The Prepper Movement: Is Prepping a New Trend? Essay

Having served nearly thirty years at CBS News, Mr. Goldberg had earned a reputation as one of the most original writers and thinkers in broadcast journalism. However, when he observed his own industry, he realized the liberal media had completely missed their mission to give honest news. After years of sharing his observations and promoting more balanced reportings, Goldberg soon realized that no one listened because they believed they were doing the right thing. The liberal bias continued, therefore Bernard Goldberg decided to take the situation into his own hands and expose the distortion of the media himself. Goldberg’s breathtaking and shocking best seller book, Bias, reveals the close-mindedness of the news culture and their mission to entertain rather than share facts.

In the study, each source was ranked based on the political leanings of its audience. As a result, it ranked sources such as Buzzfeed more liberal than average while it ranked sources such as the Rush Limbaugh Show more conservative than average. However, none of the sources earned a perfectly neutral ranking (Wormald). The correlation between news sources and their audience’s political leanings becomes interesting when compared to the type of content each news source produces. Rush Limbaugh, for example, is infamous for his conservative rhetoric, whereas Buzzfeed is known for its lighthearted quizzes and comical representation of liberal politics. This reveals something about our perception of truth: biased sources allow individuals to ‘select’ the truth. When conflicting information is pushed to the side, it becomes nonexistent. Subsequently, the sum of partial truths interpreted by an individual becomes a whole truth in their mind, especially when partial truths are reinforced by mainstream media sources such as Buzzfeed or the Rush Limbaugh Show. This is harmful because, as Lewis implied, the entire truth is lost in this process and mutual understanding becomes harder to

Hosts, reporters, and commentators dug at President Trump and his administration in almost every single story aired over the course of an hour and a half. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow eluded that Trump’s alleged ties with Russia “will come out soon,” but she omitted the word alleged, a move that could trigger a slander lawsuit. This framing by both MSNBC and Fox advance a political agenda. If a media consumer were to watch only one of these outlets, that consumer would hear only one view on the world. I believe these partisan outlets can cause closed-mindedness and advocate against those with different beliefs to work together.

In the article “GOP-Fox Circus Act”, Reed Richardson argues that although both the GOP and Fox have conservative political values, they are ultimately harmful to each other’s agendas because of their differing political goals. Both organizations are lacking popularity in recent years so they are struggling to find new ways to gain an audience. The GOP wants to find a way to get their ideas to a wide variety of people, whereas Fox is promoting more liberal views to increase the ratings of their programs. On one hand, the GOP’s reputation is hurt by the inaccuracy of Fox’s reporting. On the other hand, Fox is tied down by the conservative views of the GOP, thus restraining Fox from gaining a larger audience. Journalist Reed Richardson wrote this article for The National, a liberal newspaper, in 2013, so the events and issues that he is speaking of are still relevant to this day. Due to the differences of political views between the author and the subject matter, there is plenty of room for biased statements and opinions. Does Richardson provide enough evidence of the harmful effects of the Fox and GOP relationship? Richardson clearly and meticulously establishes the problems that both organizations face in the pursuit of their political goals with the use of statistics, reliable sources, and thorough evaluation of events; however Richardson constantly provides the reader with a biased argument when discussing the current state of Fox.

In the realm of politics, the media is responsible for producing versions of ‘truth’ which service

Within these two popular news channels, stories and changes within the government are altered to fit the watcher’s views. While Fox News focuses on the more conservative points of view of the public, CNN places their informative stories in a more Liberal light. Fox news tends to report stories in a one-sided viewpoint, which creates a lack of space for viewers to establish an opinion of their own. CNN reports their stories in more of a broad spectrum and positive light, which allows its viewers to gain more of a perspective in problems that are persisting in today’s society. I believe that, out of Fox News and CNN, Fox News displays the most of muckraking today because it only provides one side of the story, with only personal opinions as their proof. In the past, muckraking was meant to be more a informative style of journalism but as the years went by, many people use yellow journalism as a form of entertainment and way to make money; this journalism has seemed to emerge in other ways and slowly disappear in

The reflection period out of this conversation was for me shocking. As an engaged political person, I at least try to be engaged with the news. I find that CBS and New York Times are the most reliable news corporation out there with little to no bias at all, all facts. However, my colleagues find that the current mainstream news media are becoming either gossip, tabloid, or fake news channels. Respectively, I take offense to their beliefs on the basis that the news today is fake. Throughout history, it has been the news and investigative journalism that led to the many stories that transformed this nation into many shapes and forms. Without the news, a society will be at worst an anarchist society where nobody trusts each other or a tyrannical society where the populace will fall for anything that the state displays. It has been an American right of having open news sources, do Americans want to disregard this right in favor of being handed a silver platter of information from bias sources? Anyways, going back to

In America today, most people have their own political views. Some are legitimate, and some are the cause of one main problem: media bias. Certain media outlets are promoting biased political views on television, the internet, and social media. People that watch and read these biased media sources are constantly believing more and more of the false information that they are presenting. Media bias and fake news in the United States is a major contributing factor to many citizens’ political views, especially as a result of news outlets that promote a liberal agenda.

The national media is instrumental in allowing the electorate to develop opinions about contemporary issues. The media is incredibly influential and its power can be wielded for the benefit of all, or it can become a detriment to society. Some media outlets seek to sensationalize the news, sacrificing informing voters in favor of the bottom line. It is through people and organizations who seek to provide the most accurate and impartial view of an event that popular sovereignty gains much of its power. A commitment to informing the public, even when the information conflicts with a writer’s social and political philosophy, can be a difficult one to maintain. Yet, reporters uphold it everyday. This can be seen in the news site CNN (Cable News Network), which is known for having a liberal bias. Despite said bias, it does not shy away from portraying Hillary Clinton, a democrat, as a flawed candidate in an effort to be unbiased. Such a commitment is essential to creating a political and social dialogue in our nation, and as the saying goes, “when dialogue fails, democracy fails.”

On September 10th, Katie Sanders from PunditFact and former writer from Politifact Florida gave a speech at the Bob Graham Center titled Pants on Fire: Misinformation in American Politics. The talk and subsequent Q&A centered on the perpetuation of misinformation that is experienced in contemporary American politics as well as what journalists and common people alike can do to combat it. Though these were the focal points, three related tangents were my main takeaway from the experience.

Often media broadcasters tend to lean to this side, therefore giving them the image of being liberally bias. Chris Mathews and Keith Oberman from MSNBC are two examples of broadcasters that have been accused of delivering their news with a liberal twist to it. Journalists tend to vote on the liberal side of situations, but still say that while they are on the job they only tell the news in the fairest way and the way that will be least offensive as well as respectful to who it will be presented. In many cases however, this report can come out with an oddly left sided tone (thatliberalmedia.com). Since 1991 when Katie Couric became co-host of NBC’s Today Show, she has used her powerful spot in the media to praise significant liberal figures such as Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter. At the same time however, Couric has never been shy about complaining about “right winged conservatives”

Whether it is news channels on the television or whether it is Twitter and Facebook news, the public will always have a way to find out current reports. Since society has become so dependent on technology, a greater amount of individuals get their actual news online and especially through social media. As many of the public know, you cannot trust what people online are saying. Since individuals are so accustomed to getting the news online, many of them tend to believe what they just happen to scroll across on Twitter and Facebook or any other sort of social media. Finding actual facts and truths on the news have become so difficult now, due to all of the millions of different sites and places where we can get our news from. The news online tend to be biased and untrue due to how openly and freely individuals can create their own site and “reports” on current events such as a real news channels would. Social media has just made it more complicated to find the actual accuracy of current events but with enough research, dedication, and using the SMELL test, finding the right information would not be as

In today’s society, remaining connected and knowledgeable of current events and the newest trends is vital to staying ahead in business, education, and social standing. This information is supplied to everyone through the internet, newspapers, television, and radio. One can tune into stations such as CNN, NBC, Fox News, Al-Jazeera, and many others (“SQs of Media Outlets”). In order to meet the needs of viewers, readers, and listeners, the ideal media system would contain accurate, quick information, with a purely impartial view on the facts as they are known. However, this modern media system has not maintained an objective view, pushing opinionated and slanted reporting onto the population in order to create profit and gain customers. The exploitation of information media for personal gain has created a toxic and inaccurate present, constant in today’s society.

Nowadays journalists have the responsibility to report facts as accurately, objectively, and disinterestedly as is humanly possible. ‘’The, honest, self-disciplined, well-trained reporter seeks to be a propagandist for nothing but the truth’’ (Casey, 1944b).

The problem of evil is as ancient as humanity itself. Since the dawn of man, thinkers, philosophers, religionists and practically every human being who have suffered at the hands of evil have pondered this enigma, either as a logical-intellectual-philosophical or emotional-religious-existential problem. The preponderance of evil as a reality in human existence, and