Just curious if anyone has a list of the most infuriating, uninformed things said by journalists about guns.

-A Fox News anchor recently mentioned the AK-57 used in El Paso. I could go on about the Fox News "experts" who are truly ignorant about firearms.

-I constantly hear CNN calling that same WASR-10 an automatic weapon.

-Too many times, an "expert" (former ATF or cop) will mention "fully semiautomatic weapons" like it's a real thing.

Journalists are bad enough, but supposed "experts" are worse. Why can't they ask Bubba on the street for actual information? Or look it up before making "authoritative" statements?

"Fully semiautomatic weapons" -- Technically absolutely true, merely redundant. All my semi-auto firearms are fully semi-automatic and nothing else.

Fox is for dunces who prefer not to have to actually engage in thinking, much less critical reasoning,

It's shocking that more people don't believe the media after the media told us that there were WMDs in Iraq and that barrel shrouds are killing innocent puppies...

senorgrand wrote: Thu Aug 08, 2019 3:02 pm It's shocking that more people don't believe the media after the media told us that there were WMDs in Iraq and that barrel shrouds are killing innocent puppies...

I forgot about those deadly barrel shrouds.

So many dumb statements....

DiFi said: "We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than 3 rounds. And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15 round, 30 round, even 150 round magazines"

senorgrand commented:

It's shocking that more people don't believe the media after the media told us that there were WMDs in Iraq and that barrel shrouds are killing innocent puppies...

I will concur that FOX News basically invented main stream shock-and-awe biased news.

IMO, MSNBC has evolved to be an evil mirror twin of FOX. One of the business centers I frequent has MSNBC on all the time - it only takes a minute or so before someone on MSNBC is foaming at the mouth and making ungrounded assertions that I know are false, or at best misleading. I can agree with the sentiments they are espousing, but totally disagree with their methods.

They we're far from perfect, but I really miss Edgar R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite. I miss News as a public service function. I know it wasn't really the golden age of truth, but at least they tried to keep the bullshit below chin level.

max129 wrote: Thu Aug 08, 2019 5:13 pm

senorgrand commented:

It's shocking that more people don't believe the media after the media told us that there were WMDs in Iraq and that barrel shrouds are killing innocent puppies...

I will concur that FOX News basically invented main stream shock-and-awe biased news.

IMO, MSNBC has evolved to be an evil mirror twin of FOX. One of the business centers I frequent has MSNBC on all the time - it only takes a minute or so before someone on MSNBC is foaming at the mouth and making ungrounded assertions that I know are false, or at best misleading. I can agree with the sentiments they are espousing, but totally disagree with their methods.

They we're far from perfect, but I really miss Edgar R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite. I miss News as a public service function. I know it wasn't really the golden age of truth, but at least they tried to keep the bullshit below chin level.

I also miss them. The one thing that helped them keep it more truthful back then besides the fact they were a public service was the Fairness Doctrine. This prevented broadcast stations to just give one side of a story. Thank St. Ronnie’s for getting rid of it.

Well, only having 24 minutes to provide a day's worth of news will do wonders for keeping bullshit to a minimum.

But when you have 24 hours to fill, you have to lower your standards to offer that much content without going broke. At some point, it resembles "UHF" rather than "CNN".

Other networks used to complain about Fox because they had almost no reporters and simply hired pundits to talk on air. It was opinion and infotainment to sell ads. It made a lot of money. Other networks had newsrooms and bureaus in various countries. The cost of reporters and investigative reporters kept profits down.

Fast forward to 2019. Large corporations have owned news networks for years and used to set the agendas for those 30 minute news broadcasts. Local-owned newspapers are dying off. The big cable news giants are broadcasting more and more opinion and punditry and have to stay financially afloat. They have to compete with YouTube, Netflix, and InfoWars.

It is an interesting time to be alive and care about the world.

The head of CNN News Jeff Zucker was the former head of NBC Entertainment, shows CNN wasn't looking for a journalist to head that division. I agree about MSNBC, they've become the left wing clone of Fox. Last month I was on a trip and the car I rented had Sirius radio and I couldn't listen to the CNN or MSNBC for long, it's the same stupid repetition. BBC or France 24 were more informative and short segments with news.

BBC is still pretty good. NPR can be ok, and remains my primary news source since I can listen during the commute to work and we don't have cable tv. AlJezara is usually ok. Anything that isn't US profit driven is better, but even much of that is opinion disguised as news. It's telling when you have to read several paragraphs in prior to getting a fact, if there's one to be found at all.

featureless wrote: Fri Aug 09, 2019 11:18 am BBC is still pretty good. NPR can be ok, and remains my primary news source since I can listen during the commute to work and we don't have cable tv. AlJezara is usually ok. Anything that isn't US profit driven is better, but even much of that is opinion disguised as news. It's telling when you have to read several paragraphs in prior to getting a fact, if there's one to be found at all.

Very true. Yesterday I was reading articles on the ICE raid on poultry plants in MS. The CNN article was all human interest which is fine but I wanted facts, who owns these plants, how did ICE get information to make the raids...I was surprised that the Fox site had the basic info and also their propaganda, NPR as always had an informative article. Yes it's frustrating. BBC and France 24 are the public broadcasters which keeps them honest.

I need to try France24.

I like BBC and NPR, myself. With the internet and its glory, I am able to listen to (or watch) nearly any BBC channel and, also, I just found France 24 in English.

I refuse to take the time on broadcast news. If it isn't written down, it's not news IMHO.

K9s wrote: Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:21 pm I need to try France24.

I like BBC and NPR, myself. With the internet and its glory, I am able to listen to (or watch) nearly any BBC channel and, also, I just found France 24 in English.

Since the British and French had colonial empires, their news channels tend to be international and you'll see articles about what's happening in their former colonies - for example Britain on Hong Kong or India or South Africa....France on Mali or Vietnam or Senegal... And sometimes it's just getting a different perspective on what's happening in the US and how the world perceives us.

senorgrand wrote: Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:27 pm I refuse to take the time on broadcast news. If it isn't written down, it's not news IMHO.

I prefer written stories too, I can skim them to get the basics. I hate videos that auto play on news sites, so I have a blocker on the browsers I use.

I really miss Edgar R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite.

I met Walter Cronkite in the late 70's. I was working in the Coast Guard Boating Safety Office in NY. He was an avid sailor and a Coast Guard Auxiliarist. I spoke with him several times before I got transferred back out west in 1979. He was a great guy. My favorite quote about him is (can't remember who said it) was someone who said when Apollo 13 went bad , "Do something Walter!" That's how much Americans trusted him.

My wife and I prefer France 24, NPR, BBC. Occasionally NBC with Lester Holt. The rest are crap. OH yeah, WTOP in DC. Having spent 20 years there WTOP was the best. I have their app on my phone.

Thank you, True Texan, and fellow old person for bringing up the 'Fairness Doctrine'. It is a TV. It does have an off switch. But not for most Americans. There is a reason I've not owned a television in thirty five years. All things discussed above are a perfect example of this.

IMO, TV new is no longer news, it is 'emotional voyeurism'. There isn't time in a fifteen second soundbite to articulate issues or discuss nuanced, complex issues. So we get dumbed down, sound bites. This is true of most if not all of the corporate centrist media as well as the white christian nationalist networks.

As Old Coastie above, most of my daily , voracious on-line news consumption comes from British & French sources or NPR.

Want to learn some interesting things, read an American, British, French, German, Japanese and Indian history text book version of the same events. Pretty amazing stuff that.

Since we seem to be, roughly, similar ages, I'll look into the WTOP app. Thanks.

As you're also a fellow transplanted NYer: after 9/11 some fan told Bruce Springsteen to do something. He, reasonably, asked; what can I do? The fan responded; you're the only one that can(!) do anything. That conversation resulted in 'The Rising' album. That's how much, NYers of a certain generation anyway, trust 'Bruce'.

I have to plug the NYT Daily podcast. It's about 30 mins on one topic. It's good for lunch break listening for me.

I forgot (getting old) to add I read a lot too. NY Times, The Guardian, Washington Post, Huffington Post, Daily Beast, Raw Story, and a few others. I like to get a perspective on news. It's amazing how each news service can change the slant on a story. My wife is a NYer born and raised, Never left until she married me. I'm from Seattle but lived in NY for 6 years. I can mimic a pretty good NY accent though. "fuggidaboutit'
If I want a good laugh I'll look up The New York Daily News, of the British Sun.