Quote:
Originally Posted by blueash
So in a discussion of the shape of the earth the media should give equal time to those who believe it is round [ish] and those it is flat? This is the kind of situation Holt is discussing. When one side has no credible evidence and the other side has an overwhelming amount of evidence, the credible evidence should be all that is presented perhaps with a brief mention that not everyone accepts that conclusion.
You need to understand what Holt meant by "fairness" It is not fair to crazies refuse airtime to the flat-earthers. But it is not fair to the viewer to present flat earthism as an equally supported position by giving it equal time.
It is not fair to be compelled to tell how some believe that Hugo Chavez controlled our last election or that someone ran a child sex ring in the basement of a pizza parlor or that there is a world wide Jewish scheme to control everything [ see Henry Ford]. Some beliefs do not deserve to be treated "fairly". That is what Holt meant. Lies do not deserve fair airtime. |
I fully understand what he was saying. But when you have a news network like NBC, covering someone and that coverage is 95% percent negative, or when there is a real story out there that is not reported on that is not journalism it is an agenda, and any sense of fairness goes out the window