CNN is a reliable and neutral source?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ratzinger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Neutral Source
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the reliability and neutrality of CNN as a news source compared to its competitors, particularly Fox News. Participants assert that while no news organization can claim complete neutrality, CNN excels in its coverage of science and technology, which is often neglected by other networks. The conversation highlights the perceived biases of Fox News, particularly in its dismissal of scientific reporting. Additionally, the influence of corporate ownership, specifically Time Warner, on CNN's editorial decisions is noted, suggesting a lack of impartiality.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of media bias and neutrality
  • Familiarity with news organization ownership structures
  • Knowledge of science and technology reporting in media
  • Awareness of political influences on news coverage
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of corporate ownership on news media, focusing on Time Warner and CNN
  • Explore media bias analysis tools and methodologies
  • Investigate the role of science communication in mainstream media
  • Examine case studies of news coverage during political campaigns
USEFUL FOR

Journalists, media analysts, political scientists, and anyone interested in understanding media bias and the dynamics of news reporting.

Ratzinger
Messages
291
Reaction score
0
Do you think that CNN is a reliable and neutral source? Is their covering balanced and independent? Can they be trusted?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no such thing as a neutral and totally reliable source. CNN is as reliable as any other new organization. One feature they have that puts them head and shoulders above the competition is their coverage of science and technology which either doesn't exist or is virtually lacking in their competitors' broadcasts.
 
Ratzinger said:
Do you think that CNN is a reliable and neutral source? Is their covering balanced and independent? Can they be trusted?

Well... In my opinion, CNN is much more balanced than the "Fair and Balanced" Network.

I think the Fox Slogan is short for "We give a FAIR Right Wing assessment, AND our anchors are mentally BALANCED"
 
Tide said:
There is no such thing as a neutral and totally reliable source. CNN is as reliable as any other new organization. One feature they have that puts them head and shoulders above the competition is their coverage of science and technology which either doesn't exist or is virtually lacking in their competitors' broadcasts.

Well on Fox, they do not air science because it is full of "just theories" not "facts", and movie stars provide a much better escape than boring science.
 
CG,

Yes, that is a definite shortcoming of FNC.
 
i don't think we should talk about cnn but of his mother company which is AOL-

Time Warner
http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/timewarner.asp
Time Warner Corporate Timeline
http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/timewarner-timeline.asp

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=9
http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/outlets/cnn


TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign


examples:

CNN, Fox tout ABC/Post poll showing increase in Bush approval ratings, ignore own polls showing no improvement or a decrease
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512210002

CNN Says Focus on Civilian Casualties Would Be "Perverse"
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1670

Early this month, new CNN chairman Walter Isaacson met with top Republican lawmakers in Washington, D.C. to discuss how to improve relations between the cable news network and conservative Republicans.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1677


"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one."

The Mass Media & Politics: An Analysis of Influence
http://progressiveliving.org/mass_media_and_politics.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How much to Al Gore?

Recall, they were trying to merge TW and AOL at the time and certainly did not want to alienate either potential leader.
 
ComputerGeek said:
How much to Al Gore?
Recall, they were trying to merge TW and AOL at the time and certainly did not want to alienate either potential leader.

Anyway, that shows they are not impartial, non partisan, and objective..
 
Last edited:
  • #10
  • #11
So what is a good source?
 
  • #13
moose said:
The fact was that Bush said it, not the actual statement. !
i know. i know, but it's kind of tricky and funny. that is why i put the :smile: :smile:

Anyway, delete it if you want, i don't want to trash te thread...
 
  • #14
Well.. I do not watch Cable news.. I use the Internet to gather my information... I have more access to in-depth reporting, both opinions, and discussion, allowing me to formulate an opinion...

I also listen to Al Franken and Randi Rhoads, and The Majority Report because they CITE their information and use news reports not editorials when establishing facts in a situation. (Al is my high Brow, Randi is my Medium Brow and TMR is a nice mix of medium to low brow (depending on Sam's mood)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
11K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K