News outlets including cable and newspapers biasly write for their readers. They've made a determination that it's more important to maintain readership than provide honest news. Look up NY Times or Washington Post articles and then survey the comments. You will find 90-95% of the comments liberally biased. That's who read their papers. So they slant the news that way. Part of it is just that the reporters have political and social views that just get applied to the articles and the way they are presented. That's why they have lost credibility with the public. But it's always been like that. Just worse recently.
Accountants and attorneys (lawyers) generally do what their clients request of them. The change in values that has led to all the negative effects you refer to came from investors - those who wanted the short term profits at the expense of all other sorts of profits.
Since when did literate people become unbiased? That seems to be an interesting belief about mankind. Does selection of which photos are used biased or unbiased? Are photos literate or illiterate? If the NY Times puts a photo or article supporting it's political viewpoint on page 1 and a similar photo supporting a point of view it disagrees with on pg 47, are they acting literate and biased or literate and unbiased? I think you need to re-think your point of view. We all tend to believe the people and organizations we agree with. That's why we read or watch them.
Haven't the big city newspapers in the U.S. and maybe all of North America. especially when the owners owned papers in several cities, always been biased one way or the other? To me, that was the point of Orson Wells' "Citizen Kane" movie from the 20th Century. Nothing, really, has changed. The difference is: we are alive today and most were not back then.......Regards!
I've been reported about the "workflow" of a news photographer during a press conference. He was the very last one - as he arrived the conference came short to its end. The room was full of reporters and photographers. So he was standing at the opened door of the press room.
Yup. Many historians have argued that if it weren’t for the biased sensationalizing of Joseph Pulitzer’s “New York World”, and William Randolph Hurst’s “New York Journal”, the Spanish-American War would never have happened. Or going back further, the American Revolution would have had a hard time getting off the ground without the biased news papers of the time rallying support for self governance. I’d be willing to bet most of our wars relied on biased a news media to enrage the public enough to stomach the idea of sacrificing their sons and daughters to a cause that almost certainly would not have directly effect them. Or at least wouldn’t have effected them on a daily basis nearly as much as losing a loved one.
A "BA" in .......xy is just nice but sometimes not necessary.
Great contemporary photographers AND artists? Or are you looking for photojournalists? Because generally speaking, you won't find great art in a photojournalism. You'll find some good photographers with an artistic eye for sure, but as far as fine art goes, it's not the place to look. Nor should it be. They are two different fields with two different goals made for two different audiences. Besides, if you have a BA in Art History, shouldn't you be providing us with that list? I have a BFA and keeping up with the latest trends is pretty important. I would think art history would be the same. What's going on in the modern art scene is effected by what preceded it, and conversely, what's happing in the modern art scene effects our perception of past artists.
I don't have to work for a newspaper to see bias. That's ludicrous. I can read.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |
