I really don’t understand this… To me they seem like someone who believes all media can’t be trusted and is telling lies, now responding to idk what, likely a post about Israel lying. Just venting their belief that all media can’t be trusted. Doesn’t seem to me to be defending either lies or taking a particular side, or even engaging with the topic at all very much, in fact I could believe they saying this to literally any topic where “media has lied/news are fake”.
If not a whattaboutism, it belies a brainworm that media is inherently untrustworthy because they’ve been subjected to western MSM their whole life. It’s like how many burgers are against “big government” because they’re used to being fucked raw by the US government and think that’s a quality shared by all governments as opposed to theirs specifically. It just does not compute for some people that media exists that isn’t simply lying though their teeth.
Is there a government/media outlet that does not try to consciously or unconsciously influence stories/news to be more positive towards their beliefs?
Of course there is a difference between “lying through your teeth” and “trying to make something sound better than it is”, but I feel like both is lying. You mention “western MSM” and that it’s “simply lying through their teeth”, but is that really all they’re doing? From what I experienced, no, there are some things of course that are straight up complete fabrication, but most of the stuff they put out is real in some way, just in varying degrees of warped to make themselves look better. They can’t always, not even most of the time, get away with straight fabrication. Depends on the organization of course.
I’m just genuinely wondering if “non-western MSM” is really better? Which one? I’m from Europe, not the US, so of course I see one-sided coverage a lot as well, but I’m not completely blinded by Murdoch news or whatever. I’m not consuming much, if any, news media in general, most often trying to learn about topics through Wikipedia or academic books on the topic, which obviously can be biased as well.
They’ll all acknowledge that both sides politically bad, but at the end of the day, they’re leaning on one side of the political fence or another, regardless if it isn’t in the mainstream political binary as of now, because the same person would most likely use this response on mostly one side, while “coincidentally” sharing most of their political views on the other opposing side
In short, liberal ‘neutrality’ self-superiority and political equivocation…
I don’t think self-superiority is a feature of being liberal or anything, I see plenty of that everywhere, also here. That’s just a human thing.
And yeah, I guess I understand that people do have a political leaning and naturally try to argue that even covertly/unconsciously, however I really didn’t see it in this particular screenshot, that’s why I’m trying to figure out if I’m missing something.
I really don’t understand this… To me they seem like someone who believes all media can’t be trusted and is telling lies, now responding to idk what, likely a post about Israel lying. Just venting their belief that all media can’t be trusted. Doesn’t seem to me to be defending either lies or taking a particular side, or even engaging with the topic at all very much, in fact I could believe they saying this to literally any topic where “media has lied/news are fake”.
If not a whattaboutism, it belies a brainworm that media is inherently untrustworthy because they’ve been subjected to western MSM their whole life. It’s like how many burgers are against “big government” because they’re used to being fucked raw by the US government and think that’s a quality shared by all governments as opposed to theirs specifically. It just does not compute for some people that media exists that isn’t simply lying though their teeth.
Is there a government/media outlet that does not try to consciously or unconsciously influence stories/news to be more positive towards their beliefs?
Of course there is a difference between “lying through your teeth” and “trying to make something sound better than it is”, but I feel like both is lying. You mention “western MSM” and that it’s “simply lying through their teeth”, but is that really all they’re doing? From what I experienced, no, there are some things of course that are straight up complete fabrication, but most of the stuff they put out is real in some way, just in varying degrees of warped to make themselves look better. They can’t always, not even most of the time, get away with straight fabrication. Depends on the organization of course.
I’m just genuinely wondering if “non-western MSM” is really better? Which one? I’m from Europe, not the US, so of course I see one-sided coverage a lot as well, but I’m not completely blinded by Murdoch news or whatever. I’m not consuming much, if any, news media in general, most often trying to learn about topics through Wikipedia or academic books on the topic, which obviously can be biased as well.
They’ll all acknowledge that both sides politically bad, but at the end of the day, they’re leaning on one side of the political fence or another, regardless if it isn’t in the mainstream political binary as of now, because the same person would most likely use this response on mostly one side, while “coincidentally” sharing most of their political views on the other opposing side
In short, liberal ‘neutrality’ self-superiority and political equivocation…
I don’t think self-superiority is a feature of being liberal or anything, I see plenty of that everywhere, also here. That’s just a human thing.
And yeah, I guess I understand that people do have a political leaning and naturally try to argue that even covertly/unconsciously, however I really didn’t see it in this particular screenshot, that’s why I’m trying to figure out if I’m missing something.
I guess it depends on who the poster mostly repeats “all news are biased” to.