P
pensmama87
Guest
Yes, thank you - this is what I am looking for.I think we agree there is such a thing as objective truth. I think we also agree that, as human beings, we can never fully capture it. I disagree that everyone has an agenda which they promote in their news coverage. We can, to greater or lesser degrees, attempt to capture objective truth. **The best news outlets make an effort to come as close as possible. They will refine, and refine again, their news reporting to be as objective as possible. **
Some news outlets aren’t interested in being objective, and they deliberately advance an agenda. I think that is the wrong approach.
I am willing to read/follow multiple sources, but I don’t want to have to sift through tons of…well, you know
One thing that I hate, and it was brought up in this thread, is the hours and hours of “commentary” on the news, that are really just reiterations of political talking points. I’d love commentary if it was actually, “Well, here’s what this party proposed to deal with this problem. Here’s what the problem looks like, and here are some possible outcomes of this policy.” Instead, I usually hear, “Well, this proposal polls well in this subgroup, but it might lose the vote of this group.” I don’t give a crud about polling. I want to know whose policies are actually likely to work, and I know there is expert knowledge on those subjects that might help me make better decisions as a voter. But maybe actually breaking that down would give too much appearance of bias, but at least that’s honest bias (truly thinking the solution proposed by a group is going to work over the other group’s solution), instead of manipulative coverage.
So I’m not overall opposed to commentary and opinion, just as it currently exists in most US media.