Heading Logo

Where is objective journalism?

william schmidt Published: March 5, 2013 12:50 PM

AP, CNN, CBS, NBC, PBS, MSNBC continue to propagate the "sequestor" falsehood of total disaster. Consider: the effect of the "cuts" this year is not the $85 billion reported but $44 billion. The Federal goverment borrows $43 billion every week. So the sequestor amounts to one week worth of borrowing. Furthermore, the "cuts" do not reduce spending from 2012 level at all. 2013 spending will still be higher than 2012. The "cuts" are a reduction in the amount of spending increae that was "planned". Rather than submit a budget, the Senate continues to pass a continuation of spending at the previous year level plus a planned increase. The House could "defund" some of this spending but they are loathe to be called villians. Then we have a president who takes a golf weekend to Florida at the equivalent cost of 250 Federal jobs. Does anyone in DC ever take their job seriously? Will the media ever return to objective journalism?

Rate this article

Do you want to leave a comment?   Please Log In or Register to comment.

trawl Apr 20, 2013 12:32 PM

Objective Journalism doesn't sell. Thats why there is NPR and PBS. Now the brain dead will say those sources are "Liberal". Well, yes they are because true Journalism is inherently liberal, any story changes as facts emerge and leads the story to wherever the story leads. Conservative media isn't journalism. Con Media starts with a premise then picks whatever facts support their premise. If they can't find facts supporting their belief Con Media simply creates fictions. This has been well documented.

trawl Apr 20, 2013 12:32 PM

Who can forget November 6th 2012 when the followers and believers of Con Media were so thoroughly blind sided and their humiliation and embarrassment so deep many still have yet to show their faces, and those so cowardly they changed their identities to distance themselves from their own words. That distancing being a method of dodging responsibility, that thing they say everyone should take.

trawl Apr 20, 2013 12:15 PM

Well, Bill, I once heard of research done on Howard Sterns show. Those who liked Stern listened something like one hour a day. Those who didn't like Stern listened twice that amount. I found Stern creepy, and Limpy just too full of BS, Limpy makes sense as long as one doesn't think about what Limp is saying. If someone has two brain cells that talk to each other doesn't take long to realize Limp is speaking to the brain dead. And like you wrote, Bill, Limpy has listeners who see Limp for what he is but listen because they want to know what new insanity is going on with the Wing Nuts.

little_r_republican Mar 24, 2013 12:58 PM

On the internet...I find it intersting that media matters typically has 3 to 6 blogs trashing Fox or Rush Limbaugh. They don't seem to understand that having so many people watch or listen they just increase the viewership of the media they are trying to denegrate. If they would follow MSNBC or CNN or NBC or CBS they would increase their audience and ratings. But George Sorso did give them $34 million to keep posting about Fox and Rush so they must ear their pay somehow.

lancer Mar 20, 2013 1:51 PM

I Love to golf for 10 bucks at the kent state course, a couple million per round, is little out of my league!!

little_r_republican Mar 15, 2013 8:59 AM

It appears that more and more people are utilizing the intgernet to seek out alternative (to self appointed "mainstream" media)"news". At least they can research differing opinions if not objective facts.

whizzard Mar 14, 2013 12:36 AM

Another example, the Streetsboro district is considering placing an item on the ballot in November. The paper has only published what they district has presented and there are no views of how the public feels. One sided reporting. Is it intentional?

Martin Fleming

whizzard Mar 14, 2013 12:34 AM

Many times even this paper has not been objective. Just look at the remarks made by the editor in Sound Off.

They listen and report both sides. They don't take a side. Just report what you see.

Don't offer opinions on issues of justice or about abortion, or school levies or issues. We want news that is unbiased and objective.

When you leave your opinion you expect the public to follow as if yours is the only way.

The Editor of Sound Off gives proof of that and so does the "In Our Opinion".

Martin Fleming

Ian_Maserb Mar 13, 2013 9:32 AM

Oh, the media tries to be objective, but, since they went to public schools, they think that objective means objecting any consideration of fiscal responsibility.

chasmo Mar 9, 2013 5:46 PM

I find that people only label journalism "objective" if it agrees with their own biases.

little_r_republican Mar 7, 2013 8:10 AM

Opinion talk show hosts are not news reporters, so don't confuse Rush or even Combs with news reporting.

anonymous Mar 6, 2013 12:46 PM

The "sequestor" deadline was agreed upon by all involved (Democrat & Republican) stating that it would force them to come to some sort of agreement because, if not, the results would be devastating. Now, after no agreement is reached, when the Democratic party and the media make the same statement that Republicans agreed with at the beginning, it's a lie. That is what is known as a flip flop and is why Mr. Romney is sitting at home right now. If it's objective journalism you are looking for, I am sure you can find Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, or any of those other "journalists" on Fox news to fill that void but please keep in mind that they are another reason why Mr. Romney is sitting at home right now. They pounded away in 2008 that President Obama will take all your guns, he was not born here, he loves Muslim terrorists, and we will be in a full blown depression by the end of his first term. The stock market reached an all time record high yesterday and no one is listening to those lunatics anymore.

anonymous Mar 6, 2013 12:10 PM

Maybe GM and the UAW could lend back some of the $50 billion they were given?

anonymous Mar 6, 2013 8:23 AM

And the secretary of transportation along with the secretary of education admit they did no planning for sequestration.They spent $500 million on consulatants, another $200 million on conferences, but both are absolutely necessary and they cannot see making any reduction in that amount of spending. Dept of trnasportaion had 49 conferences last year. Dept of ed doesn't kow how many conferences last year...but was less than 49.