Yes, it is very true that "news organizations intend to mislead, misinform or persuade the public to adopt a particular point of view through their reporting."
But I contend that:
1. News organizations today are less biased than they have ever been.
2. They are better than every other alternative.
3. They are better than nothing.
1. People imagine we had a golden age of news reporting. Never happened. For example, the media sat on the juiciest of juicy stories (JFK's affairs) so that they wouldn't lose access to the White House. What other more subtle ways were they influenced?
2. Where else are you going to get your news from? Facebook, TikTok? People claim that independent sources on SubStack are better, but then they list examples that have obvious and massive biases...
3. Informed voting is a crucial aspect of democracy. If you don't explicitly seek out the news you're going to get it anyway, and those sources are things like ads or political parties that are very much trying to influence you.
I think we have to throw in "news organizations" with "democracy" and "market economy" in the category of "awful things with obvious massive drawbacks, but better than any other alternative".
Like democracy and capitalism, we should concentrate on making news organizations incrementally better rather than discarding them for a worse alternative.
But I contend that:
1. News organizations today are less biased than they have ever been.
2. They are better than every other alternative.
3. They are better than nothing.
1. People imagine we had a golden age of news reporting. Never happened. For example, the media sat on the juiciest of juicy stories (JFK's affairs) so that they wouldn't lose access to the White House. What other more subtle ways were they influenced?
2. Where else are you going to get your news from? Facebook, TikTok? People claim that independent sources on SubStack are better, but then they list examples that have obvious and massive biases...
3. Informed voting is a crucial aspect of democracy. If you don't explicitly seek out the news you're going to get it anyway, and those sources are things like ads or political parties that are very much trying to influence you.
I think we have to throw in "news organizations" with "democracy" and "market economy" in the category of "awful things with obvious massive drawbacks, but better than any other alternative".
Like democracy and capitalism, we should concentrate on making news organizations incrementally better rather than discarding them for a worse alternative.