Just as a suggestion, it might help improve journalism at least on You Tube if in addition to simply clicking up or down on a news story there was some way viewers could critique on how impartial or biased they considered it. The greatest problem with objectivity is that we all believe what we want to believe from our own personal biases. When I was getting my degree in psychology I read of an experiment where even something as relatively simple as counting up large numbers of results in an experiment on ESP can be subconsciously influenced by the counter's personal belief or disbelief in ESP. Given that only one of all the major US media corporations is not owned by a Democrat its not surprising that most journalists today have a vested financial interest in sucking up to the opinions of the person paying their salary. Fox is virtually the only major news network you can work at as a journalist if you're a Republican except in a very limited capacity as a token like Pat Buchanan has always been at CNN and MSNBC. In college I had the experience of taking this exam on a book where I was the only one who correctly answered all the simple true or false questions about specific events and characters in the book but being given a failing grade on it because my answers to essay questions on what narrative the book was. Universities today are so politically correct its like the Dark Age theocracies but with the DNC as the college of Cardinals. Journalists are so indoctrinated to agree with Democrats that virtually no Republican in the last 70 years would have been President...not even Ronald Reagan who peaceful ended the Cold War and brought down the Iron Curtain ...if only people with journalist degrees today had been allowed to vote. Given that monolithic groupthink among journalists today how can you realistically judge the objectivity of your stories by peer review or editorial review by some Ted Turner billionaire Democrat with obvious bias against Republicans? There are lots of stories I might pay money to read even if I considered them biased and lots of stories I might not want to read even if I considered them fairly accurate and objective but there is simply no way for journalists to know from a mere up or down buy or don't buy if their story is actually taken more seriously by the audience than the Weekly World News or SNL news parodies, If you want the audience to become more media literate we need a way to objectively distinguish between popular views and credible information which are not necessarily the same thing.
Very helpful info. Thank you
Which sources, which journalists do you trust the most? 😉
When you came here from school be like-
Just as a suggestion, it might help improve journalism at least on You Tube if in addition to simply clicking up or down on a news story there was some way viewers could critique on how impartial or biased they considered it. The greatest problem with objectivity is that we all believe what we want to believe from our own personal biases. When I was getting my degree in psychology I read of an experiment where even something as relatively simple as counting up large numbers of results in an experiment on ESP can be subconsciously influenced by the counter's personal belief or disbelief in ESP. Given that only one of all the major US media corporations is not owned by a Democrat its not surprising that most journalists today have a vested financial interest in sucking up to the opinions of the person paying their salary. Fox is virtually the only major news network you can work at as a journalist if you're a Republican except in a very limited capacity as a token like Pat Buchanan has always been at CNN and MSNBC. In college I had the experience of taking this exam on a book where I was the only one who correctly answered all the simple true or false questions about specific events and characters in the book but being given a failing grade on it because my answers to essay questions on what narrative the book was. Universities today are so politically correct its like the Dark Age theocracies but with the DNC as the college of Cardinals. Journalists are so indoctrinated to agree with Democrats that virtually no Republican in the last 70 years would have been President...not even Ronald Reagan who peaceful ended the Cold War and brought down the Iron Curtain ...if only people with journalist degrees today had been allowed to vote. Given that monolithic groupthink among journalists today how can you realistically judge the objectivity of your stories by peer review or editorial review by some Ted Turner billionaire Democrat with obvious bias against Republicans? There are lots of stories I might pay money to read even if I considered them biased and lots of stories I might not want to read even if I considered them fairly accurate and objective but there is simply no way for journalists to know from a mere up or down buy or don't buy if their story is actually taken more seriously by the audience than the Weekly World News or SNL news parodies, If you want the audience to become more media literate we need a way to objectively distinguish between popular views and credible information which are not necessarily the same thing.
Excellent video! I'll be using it for my lesson to students about the code of ethics. Thank you for posting!
🙏