Quote:
Originally Posted by OvenMaster
You know, I've wondered about that very issue.
I agree that blatant lies should definitely be kept in check. But how?
We trust(?) news agencies who tell us what's going on. They add their biases, cleverly edit content, etc, but basically it's pretty rare to have any stories checked for accuracy before they're presented to the public for their consumption. How can this be done?
I remember reading a story where a classroom full of high school students was discussing freedom of the press. When told that it was indeed the law of the land as the First Amendment of the constitution, almost two-thirds of the students did not believe it and said that these freedoms went too far, and that the government should have oversight of what gets printed or distributed.
The problem with verifying news or other info is "who would do the verifying?"
|
You need a source that does not have a dog in the fight. I trust Jim Lehrer's news hour because he has no sponsors. Back in Canada the news never had sponsors because you can almost guarantee a bias when there are sponsors. I would not trust anyone working for Rupert Murdoch as far as I could throw them.