NPR-Fox News Connection

[volinbham]

So much for those compassionate NPR listeners:

What happened to tolerance?

 

[jdsa]

I'll admit to being an NPR junkie, but this doesn't upset me.

Considering the stereotypes about Fox (I don't watch it or any other tele-news), I just hope they aren't cast as the token liberals to work up the juices of the target audience.

 

[orange+white=heaven]

Interesting read. Kudos to NPR for (1) having an ombudsman, and (2) giving them a place to comment.

Actually it was this part...

The reaction to Liasson's statement and other recent experiences with blog-inspired campaign, leads me to an inescapable conclusion: These blogs appear to be making our public life even more crude and vulgar than it has been up to now. I'm sure that pointing this out will likely result in another wave of crude and nasty notes, though I hope it won't.

My question to the bloggers: When will you start running corrections and taking responsibility for your actions like the "mainstream media" you so disdain?

that caught my eye.

Isn't it time for a discussion about bloggers responsibility to the facts?

I don't seek out blogs, it tends to be too much material to sift through for the amount of time I have available. Further, I have no sense that I can trust what I might read. What troubles me is the growing number of times that what a person read in a blog is injected into a conversation as fact.

 

[volinbham]

Interesting read. Kudos to NPR for (1) having an ombudsman, and (2) giving them a place to comment.

Actually it was this part...

that caught my eye.

Isn't it time for a discussion about bloggers responsibility to the facts?

I don't seek out blogs, it tends to be too much material to sift through for the amount of time I have available. Further, I have no sense that I can trust what I might read. What troubles me is the growing number of times that what a person read in a blog is injected into a conversation as fact.

I couldn't agree more - I think blogs have their place. They may uncover or start a news story but there must be some verification process. It's hard enough to sort through traditional news media to get at verifiable info.

The 24 hour news cycle is bad enough. Relying on blogs or agenda driven websites (whether left or right) virtually guarantees you will only get part of the story.

I think the NSA phone record story is a good example. USA Today ran with an incomplete story (based on denials from Verizon and a retraction demand from Bellsouth). The blogs take it further by adding opinion, quoting only people that agree with their opinion, finding "experts" that will say it is definitely illegal, etc. In the end, we have a hard time knowing what is fact and what is opinion.

 

[VOLracerx]

Interesting read. Kudos to NPR for (1) having an ombudsman, and (2) giving them a place to comment.

Actually it was this part...

that caught my eye.

Isn't it time for a discussion about bloggers responsibility to the facts?

I don't seek out blogs, it tends to be too much material to sift through for the amount of time I have available. Further, I have no sense that I can trust what I might read. What troubles me is the growing number of times that what a person read in a blog is injected into a conversation as fact.

Well it has to be true cause its on the internet...right???