THE ERA OF TRUMP

[adwinistrator]

Thanks for the reponse.

Is the credibility of AP and Reuters in doubt if a story some other outlets article contains falsehoods?

Yes.

I'm not sure I follow you on this one. AP and Reuters are, in my mind, in a class of their own in comparison to the opinion based news organizations. While you can find mistakes or controversies in the past, they make it a point to uphold the highest journalistic integrity standards they can. If Fox News or MSNBC goes over the top, letting opinion/bias push the lead instead of journalistic integrity, I would not think less of AP or Reuters.

If the discussion is about "the press", there's really nothing that can be said of any value, besides reinforcing the "us vs. them" narrative.

No, discussing "the press" can add value by comparing the similarities in how reporters and media outlets report the news, instead of pretending that there are none of these similarities shared by a rather large and prominent group of journalists.

I agree with your point, I would at least make it a point to specify the type of "press" being criticized. When The Huffington Post or Brietbart opinion blogs are being used to point to the failings of journalism, as a whole, it weakens the argument. There is a lot of valid criticism to be had at the journalistic failings of the internet news outlets, as well as the mainstream TV news and mainstream newspapers who have lowered their standards to compete with the internet sensationalists.

[Okeefenokee]

Funny how "The Press" apparantly is this one thing, this one, single entity. It's a bit like arguing against "The Government"'s Obamacare, or "The Government"'s building of The Wall. Sure, it's "the government" enacting those things, but... Trump is not Obama because both are "the government". One ought to mentally consider that the same applies even less to the "The Press".

Uh huh,

[StCapps]

I'm not sure I follow you on this one. AP and Reuters are, in my mind, in a class of their own in comparison to the opinion based news organizations. While you can find mistakes or controversies in the past, they make it a point to uphold the highest journalistic integrity standards they can. If Fox News or MSNBC goes over the top, letting opinion/bias push the lead instead of journalistic integrity, I would not think less of AP or Reuters.

If you would think less of FOX or MSNBC for doing it, than I see no reason to not think less of the AP or Reuters if they do the exact same thing. You shouldn't hold different news organizations to different standards and act like it's okay when one outlet does it but not another, at least remain consistent. Not sure I follow you.

[MilSpecs]

Funny how "The Press" apparantly is this one thing, this one, single entity. It's a bit like arguing against "The Government"'s Obamacare, or "The Government"'s building of The Wall. Sure, it's "the government" enacting those things, but... Trump is not Obama because both are "the government". One ought to mentally consider that the same applies even less to the "The Press".

Uh huh,

Not that I think the press is blameless, but aren't these opinion pieces?

[K@th]

Lol. Even Bill O'Reilly thought the speech sounded odd. It was a bit dark, but I liked it.

[StCapps]

Lol. Even Bill O'Reilly thought the speech sounded odd. It was a bit dark, but I liked it.

It was the brightest speech he's ever given. Polar opposite of dark. You'll just buy any bullshit the media peddles to you about the tone of Trump's speeches won't you?

[adwinistrator]

I'm not sure I follow you on this one. AP and Reuters are, in my mind, in a class of their own in comparison to the opinion based news organizations. While you can find mistakes or controversies in the past, they make it a point to uphold the highest journalistic integrity standards they can. If Fox News or MSNBC goes over the top, letting opinion/bias push the lead instead of journalistic integrity, I would not think less of AP or Reuters.

If you would think less of FOX or MSNBC for doing it, than I see no reason to not think less of the AP or Reuters if they do the exact same thing. You shouldn't hold different news organizations to different standards and act like it's okay when one outlet does it but not another, at least remain consistent. Not sure I follow you.

I think you might have misread my post...

Is the credibility of AP and Reuters in doubt if a story some other outlet's article contains falsehoods?

I did have an extra word in there by accident, so it wasn't very clear...

[StCapps]

I think you might have misread my post...

Is the credibility of AP and Reuters in doubt if a story some other outlet's article contains falsehoods?

I did have an extra word in there by accident, so it wasn't very clear...

Oh, then no that wouldn't be their fault unless they reported the same falsehoods without proper examination. Then that would damage their credibility.

[K@th]

Lol. Even Bill O'Reilly thought the speech sounded odd. It was a bit dark, but I liked it.

It was the brightest speech he's ever given. Polar opposite of dark. You'll just buy any bullshit the media peddles to you about the tone of Trump's speeches won't you?

Lol as if. I assure you that nobody told me to like the speech.

[adwinistrator]

I think you might have misread my post...

Is the credibility of AP and Reuters in doubt if a story some other outlet's article contains falsehoods?

I did have an extra word in there by accident, so it wasn't very clear...

Oh, then no that wouldn't be their fault unless they reported the same falsehoods without examination. Then that would damage their credibility.

Usually, it's the lower tier news commentary that uses AP and Reuters for their facts, which they then pick and choose to make their points. The AP news feed is the backbone of all live TV news, for the events and facts in the world. They are a huge part of "the press", so that's why I used them to make the point of why a distinction is necessary in the criticism of TV, newspaper, or internet news.

But in general, I think we agree on most everything discussed here.