Have People Tuned Out Media Outrage?

[Not A Theist]

Your premise is people don't trust media so they listen to liars. My premise as I stated is that Objective and impartial news is a myth. You have a story and then you have coverage. 7 people shot by a terrorist is a story. The person you listen to in order to get the rundown is the coverage, whether it's the New York Times or Paul Joseph Watson. The reason why people stopped trusting media is because for years they made people believe they were objective and unbiased because of their corporate name.

I'm not sure that "liars" is quite a comprehensive enough term for the news sources that people are running to in the face of lack of faith in the media - or, at the very least, it doesn't capture the range of behaviours exhibited by the "news" sources that are now being turned to. They're not all liars, nor do they lie all the time. For that matter, precisely this is true of mainstream media as well.

I'll take it that you agree that my premise is sound, since I haven't actually heard you state otherwise?

 

[Trotsky]

Yes, all outlets that report facts are not trustworthy if they occasionally give opinions.

Or, even if they don't give opinions, if they report facts I don't like.

Or, even if they don't give opinions or report facts I don't like, if they don't proactively report my own opinions to me as facts.

 

[Trotsky]

Does working for the New York Times make someone any less of an opportunistic charlatan?

You mean....working for the most respected publication in North America? That rigorously vets its facts and uses long-held journalistic standards of professionalism? That employs the best and brightest journalists from the highest ranked schools? That has, a thousand times over, broken huge stories to protect the public from the government?

Yes, that makes you less of a charlatan than some pud operating a website out of his basement telling imbeciles like those ITT that Hillary Clinton is fucking kids in a pizzeria.

 

[kpt018]

Alternative theory: the people that support Trump aren't watching/reading the news outlets that are critical of him and are instead watching/reading news that shill for him.

 

[all caps]

Theres only one news source I trust.........

 

[Son of Jamin]

Well, in Sweden, the vast majority believe that the established media lies about issues regarding migration!

Once you begin to truly distrust media on a major issue, then it’s bound to spill over on other issues as well!

So it is only reasonable that people will reach a point when no matter how much media scream and holler about something, it won’t move the needle!

 

[mommas homeboy]

They’ve been tuned out for almost two years now. The media has gone completely nuts.

People know they’re lying, immoral scumbags whose entire lives focus one thing: hating Donald Trump.

 

[mommas homeboy]

You mean....working for the most respected publication in North America? That rigorously vets its facts and uses long-held journalistic standards of professionalism? That employs the best and brightest journalists from the highest ranked schools? That has, a thousand times over, broken huge stories to protect the public from the government?

Yes, that makes you less of a charlatan than some pud operating a website out of his basement telling imbeciles like those ITT that Hillary Clinton is fucking kids in a pizzeria.

Jesus, bro....the NYT is dogshit. What the hell did you put in your meth pipe this morning?

 

[SaiWa]

but then, why the media doesn't cover all these "way bigger" problems? They are more interested in Russia and porn stars. In other words, the coverage of media fails to represent the interests of the voters.

You have no idea what you are talking about apparently.

Every single problem listed in that list has been touched on by the media.

Immigration - you are blind/deaf if you haven't read or heard of these in the media
Dissatisfaction with gov/poor leadership - all the complaining about Trump don't count heh? lol
Race Relations - Seriously???
Unifying the Country - yah that issue never comes up when the left the right incessantly argue against each other.
Lack of Respect - uuhhh.. this topic even comes up in these forums for crying out loud.

Every single of these issues has been featured prominently in the media. The hot issue of the day/week is because Trump just had a meeting with Putin.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

there's people that wake up in the morning to get outraged by the latest thing in the news cycle.
but for most people, it has diminishing returns.
i suspect in about another year people won't give a shit what trump says and does if the economy is doing ok.

 

[Steve-French]

It seems that the people simply do not care so much about Russia as the media would like to believe.

Gallop Poll: Americans don’t really care about Russia
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/gallop-poll-americans-dont-really-care-about-russia/

"The percentage of Americans saying “Situation with Russia” is the most important problem is literally too small to represent with a number. ”

Surprising and also very, very bad news for dems, because Russia is pretty much their main political agenda and election strategy.

I don't see the Dems getting anywhere close to the White House in 2020. They are not learning their lesson by the way that they are handling themselves. They keep running on the shit that has been making moderate voters turn on them.

I'd vote D again if they campaigned on things like worker unions and backing the middle class. Instead they are more concerned with opening boarders and PC culture. It's idiotic too as they have no interest in trying to win the vote of your average white person when whites are still the countries majority.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'd vote D again if they campaigned on things like worker unions and backing the middle class. Instead they are more concerned with opening boarders and PC culture.

You'd vote for them if they said what they're actually saying, but instead you believe that dishonest right-wing claims about what they're saying are what they're saying. Doesn't sound like you're sincere.

 

[Steve-French]

You'd vote for them if they said what they're actually saying, but instead you believe that dishonest right-wing claims about what they're saying are what they're saying. Doesn't sound like you're sincere.

I'm not specifically listing to any side. I gather my info from both left and right sources and this is just my perception. A perception that you just happen to disagree with.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

For some reason, the American news media has been making me think of the tale "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

The price of too many lies, is skepticism as a first reaction.

 

[Rational Poster]

but then, why the media doesn't cover all these "way bigger" problems? They are more interested in Russia and porn stars. In other words, the coverage of media fails to represent the interests of the voters.

The media covers what gives them ratings.

The idea that the media has some secret secret agenda other than accumulating wealth is pretty funny if you ask me.

 

[Trotsky]

Jesus, bro....the NYT is dogshit. What the hell did you put in your meth pipe this morning?

It's literally the most prestigious newspaper in the Western Hemisphere and perhaps the world.

Sorry if they published something that hurt your feelings or that some less reputable publication convinced you was false or biased.

 

[Rational Poster]

Jesus, bro....the NYT is dogshit. What the hell did you put in your meth pipe this morning?

What makes the New York Times dogshit?

 

[GetTheseHands]

You mean....working for the most respected publication in North America? That rigorously vets its facts and uses long-held journalistic standards of professionalism? That employs the best and brightest journalists from the highest ranked schools? That has, a thousand times over, broken huge stories to protect the public from the government?

Yes, that makes you less of a charlatan than some pud operating a website out of his basement telling imbeciles like those ITT that Hillary Clinton is fucking kids in a pizzeria.

Are you talking about journalists who colluded with Clinton during the campaign (and partly funded it) or the opinion writers who create lovely stories about the joys of communism?

 

[Teppodama]

It's outrage burn out. They would be better served by better timing, rationing of outrage to maximum effect and focusing on a few key specific points guaranteed to spark the most potential controversy. When it's "throw any and everything at the wall and hope something sticks" its outrage overload and people in general can only maintain that for so long before increasing levels of apathy settle in as issues that more directly effect them take precedence like their jobs, education, etc. Additionally, those looking to draw the eye and vote back to their issues of choice become increasingly more desperate and strident in their exhortations thus further turning people away with the hysteria.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'm not specifically listing to any side. I gather my info from both left and right sources and this is just my perception. A perception that you just happen to disagree with.

No, your claim is objectively false. Opening borders, for example, is an extreme fringe position. What your saying is basically equivalent of someone saying, "I'd vote for Republicans if they got back to supporting tax cuts for the rich and deregulation, but instead they keep talking about how we should expel non-whites from the country and put gays in concentration camps."