AP Propaganda
The Jawa Report reminds us of the incredible amount of bias at the Associated Press.
The AP… Independently biased.
Share This
Share This
An Internet hub for centrists, independents and moderates with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting and popular features from the left, center and right.
Share This
So whom do you trust for accurate news?
I would say that I do not trust any source completely. I think about the reports myself and try to find confirmation.
That is, I think, what all of us should do.
That being said, I have to admit that I made some big mistakes in the past myself. I
the end, I really do think that we have to be sceptical. Reuters and the AP do not have a monopoly on the “truth, inc.”
I do not doubt that many members of the media do distort and make mistakes. This bias can be across the spectrum.
And it is useful that the right dig up some problems, though they are selective.
So selective that people like you can only be classed as dishonest. In case after case you have presented rightwing statements as fact. When these are disproven you have never bothered to correct what you wrote.
You have no integrity, you are a partisan shill. And unlike the mainstream media you have no institutional or moral structures that encourage correction.
No one sane, ever declared our systems perfect or are mechasnisms of information flawless. We work wit checks and balances and pluralism, rival understandings which offer differ and force people to conside, reconsider and change their minds.
However people of your ilk do not understand this. The agenda of the right is to use the flaws in the preess to totally discredit it, to destroy our complex system so that the real revealed truth such as that expoused by Ledeen and others has no competition because unlike people like you who speak from purity of heart and the truth of the Marxist Lenisnist dialectic which renders all capitalist media double plus ungood… Whoops! wrong buzzwords, same conception… you know the reality beyond reality.
You attack a strawman. Nobody who is sane believes that you can trust all you can read. We do know that our traditional system is better than that which has occured historically, we do sek reforms and within the sytatem of checks and balances critiques from partisans do help because that is how capitalist and democratic systems work, they employ selfish interests.
But do not pretend you have any interest in truth. Otherwise you would also list the flaws of Fox, the many rightwing assumptions in that vague thing called MSM and the outright lies of many the bloggers you continue to quote after they are caught.
You have no interest in truth, you are without shame. You want to undermine the institutions of our society without redemption so they can be replaced by absolute truth. Like our Republican Guard you are not a conservative, but a revolutionary. Yiu care only about facts when they suit your interests.
anna I forgot that this post might hurt your feelings.
So how’s life at the AP?
“partisan”… hahahahahahaha
I only trust Fox News for its Fair and Balanced(tm) news reporting.
I don’t trust any news source. Too many factinistas. I go with my gut—-truthiness. We should get our news from a higher power than ABC, Reuters or the AP.
I don’t follow Anna’s overreaction.
For me the point of this particular blog is to participate in an exchange of opinions and facts.
I almost always go to links people recommend to try and get a better grasp of the truth from a number of points of view.
I find it exhilarating, except for the few commenters who waste space by being cute rather than making a meaningful contribution to the discussion.
Glad you asked. I’m always looking for good sources. I used to think BBC was very close, being nonprofit and less manipulative than our corporate media.
According to the Global Free Press rankings for this year, the USA is 22nd in the world. At the top is Finland and Ireland (tied for first place). More here.
What’s the problem with our media?
* Corporate Ownership
* Advertiser Influence
* Official Agendas
* Telecommunications Policy
* The PR Industry
* Pressure Groups
* The Narrow Range of Debate
* Censorship
* Sensationalism
Oops. Ugly typo. Make that Iceland, not Ireland. Anyone know specific sources of reliable English language news? I used to subscribe to a publication called world press review. They translate news items from sources all over the world, without commentary except to identify any known bias of the source. My current favorite for print news is The Week, which I recognize as liberal, but they do quote commentaries on both sides of each issue. Highly recommended.
Because being sodomized to death with an iron bar is much, much less biased when it comes from a soulless, corrupt government agency.
I think a lot of this is a tempest in a teapot. Of course some AP stringers are tied with the insurgency. In what war has that not happened? And I’m sure AP was duped into showing blatant propaganda during the Lebanon/Israel war this summer. I’m also quite certain it happened the other side as well, where Israeli military officials released things to top US media that were known to be incorrect. The US military does it almost everyday. Sometimes the US military believes its own propaganda, such as William Caldwell’s incredible op-ed in the WaPo last week.
I remain convinced that the six Sunnis burning story is true. Read the daily reports of drill holes and torture; is it hard to believe the death squads wouldn’t douse people with kerosene and light them on fire? Sadly, the story isn’t even that controversial on the face of it.
Do the right-wing blogs not understand the consequences of going public with names in this war? The US military’s denial of this reminds me of an explosion in Baghdad right after the launch of Operation Together Forward that they blamed on a gas leak. LOL. I knew it was a blatant lie. The US wanted to make it look like the operation was succeeding, and a massive bomb would show otherwise.
Of course corporate ownership is bad for news organizations. Publicly held corporations are only interested in the bottom line, not how truly effective their news organizations are. If it takes personnel cuts to meet financial goals it doesn’t matter if the ability to cover the news is degraded by it. Finances first, effectively doing your job second.