Journalism and Media Ethics: UVA, Brian Williams and Bill O'Reily

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by That Guy

it's not a new problem, and scientific journals have had issues with false results and fake peer reviews for a while too.

No its not a new problem, but I think its a more harmful one and its affects more people than it did before. I think its dangerous because of the online forum (print media have moved to more an online format) and of how adverstising dollars work. So by "clicks" determine advertising dollars, the bigger the story (or the lie), more of the reason to push outlandish stories ie "gang rape by 7 men within the "safe" confines of a top public university in the nation"...there is alot to gain. sadly

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

No its not a new problem, but I think its a more harmful one and its affects more people than it did before. I think its dangerous because of the online forum (print media have moved to more an online format) and of how adverstising dollars work. So by "clicks" determine advertising dollars, the bigger the story (or the lie), more of the reason to push outlandish stories ie "gang rape by 7 men within the "safe" confines of a top public university in the nation"...there is alot to gain. sadly

commercial money is WAY better than internet ad revenue.

the worse problem is that people don't seem to care as much about the truth or fixing problems as they do about clicking a link/turning on the tv and having someone spout a 4 second statement that validates their beliefs and let's them know that whatever they already thought is right. no one wants to sit down and watch a 90 minute nuanced debate. those don't have one-liners you can cheer at.

I mean, i don't know how else climate change denial, anti-vaccine rhetoric, or the refusal to believe in evolution can possibly exist. and scientology.

there are plenty of liars out there, you've just got to do your best to avoid getting sucked in.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by That Guy

commercial money is WAY better than internet ad revenue.

the worse problem is that people don't seem to care as much about the truth or fixing problems as they do about clicking a link/turning on the tv and having someone spout a 4 second statement that validates their beliefs and let's them know that whatever they already thought is right. no one wants to sit down and watch a 90 minute nuanced debate. those don't have one-liners you can cheer at.

I mean, i don't know how else climate change denial, anti-vaccine rhetoric, or the refusal to believe in evolution can possibly exist. and scientology.

there are plenty of liars out there, you've just got to do your best to avoid getting sucked in.

True, it's easier just to nod your head in agreement. The other side of it people will form their opinion and regardless of debate will not even shut up to ponder the other view.

But getting back to the subject, nbc (Brian Williams thing) and rolling stone have built people's trust and there an expectation for their present a story and for it to be vetted to the max.