this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
167 points (91.1% liked)

Today I Learned

17430 readers
1 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Long but good.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 59 points 4 months ago (10 children)

As someone who can't watch a video right now because I have a bunch of loud kids, can I get a summary?

The title doesn't really explain why.

[–] kryllic 72 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Generated with ai because I also didn't watch lol:

Short Summary

  1. In the 1950s and 60s, there was a belief in a golden age of news where information was delivered without political bias, shaped by cultural, technological, and political forces.
  2. The rise of television, figures like Joe McCarthy and 60s radicals, and even Ronald Reagan played a role in shaping the news landscape.
  3. The aftermath of World War II highlighted the power of propaganda and the need for responsible news delivery.
  4. Government sought to regulate news organizations through acts like the Radio Act of 1927 and the Fairness Doctrine in 1949 to ensure programming was in the public interest.
  5. During the era of television news, objectivity was valued, with news programs not expected to make money and a doctrine of social responsibility guiding ethical journalism.
  6. The New York Times set high standards for objectivity, with television news aiming to emulate this model.
  7. Clips from the era showed commentators presenting opposing viewpoints without bias or emotionally loaded language, allowing the audience to form their own opinions.
  8. Anchors like Walter Cronkite maintained impartiality even when reporting on controversial topics like the election results of pro-segregation candidate George Wallace.
  9. Journalism in the 60s and 70s shifted towards a more active approach, with journalists encouraged to call out lies and take sides based on facts.
  10. By the end of the 60s, there was a noticeable shift towards more activism-driven content in newspapers like The New York Times, departing from earlier eras where objectivity was considered the highest journalistic goal.
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If that's the summary, then the video is overly simplistic and doesn't understand the actual concept of media bias. The news was biased then too, especially foreign coverage, and it was biased before then. I mean, this goes all the way back to the USS Maine at the very least.

Anyone who wants to talk about media bias and hasn't read Manufacturing Consent or other similar work needs to be banned from the topic. Learn about the propaganda model. Maybe also read about the Committee on Public Information and Edward Bernays while you're at it.

I can't take anyone seriously who really thinks the overall news landscape was less biased when there were only a handful of networks determining news on TV and less alternatives in the print media as well.

Edit: Longer, but better

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Name a more iconic combo than lemmy.ml and criticising something they haven't even read (watched in this case)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, some people work. Have you read Manufacturing Consent?

Either way, the summary is pretty accurate after watching. He devoted 30 seconds to recognizing that anti communism was a major pillar of the news media back then, at least. But that is a major reflection of exactly how they weren't "unbiased" and basically shows how the regulations and fairness doctrine did very little to expose Americans to ideas outside those accepted by the elites who owned and ran NBC, CBS, ABC, and NYT/WaPo. So to claim that it's mostly true that they were "unbiased" back then is still a bit ridiculous after such an acknowledgement. "They were mostly unbiased unless you count mainstream, elite American opinion of the 50s/60s as a type of bias"..

Again, no look at the structure of the news media and how they treated the US government's and major corporations' words as a major form of sourcing, the importance and influence of advertising, etc.

He has a handful of chosen examples. Manufacturing Consent has case studies documenting coverage of specific events from these media sources.

The populace wasn't more educated when everyone got their news from the same 5 sources (and a more educated populace is what we should want from our news media.)

They just all mostly agreed and said the same things. There was still bias, it just wasn't as partisan and people were less likely to disagree because there wasn't anyone saying otherwise. The faux neutrality was a facade.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Not yet, it's on my list, but my local library doesn't have a lot of Chomsky

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Curious, how does one summarize a video like this? I imagine I could make use of this quite a bit.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Giving it a go now. Thanks!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Wow! This is useful

load more comments (7 replies)