writers have their bias,
so it's best to be skeptical.
Amara >>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:37 MDT