[Love2Swim]

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.

Exactly! Since when do nut jobs get equal opportunity to voice their crackpot notions on national news media? This has nothing to do with opinions, but all to do with facts, which are easily verifiable.

[tvbound]

Originally Posted by jebartle

those annoying facts seem to get in the way. Fact check everything, period! You can have your own opinion but not your own facts.

Bingo!

[gdennis317]

You can give “alternate facts” but does not make them true.

Problem is those spouting outright lies and opinions with no bases in the truth at all.

[Cobullymom]

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.

Readers digest condensed interpretation, if they don’t feed you full of whatever you want to hear, then you don’t want to hear...

[Cobullymom]

Originally Posted by Love2Swim

Exactly! Since when do nut jobs get equal opportunity to voice their crackpot notions on national news media? This has nothing to do with opinions, but all to do with facts, which are easily verifiable.

You mean like Rachel Maddog, and Lester preaching on about Russian collusion for years, the president being a white supremacist? And they never apologized...now I understand...

[DeanFL]

.
.

Originally Posted by jebartle
those annoying facts seem to get in the way. Fact check everything, period! You can have your own opinion but not your own facts.
.
.
YES!!!

BUT... how do you REALLY check it out?

Google - filters.
Other Network News - nope
News sites - can be very biased.
Newpapers - ditto
Snopes - ditto
Facebook - cancels posts they don't like.
Twitter - ditto above, also cancels specific users totally
ToTV - opinions
Neighbors - ditto
Friends & Relatives - ditto

Bottom line.... there is NO REAL trusted source.
.
.

[Cobullymom]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Thanks for an accurate well written understanding of his remarks.

Problem for many on this forum, without lies, they believe in zero. Nothing. Again, these are National Enquirer readers almost to a tee.

Reading this thread and the inane stupid comments ref The Daily Sun, I am convinced that these people don't like the media because it is over their head.

Or, they just do not care to even try.

I am convinced we have slipped into 3rd world status the last few years, and in reading the foreign press, and hearing from a few friends in Europe and Asia, we (Americans) are considered dullards who live to hate (skin color, heritage, political party...matters not). We are considered a nation of know nothing's who follow the loudest and most bizarre folks. Remember the folks who were attracted by this stupid headlines on the Enquirer...we have become a nation of them.

The fact that Lester Holt made comments that were so grossly misunderstood and then posted about is a testimony to our lows.

Rejecting truth for gross accusations and conspiracy theories and allowing that to be your entire basis, and then to post on here about it is simply scary.

Readers digest condensed interpretation, if they don’t feed you full of whatever you want to hear, then you don’t want to hear...

[merrymini]

Do not watch the regular news and see or listen to any news with skepticism. They are prefiltering and it is so obvious, the slants so strong. How can you believe any of them?

[hrenner]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

.
.
"LITTLE PARTS"???? "out of context"... Did you Not see the quotes???

You>

"not giving unsupported arguments equal time"
BASED UPON WHAT AND WHO?

"Our duty is to be fair to the truth."
WHO'S TRUTH???

" Finally, misinformation should not be a matter of opinion."
WHO'S OPINION???

"If there are no demonstrable facts presented, or at least scientific consensus, then it is opinion."
WHO'S OPINION???

Do YOU NOT see a dichotomy here? ...if you don't know what that means, here it is:

something with qualities or features that seem to conflict with one another

I ALWAYS look on the other side of an argument. Would YOU feel the same way about this if it was said by a Fox News anchor or such? please...
.
.

So you are saying it's ok to present unsupported theories equally with evidence supported theories. Wow.

[Cobullymom]

Originally Posted by Spalumbos62

Sorry, but to me, the only thing, person that comes to mind is the big guy that just left and fed us all falsehoods and now we're at this horrendous point. Too bad Lester wasn't president.

You absolutely correct we are NOW at a horrendous point...and Lester fed you your daily supper and you gobbled it up....

[Cobullymom]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

.
.

Originally Posted by jebartle
those annoying facts seem to get in the way. Fact check everything, period! You can have your own opinion but not your own facts.
.
.
YES!!!

BUT... how do you REALLY check it out?

Google - filters.
Other Network News - nope
News sites - can be very biased.
Newpapers - ditto
Snopes - ditto
Facebook - cancels posts they don't like.
Twitter - ditto above, also cancels specific users totally
ToTV - opinions
Neighbors - ditto
Friends & Relatives - ditto

Bottom line.... there is NO REAL trusted source.
.
.

You got it....������

[DaveZ]

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.

Interesting that the government, academics, and what ever else that once served as media once regarded the Earth as flat and refused any other opinion. Galileo went to jail for proposing otherwise.

[Cobullymom]

[G.R.I.T.S.]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

.
.
From a major Network News "Journalist" on NBC NIGHTLY NEWS. This is the man responsible to edit and deliver NEWS. But listen to this direct from his mouth>

NBC's Lester Holt says we don’t need to hear both sides to define truth: ‘Fairness is overrated’

NBC News anchor Lester Holt received the Edward R. Murrow Lifetime Achievement Award from Washington State University Tuesday evening, an honor given to those who demonstrate a commitment to excellence.

In his acceptance speech, the longtime journalist offered his advice to others in the field, emphasizing the value of truth-telling.

"I think it’s become clear that fairness is overrated ... the idea that we should always give two sides equal weight and merit does not reflect the world we find ourselves in," Holt said on Tuesday night while accepting an award at the 45th Murrow Symposium.

"Decisions to not give unsupported arguments equal time are not a dereliction of journalistic responsibility or some kind of agenda. In fact, it's just the opposite. Providing an open platform for misinformation, for anyone to come say whatever they want, especially when issues of public health and safety are at stake, can be quite dangerous."

"Our duty is to be fair to the truth. Holding those in power accountable is at the core of our function and responsibility," he said. "We need to hear our leader's views, their policies and reasoning. It's really important, but we have to stand ready to push back and call-out falsehoods."
.
.
"Providing an open platform for misinformation" "Misinformation" - In WHOSE Opinion????
.
NBC's Lester Holt Emphasizes 'Regard for Truth' as He Accepts Edward R. Murrow Award

I'm wondering who is the arbiter of this "truth?" Dangerous ground upon which "journalists" are now treading...

[Notsocrates]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

So when it is the journalists idea of the truth it is ok to give a one sided report of the news.

Scary.

" It's really important, but we have to stand ready to push back and call-out falsehoods."

THIS is the real problem? A reporter's job is to report the facts which is hard enough. No one appointed him guardian of the "truth" according to his own lights. The arrogance of this did not go unnoticed.