My opinion http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1392587-the-declination-of-the-news/

The problem overall isn't with bias as much as it is with news being sold as a product that has to appear attractive and exciting to consumers. This affects what news is reported how news are reported (sensationalism).

Which is why news should be not for profit.

In Australia we have the 100% government funded ABC new channel which is pretty good at being unbias.

Uh oh! JagarTharn12 I heard the wall street mobile has been dispatched. They're coming for you!

That's a nice little bit of information there. I did not realise that happened in Australia. But does that have no impact on what the channel says? If your going around offending the people who pay for you with what you report... if you understand my meaning?

This is what does my head in, as Jon Stewart points out on many occasions..


Random news feeds at the same time this last week:

"The outcome of the vote is a sure win for the President", "The outcome of the vote is a win for Arizona", "The outcome is a definite victory for the state"

switch the channel..

"The outcome has to be a blow to the presidents policies", "It's a bad day for Arizona", "This obviously affects the sovereignty of the states in general because of this.."


And then I get to make up my mind what the news actually was, which isn't what I thought news was for.




^^ that would be me in the middle ^^

Many countries have public service media available which are different from flat out government-owned services.

The government can't cut funding without the Senate agreeing, and the Senate has always been the opposing party so I wouldn't think the government would be able to shut down criticism without getting voted out.