And I thought you were just another pretty face! A very thoughtful article and one that posses an unspoken problem - How to get the Media to stop printing and broadcasting things they know are false and how to get them to call out politicians who are obviously lying? The idea of giving opposing viewpoints equal time is good, except when one viewpoint is obviously false. Giving people who deny science equal time with scientists who are reporting substantiated facts is very confusing to the average person. Normally, I like what AOC has to say, but this time she is wrong. It's a great idea to "Bell the Cat", but who gets to decide what statements get "Belled"? The media needs to police itself, as it has done in the past, but as long as accountants rule, all they will care about is the bottom line. If I remember correctly, in the past there was something called the Fairness Doctrine, which roughly said if you reported a Democrat saying one thing you would need to give equal time to the opposing Republican view. I would like to see some informal agreement between the various media organizations about labeling some things as being so outlandish they can't be believed - Lizzard People and Pedophile rings as two examples. With power comes responsibility and the media need to be held accountable when they report things that have no basis in fact. There are various ways of proving the world is round (actually an oblate spheroid) but if someone says it is flat they need to be able to prove their point before they get air time. BTW I love your drawing.
Very interesting, I'm going to have to dig into the Fairness Doctrine. I think I've come across it before but never looked into it. Great points as usual Edward. As for the drawing, in this case it was someone else's (the credit is below the pic)--but don't worry, I'll be slowly adding some more to some of my new articles. Cheers
And I thought you were just another pretty face! A very thoughtful article and one that posses an unspoken problem - How to get the Media to stop printing and broadcasting things they know are false and how to get them to call out politicians who are obviously lying? The idea of giving opposing viewpoints equal time is good, except when one viewpoint is obviously false. Giving people who deny science equal time with scientists who are reporting substantiated facts is very confusing to the average person. Normally, I like what AOC has to say, but this time she is wrong. It's a great idea to "Bell the Cat", but who gets to decide what statements get "Belled"? The media needs to police itself, as it has done in the past, but as long as accountants rule, all they will care about is the bottom line. If I remember correctly, in the past there was something called the Fairness Doctrine, which roughly said if you reported a Democrat saying one thing you would need to give equal time to the opposing Republican view. I would like to see some informal agreement between the various media organizations about labeling some things as being so outlandish they can't be believed - Lizzard People and Pedophile rings as two examples. With power comes responsibility and the media need to be held accountable when they report things that have no basis in fact. There are various ways of proving the world is round (actually an oblate spheroid) but if someone says it is flat they need to be able to prove their point before they get air time. BTW I love your drawing.
Very interesting, I'm going to have to dig into the Fairness Doctrine. I think I've come across it before but never looked into it. Great points as usual Edward. As for the drawing, in this case it was someone else's (the credit is below the pic)--but don't worry, I'll be slowly adding some more to some of my new articles. Cheers