Russia Today Reporter destroys CNN

[Developereo]

My old university professor once said

"You have to be bias to say other bias, if you don't have a preset of mind, then how exactly do you see other's bias??"

The professor was an idiot.

If I watch a story about a fight between A and B, and the media only tells me A's side of the story, then I also want to hear B's side of the story.

I don't have to take sides in the conflict myself to know that the media reporting is biased.

 

[fallstuff]

Are you merely pointing out what we already know ? Or are you doing just what Pakistanis like to do about US, bitching and moaning and offering no real solutions ?

A conservative friend of mine once said, " We conservatives tend to see the world in black or white." You certainly fit this definition.

My post was actually to " merely state the fact", additionally also to point out the fact that what has become of CNN !!! I actually have more respect for FOX news as they are pretty upfront about who they are and what FOX stands for.

Many folks don't understand that CNN is an American company, it earns most of its revenue here, also shares the same values and ideology, at the end of the day its going to somewhat support the stance of the State Dept.

 

[A1Kaid]

The CNN interviewer in first video is extremely biased. This is against journalistic ethics. This is not freedom of press. This is what we call propaganda.

There is no media more idiotic than American

That a-hole is the brother of a-hole NY governor Andrew Cuomo...

Both RT and CNN are bs networks that have their own agendas and it's not journalism.

 

[gambit]

You want solution for what my dear @gambit?

I can only say things in the context of this post. The solution to this media circus? I dont know. But what I know is that journalists in print and electronic media must be impartial. Not like CNN anchor, who is asking fraught questions. The questions are loaded with American bias on this issue.

At least you have enough courage to admit your ignorance.

But you overstepped yourself. In a truly free media, you have the freedom to either opine or strictly report or both. CNN does both. CNN have a division called simply enough 'CNN Headline News' where all the reporters and anchors does is strict reporting. All four major news companies in the US does that. An interview is different. If you opt to open yourself to be interviewed, you should have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that you are open to the risk of being confronted, not coddled, by the interviewer. You do not like the increased risk ? Then do not be interviewed. Simple as that.

The bias is that Russia is bad. It has invaded Ukraine. Putin is a villain. All the while forgetting America's blatant lies for a decade about Iraq's WMD and then illegal invasion of that country.

I have exposed the fallacy of that many times already and not one of you dared answer my question. Try something new.

Even in the second video, the former general speaking in extremely patronizing terms. He does not the know the political context of the issue. He does not know the geopolitics of the region. I bet e has never been to that part of the world. This dumb down ' free' media creates dumb viewers. Better read Guardian on this or any other issue to get good insight.

Now you get the idea of what is a truly free media. We cater to all, morons and sophisticates. Am sure people here considers themselves the latter.

A conservative friend of mine once said. " We conservatives tend to see the world in black or white." You certainly fit this definition.

And I have no problems with that. We ALL do, including you, sees things in black and white -- in principles.

My post was actually to " merely state the fact", additionally also to point out the fact that what has become of CNN !!! I actually have more respect for FOX news as they are pretty upfront about who they are and what FOX stands for.

Many folks don't understand that CNN is an American company, it earns most of its revenue here, also shares the same values and ideology, at the end of the day its going to somewhat support the stance of of the State Dept.

At least CNN and others CHOSE to be biased. Much more than can be said for most of the world's media where they are government owned and MUST toe the party line. I guess that kind of freedom must be quite alien to you.

But here is odd part: If a US news company is constantly at odds with the US, about government, politics, ideology, and the American society in general, then that news company would be considered 'free'' and praised by those living in dictatorships, where the country have high illiteracy rate, the country hardly accomplished anything, and the people hardly been anywhere. Kinda like your Pakistan.

 

[airmarshal]

But here is odd part: If a US news company is constantly at odds with the US, about government, politics, ideology, and the American society in general, then that news company would be considered 'free'' and praised by those living in dictatorships, where the country have high illiteracy rate, the country hardly accomplished anything, and the people hardly been anywhere. Kinda like your Pakistan.

Thats where you spoke the mind of American govt! This is the definition of free media that American govts. apply to outsiders. Imagine if CNN is totally free as you state the definition of being 'free' here, what will your govt. do? It will certainly clamp down on this 'freedom'. But when govts. abroad do what they should, Americans and 'free world' start criticizing that govt.

 

[gambit]

Thats where you spoke the mind of American govt! This is the definition of free media that American govts. apply to outsiders. Imagine if CNN is totally free as you state the definition of being 'free' here, what will your govt. do? It will certainly clamp down on this 'freedom'. But when govts. abroad do what they should, Americans and 'free world' start criticizing that govt.

Right...So basically you posited something that can never be proved, but only alleged.

You do not like SOME of CNN's reportage, so you declared that CNN is a government mouthpiece, if CNN is truly a free media company, it would be punished if it goes outside of what the government said, but since CNN have never been punished, then CNN is not a free news company.

Yup...And people call Americans stupid after they engaged in logical fallacies.

 

[sincity]

When US started a war with any nation, US first military bombing campaign would be the media center of the target nation, US government know media outlet is the extention of government mouth piece represent the opinion of the nation. For domestic related news, media outlet will provide impartial view on most subject but nations will utilize their media center to project their bias opinion toward the nation they deal with on the foreign related matter. NBC anchor man were fired for his statement on Bush administration were falsified information on Irag WMD for the unjustifiable and illegal war. Any well intented journalist reported unbias fact and willfully respect the integrity of the journalistic principle will get their *** fire on the spot when the government deemed them as unpatriotic and not toe the government line.

 

[airmarshal]

Right...So basically you posited something that can never be proved, but only alleged.

so you declared that CNN is a government mouthpiece,

I never said that. Read all my posts again please. I was talking about bias and you said that freedom does allow bias and I agree with you.

The point I made in the last post was that 'free' media supported by your govt. abroad is totally at variance with the policy and society of that country. If the govt clamps down on that 'freedom', the biggest loud mouth that denounces that govt. is that of America.

 

[gambit]

I grew up in the days when the TV remote control device was a luxury and what the hell is this 'cable TV' thingie.

People these days have a buffet of news sources and they still complain it is too hard to change the channel and think for themselves. On one side of their mouths, they pretentiously condemned government controlled news, but when the channel they just happened to watch presented something they do not like, they complained the news is 'too biased', whatever that mean.

 

[Pakistanisage]

Wow Anissa , you go Girl. A native New Yorker blew away those silly Reporters and the foolish General. A+ for Anissa...

 

[BDforever]

is she single ? i wanna marry her

I grew up in the days when the TV remote control device was a luxury and what the hell is this 'cable TV' thingie.

People these days have a buffet of news sources and they still complain it is too hard to change the channel and think for themselves. On one side of their mouths, they pretentiously condemned government controlled news, but when the channel they just happened to watch presented something they do not like, they complained the news is 'too biased', whatever that mean.

 

[wolfschanzze]

Bravo bro, we have the same infiltration of western media influencing minds here.Once our PM comes we want to resurrect Patriotic media
All these western media sympathizers can kiss goodbye, they already posted many hardly makes any difference! LoL

 

[graphican]

Yes it is. The freedom of the press INCLUDES the freedom to be as biased as we want. You do not like it ? No one forces you to watch it. Change the channel to another biased source that you like.

Sir that was on lousy one from you. Does that mean its also a freedom to be nonsense, misinforment and a lier? and if there is one, is there an equal freedom to call you nonsense, misinformed and brainwashed? And if Americans accept this side of "freedom", what grounds are left for you to even open and speak up as whatever you will utter will be garbage. If you spread disinformation yourself, do you also accept others to be the same to you and your audience? Does that mean you accept others can add chaos to your own mental chaos? Where is value of truth anywhere in this equation or is truth even relevant?

This freedom of expression is non-scalable, non-universal and a flawed paradigm. Where is freedom of expression on denying holocaust?

 

[jaunty]

CNN has been unbearable since that MH 370 incident.

 

[gambit]

Does that mean its also a freedom to be nonsense, misinforment and a lier?

Yes.

...and if there is one, is there an equal freedom to call you nonsense, misinformed and brainwashed?

Yes.

And if Americans accept this side of "freedom", what grounds are left for you to even open and speak up as whatever you will utter will be garbage.

It is called 'critical thinking'. It means you put aside whatever emotionalism you have and examine the facts and arguments. If you jump to the conclusion that EVERYTHING the American media says are lies. Then you gave yourself plenty grounds to call anything we say as garbage.

If you spread disinformation yourself, do you also accept others to be the same to you and your audience? Does that mean you accept others can add chaos to your own mental chaos? Where is value of truth anywhere in this equation or is truth even relevant?

This freedom of expression is non-scalable, non-universal and a flawed paradigm. Where is freedom of expression on denying holocaust?

When Al-Jazeera was created, did they consulted Pakistan, Russia, and China on how to run a news organization that will be accepted as credible by the rest of the world ?

Hell, no.

Not just no, but 'Hell, no.' If anything, Al-Jazeera took Pakistan, Russia, and China as how NOT to be a credible journalistic source.

Like it or not, the creators of Al-Jazeera looked to the West for journalistic standards to go by. Its format practically mirrored that of how Western media companies operate, and it did well enough that it offended many ME countries who felt AJ should have been more favorable to the ME. On the other hand, many in the West felt the opposite, that AJ was too favorable to the ME. In the end, AJ earned many journalistic awards precisely because enough people on both side felt AJ offended them.

The AJ example on global journalism and AJ's incursion into Western countries are perfect. If you demand a variety of opinions, then by default you just told others that the burden of discernment is upon YOUR intellectual shoulders and that you expect the availability of opinions that are factually true but contextually contestable, can be factually untrue and factually incomplete, and can even be outright lies, because everything I listed cannot exist unless the sources are unfettered from government control.

Americans, as a whole, may criticize news sources for many reasons, but also as a whole we DO NOT support censorship, as in government enforced censorship. We will take upon ourselves to discern. Some of us will fail. Some of us will succeed. But what make US and our method of journalism, including Fox News, superior and the standards to match, is the allowance of all degrees of fact reporting and biased opinions.