Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

WCGreen

(45,558 posts)
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 05:58 PM Sep 2012

I think what we are seeing now in the relationship between "journalists" and candidates...

is that the "journalists" are not that interested in fact checking because, frankly that takes a lot of time and effort on their part to educate themselves on all the issues that are raised in the campaign.

I think they are taking the easy way out and here is what I mean,

Instead of looking at an issue and researching and building a background of information to better understand those issues, they just take the opposing sides take and repeat that to the candidate.

This makes it all so easy for the candidates and the press since so-called "facts" don't have to be checked and researched and vetted and gone over more than once.

What I can't understand is if we are in an almost perpetual round of political campaigning, why can't the journalist do independent research, like say Matt Tailabi, and then confront the candidates with more than the oppositions talking points.

Because that is what it seems to be.

That is why so many on both sides don't trust the media anymore, I believe, because when the democrats candidate is being "interviewed", they just repeat what the republicans are saying and the same goes for the republicans being asked about democratic talking points.

I think part of this comes from the rights hatred and attacks of the so-called liberal media. The people behind the so-called journalists have fallen into that safety zone which allows them to appear "balanced" to the average person but to partisans, well, that is a different story.

What this does is take reality out of the process of electing and covering candidates and then elected officials and replace it with what we now call a "narrative" that is built by ignoring the truth and getting ques from the opposing candidates or elected officials.

Just some thoughts I had after watching some news today and keeping up with Broadcast News on HBO.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I think what we are seeing now in the relationship between "journalists" and candidates... (Original Post) WCGreen Sep 2012 OP
They COULD; they DON'T. elleng Sep 2012 #1
They don't want to lose their precious seat by not being a sycophant thelordofhell Sep 2012 #2
We're seeing the relationship between big money in campaigns and media corporations on reporting. Skidmore Sep 2012 #3
When "journalists" are handed their script, and bludgeoned for straying from it ... zbdent Sep 2012 #4

elleng

(133,113 posts)
1. They COULD; they DON'T.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 06:03 PM
Sep 2012

Stems from beginning of 'deregulation,' which included end of 'fairness' doctrine, and loss of real competition among 'news' outlets.

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
3. We're seeing the relationship between big money in campaigns and media corporations on reporting.
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 06:51 PM
Sep 2012

You need a horse race to keep money coming in from both sides.

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
4. When "journalists" are handed their script, and bludgeoned for straying from it ...
Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:59 PM
Sep 2012

then they no longer can call themselves "journalists" ...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I think what we are seein...