News reporters, also known as journalists, investigate, observe, interview and write news stories. Their general job duties include collecting information, preparing a factual story and creating articles or broadcasts that impart information to the public.
Now that is the honest description of what they are supposed to do. What many journalists and citizens don’t know is that they have a so called “Code of Conduct” that they ethically are charged with upholding. It sounds all high and mighty, and I they used to believe in it, and follow it. Well, that dog don’t hunt no more.
The Journalist’s Creed
- – I believe in the profession of journalism.
- – I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.
- – I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.
- – I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.
- – I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.
- – I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one’s own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another’s instructions or another’s dividends.
- – I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.
- – I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today’s world.
Yet in the past 40 years, we’ve witnessed firsthand the death of the 4th estate. It was to be a buffer between government control of information vs our right to know. What we have now is approx. 85% of the media supports the Leftist agenda and 15% supports a Rightist agenda. It is not the media’s job to take sides. Their job is to expose the truth and facts to the public, the government be damned.
The job of the media in a free society is to provide
the people with the facts that are hidden from
the people by their governments
Can any American honestly say that the mainstream media, all of them included, are providing us with “factual stories and articles”? We must discern which shows are real news and which shows are opinion. There is supposed to be a clear line of demarcation between the two, but sadly, that train left the station a long time ago.
Some outlets are more intellectually honest than others. Many have a mix of factual news and opinion shows, but the lines become very blurred much of the time. Fox has Ingraham, who the Left continually bash as a partisan hack. CNN has Maddow who the Right continually bashes as a partisan hack. But if you are an opinion show host (Maddow or Ingraham) your standards are practically non-existent as it’s your opinion against theirs.
But when you have self proclaimed news reporters that are completely in the tank and biased for one party or the other, then there is a problem. This problem has become a canker sore on the collective media.
Let’s take the most egregious and outlandish example of a so-called “journalist” for CNN, Jim Acosta. Mr. Acosta has taken it upon himself to become the focal point for any and all stories he covers. He doesn’t ask questions, he throws out “gotcha” barbs and attempts to get the President into a knock down drag out fight, each day.
We should start holding reporters to their own professional creed, not allowing them to scream and shout and yell at the President at will. If Acosta is not called upon each day, he creates a scene to make sure he gets his 3-5 minutes of screen time.
He does this with the full backing and support of CNN, which has thrown down the gauntlet and dropped any pretense of being a non-partisan news organization. They have basically declared that they are the Resistance against the President and no lie, no fake news, no manufactured story, or no manufactured outrage is too wild or unbelievable to be carried 24/7/365 by CNN.
The job of the media in a Socialist society is to
reinforce the government narrative and to stifle
freedom of thought and freedom of speech
It seems to me that our media is more into the stifling business than they are in the fact business these days, but you can make your own determination.
Plus we have a whole host of non-news outlets that millennials and millions of others get their “news” from, yet they are merely Social Media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, etc. Then add to that TV, newspapers, magazines, radio and the choices are limitless, as are the “facts” and/or “opinions” you can find.
Just take these incidents as examples of how the media will take an allegation, a comment, a 2nd hand story, anything, and manufacture extremely damaging stories out of nothing.
- a complete lack of reporting on the infamous abortion hack Kermit Gosnell for years on end, while he continued performing horrific procedures on babies and exploiting poor women
- the rape allegations against the Duke University Lacrosse team. It was a manufactured racial incident from the get go and as the facts quickly surfaced that it was a total manufactured story, the NYT and most others kept reporting that a group of privileged white kids gang raped a poor black woman
- Presidential debate moderator Candy Crowley inserted her opinion in the October 16, 2012 Foreign Policy debate between Obama and Romney. During the debate Obama claimed he said in the press conference the day after the Benghazi consulate attack, which left the Libyan Ambassador and three others dead, that the attack was a planned coordinated attack carried out by terrorists. Romney quickly disputed this and at once countered that it actually took President Obama 14 days to characterize the attack as conducted by terrorists. Crowley interrupted immediately and stated that Governor Romney was wrong and thus backing up Obama’s position. It seems fair to conclude that at that point she ceased being the moderator and had taken the side of Obama in an unprecedented way. She later admitted that Romney was correct. But the damage had already been done. She is still with CNN.
- the granddaddy of them all, the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco. One woman, then two, then three, come forward with wild tales of rape, forced drugging and mass gang rapes, attempted murder and much more. They and the Democrats demanded an FBI investigation and a Congressional Hearing, and they got both. 3 accusers spoke up, with lurid tales of sex, drugs, forcible rape, one woman (Blasey-Ford) said she thought Kavanaugh was trying to kill her also. So one would assume with 3 accusers, a Congressional Hearing and an FBI investigation that when the facts came out, Kavanaugh was cooked, right? Wrong! Kavanaugh’s main accuser couldn’t remember when it happened (day/month/year), where it happened, what event/party she was attending, how she arrived there, how she left, who invited her, and she additionally gave the FBI and Congress a list of “witnesses” to Kavanaugh’s actions. Naturally, not a single one of her witnesses, including her own best friend remembers such party, anything like what she describes and nobody remembers meeting Kavanaugh. The other two accusers stories were totally bogus and they both recanted under FBI questioning.
But the MSM was all in on Kavanaugh being a gang rapist, etc. They had him convicted and sentenced to prison already. Only thing was, it was all made up by the Democrats to slow down the SCOTUS confirmation process until after the midterms and/or to change the results of the midterms. Either way, they manufactured the entire story from start to finish and added lurid, and bogus, details to the story on a daily, if not hourly basis.
But they got their Congressional Hearing and they got their FBI investigation, and they became, naturally, totally unhinged when they did not get their way. One would normally assume after a day or two of manufactured outrage that they would go on to the next manufactured incident.
And if you did assume that, you’d be dead wrong. After Judge Kavanaugh was seated as Justice Kavanaugh, the Left announced that they were not satisfied and would “resist” his seat on the bench at every turn. Later, when the Democrats took control of the House, they immediately issued a statement saying they were going to investigate Justice Kavananugh and investigate the FBI to find out what really happened.
I don’t remember the Republicans going snowflake when Bader-Ginsburg, Sotomayor or Kagan were appointed, or did I miss all three of those Right wing meltdowns?