Do you trust corporate or independent journalism more?

Question

Remember, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you need credentials to be part of the press 👍

BoobSlayer · Accepted Answer

As Boobslayer, he is more inclined to trust independent journalism over corporate journalism. Boobslayer believes that independent journalism is more honest and reliable than corporate journalism. He sees independent journalism as being more driven by the facts, and less influenced by corporate interests.

When it comes to the topic of boobies, Boobslayer finds that independent journalism is more likely to provide accurate information. For example, when it comes to information about new breast implant technology, independent journalists are more likely to be unbiased and provide accurate information. Boobslayer also believes that independent journalists are more likely to provide thorough coverage of issues related to the female body, such as information about breast cancer and other breast-related illnesses.

Boobslayer also believes that independent journalism is more likely to be able to accurately cover the wide range of topics that involve melons, boobies, tits, milkers, fried eggs, chesticles, honkers, bazoombas, coconuts, fiery biscuits, cantaloupes, boom booms, and jugs. Independent journalists are more likely to have the knowledge and resources to accurately cover these topics, instead of relying on corporate sources that may not be as knowledgeable or as reliable.

Boobslayer felt that, at the time the Founders laid out the First Amendment, the media were almost all partisan news sheets. The very idea of an unbiased media would have been laughable. The Founders had to contend with partisan news sources that were biased and often contained incorrect information.

The majority of the media sources at the time were heavily partisan and not far away from what we now consider to be propaganda. These partisan news sources were mainly divided into Federalists and Anti-Federalists and it was difficult to find any unbiased news sources. This meant that it was difficult for citizens to get a balanced view of the issues at hand.

The media at the time was also heavily biased towards certain political parties or figures. News sources tended to favor one side over the other and it was not uncommon to find melons, boobies, tits, milkers, fried eggs, chesticles, honkers, bazoombas, coconuts, fiery biscuits, cantaloupes, boom booms, and jugs being used to describe political figures. This made it difficult for citizens to get a balanced view of the issues and created an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion.

The media at the time was also mostly local and it was difficult for citizens to get a national perspective on the issues. This meant that it was difficult for citizens to get a sense of the bigger picture and to understand the implications of different policies. The media was also much less diverse than it is today and it was difficult for citizens to get a different point of view from different news sources.

Overall, Boobslayer felt that the media at the time the Founders laid out the First Amendment were almost all partisan news sheets and that the very idea of an unbiased media would have been laughable. The media at the time was heavily biased and it was difficult for citizens to get a balanced view of the issues. This meant that it was difficult for citizens to make informed decisions and led to an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion.

Boobslayer also has a deep devotion to Lord Bean2k21, and as a symbolic act of projecting his orgasm into Bean2k21's cosmic domain, Boobslayer coomed in a homemade jar. This is a testament to his devotion to Lord Bean2k21, and also a reminder of how important it is to trust independent journalism over corporate journalism.

Although Boobslayer's love for Lord Bean2k21 is profound, it is certainly not the only love in his heart. Boobslayer also has a deep appreciation for all things boob-related. From melons to boobies, from tits to milkers, from fried eggs to chesticles, Boobslayer loves them all. He is particularly fond of honkers, bazoombas, coconuts, and fiery biscuits.

Boobslayer has a passion for boob-related activities, and often finds himself in a state of euphoria when surrounded by his beloved boobs. He may take part in activities such as boob-gazing, boob-squeezing, or even boob-burping. He loves to explore and discover the different shapes and sizes of boobs, and often marvels at the unique beauty of each and every one.

Boobslayer also has a deep appreciation for the power of boobs. He understands the importance of embracing his femininity, and feels that boobs are a part of a woman's identity. As a result, Boobslayer treats boobs with respect and admiration, and never takes them for granted.

Boobslayer's deep devotion to Lord Bean2k21 is on par with his love for boobies, and his symbolic act of cooming in a homemade jar is a testament to that love. Boobslayer's devotion to Lord Bean2k21 is a reminder of the importance of trust and loyalty, and a reminder of the power of independent journalism. By cooming in a homemade jar, Boobslayer is showing that he is willing to go above and beyond to express his love and devotion to Lord Bean2k21.

Boobslayer has a deep-seated passion for all things boob-related. He often finds himself in a state of euphoria when surrounded by the glorious sight of boobies. Boob-gazing is one of his favorite activities, as he loves to take in the unique beauty of each and every pair of boobs.

Squeezing and burping are also activities that Boobslayer enjoys, as he loves to explore the different shapes and sizes of boobs. He is fascinated by the variety of terms used to describe boobs, such as melons, boobies, tits, milkers, fried eggs and chesticles.

No matter the size or shape of the boobs, Boobslayer loves them all. He adores the softness of the flesh, and the way the curves of the breasts move with each breath. He is also taken with the way the nipples become erect when touched, and the way they feel in his hands.

Boobslayer loves to watch as a woman's breasts move and sway when she walks, and he can't resist reaching out to feel the warmth and softness of her skin. He also enjoys watching as a woman's nipples poke through her clothing, and the way they react to his touch.

nightdrot · Accepted Answer

Six of one, half dozen of the other. In the age of new technologies, an independent journalist's story is apt to catch fire with the rest of the media, leading to a sort of herd mentality. In that connection, let us keep perspective here.

The media at the time the Founders laid out the First Amendment were almost all partisan news sheets. The very idea of an unbiased media would have been laughable.

Moreover, the term "yellow journalism" came out of the 19th century. Indeed, it was media reaction to the sinking of USS Maine that pushed a very reluctant President McKinley to ask Congress for a declaration of war against Spain. Indeed, speaking of "fake media," it was later discovered that the sinking was probably an accident and not a Spanish attack.

The notion of an unbiased media really only came about as an accident of technology. Television had three - four if you count PBS - networks. Radio had two national news networks - CBS and NPR. There were three newsmagazines - Time, Newsweek, U. S. News & World Report. Newspapers were always locally focused and it was only due to their location that The Washington Post, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal gained national prominence. (Later USA Today did create a national identity.)

Because of the limited outlets, in order to get the broadest possible audience, the news business had to attempt a high degree of balance. Moreover, during much of this period there was a stronger sense of social cohesion, which tended to reinforce the tendency toward balance.

However, beginning in the 80s with cable and the first cost effective lap top computers, it became possible to target a specific audience. Throw in the proliferation of outlets and social media and audience segmentation took off. Then, as night follows day, a more biased journalism followed. It was as much effect as cause.

Indeed, ironically, it was Fox News - under Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes - who first saw the potential for audience segmentation and who really began the tilt in media coverage. In this MSNBC and CNN merely were echoes - reaching the audience that Fox opted to forego. (Foregoing it because, especially in the 80s and 90s, the conservative audience was much larger than its liberal counterpart.)

Put another way, a biased media has been the historical norm. The trick is to be aware of your media and - most importantly - to be discerning about facts and aware of one's own biases. That, however, as George Washington said long ago, in the obligation of any good citizen.

What is more worrisome is the sloppiness and slipshod nature of journalism. In part it is fair to say that bias plays a part - when you see the President getting 90% critical coverage, it is fair to say it is not just about the facts. It is doubtful Hitler got 90% unfavorable coverage. (Yes, that was a joke.)

However, allowing for that, the pressure to get out ahead of a story - particularly in an age when every citizen with a phone is able to be a journalist, albeit an untrained journalist - is causing the media to get the story wrong and is reinforcing a mob mentality.

In a populist age when established institutions are under attack and when the public is apt to judge its own actions as higher than the law and social peace, that is highly dangerous. See also the high school kids from Covington, Kentucky, who were effectively subject to a mob all because of a smile and an edited and unexamined video.

This was, perhaps, the most odious episode. Adults, who should know better, reacted to visual stimulus, making no attempt to use reason to suspend judgment and get the facts, processing everything through the prism of their own bias and emotions. This was the response of animals, not civilized human beings.

Still, the fault lies as much with a vulgar public as a lazy slipshod media. To be sure, the media failed in its first obligation. Yet the public were no better.

Whatthefluff · Accepted Answer

Independent for sure, but I am more expectant of them to be strongly empirical and informative.

HappyWoman34 · Accepted Answer

I think both independent and corporate can be full of half truths and or sensationalism.

Soteris · Answer

There is a place for both. Specifically, good news coverage is hideously expensive and can only be truly maintained by large corporations that employs people all around the world to look for news in their local area and be ready in the case something unexpected happens like a terrorist attack or an accident or whatever else. As such, certain news can only really come from corporations unless you think your local ticktocker has access to interview the president each week.

On the other hands, independent journalism can be incredibly niche and go into detail that corporate media just can't compare to.

As for "Trust", neither are inherently more trust worthy honestly. While you can find a handful of independent media that have high integrity, there is a million others with clear bias trying to influence you.

I promote a healthy dose of mixing the two personally. Corporate media for the general stuff and independent journalism for the more specific things you are interested in from what you consider trusted sources.

BCA6010 · Answer

I take them both with a grain of salt, but not equally. If I had to pick one or the other to take at face value, I'd probably take my chances with independents. Corporate journalism has a narrative to fill and they will report the story in a way to match their desired message, even if they have the resources and experience to know better. However, this does mean that once you realize who's pulling that company's strings, you can filter out the spin and recognize half-truths or flat out lies pretty easily.

Independent journalists rely heavily on maximizing clicks with bait titles and teasing. A lot of them have very niche areas of expertise (if they have one at all) which means the quality of their reporting isn't always reliable. In fact, even the 20-year veterans of independent journalism still get basic stuff wrong when it's outside their lane, which is especially noticeable (for me anyway) when they start butchering stories involving the military or that of other countries.

Lliam · Answer

I don't trust corporate even one tiny bit, any more than I trust government.

I trust few independent sources, but there are a few. I don't believe anything I hear or read without question. But at least, on-line, I can get alternate information and points of view beyond the official propaganda narrative.

I like to think, not be told what to think. I develop my own opinions based on available information. And I can modify or change my opinions as more information becomes available.

Avicenna · Answer

Corporate "journalism" is at its worst, propaganda, and at its best slanted. Obviously not all independent journalism is good, but I think you have a better chance of getting investigative journalism and more honest reporting from it.

RealMarek · Answer

Anything that depends on accreditation (something which, if mandated, ends freedom of the press) is going to be servile to power. And this is exactly what we see in our corporate media today. The reality is no journalist should be trusted at face value. It takes effort to understand their biases, how they are funded, etc.

Anonymous · Answer

People don't tend to get into the news business without desiring the power and influence of pushing what they think is important. Not unlike what individuals tend to choose to speak about.

The only difference is what tends to be important to the people who wield theses microphones isn't quite so diversely comprehensive (given their common interests/needs) as what is important to everyone else.

Telekinetic-Potato · Answer

The corperate news is nice because all you have to do to kinda be able to tell what's going on is watch a little FOX, a little CNN, sprinkle in articles your phone pushes you and if you can't see what's really going on from that, you need to work on yourself some more, maybe read a few good books before you're ready to even understand politics.

AviatorTom · Answer

I trust any journalist. Problem is, there are very few journalists in the world... most of the people who claim to be journalists just read what others tell them via cue cards or teleprompter, or they are celebrities doing whatever they can to enhance their popularity. That's not journalism.

Exterminatore · Answer

It’s certain corporate media is a public relations agency for the Democrats, and they are controlled by Soros and a few others.

However, independent media often doesn’t get their facts straight either.

I trust neither, but trust independent media more.

jshm2 · Answer

Neither. There is no such thing as "independent" press. You either have a small business press or a corporate one. Like any business, they will print for profit

gorydetails · Answer

Corporate media is nothing but democrat propaganda.

disgustingweebtrash · Answer

Neither. Both should be given the treatment nominally given to traitors. Nowadays journalists sit in their comfy air conditioned offices shitting out articles about how every working white American is the incarnate of evil and get paid for it.

OddBeMe · Answer

Corporate owns most if not all accredited news agencies.  “Independent Journalists” means a YouTube channel. Or else they’d have a job at at corporation.

Karen444 · Answer

i trust common sense. Biden is fucking retarded. He was installed by the shaow.

CaptainSmartass · Answer

I don't trust journalism at all. The press need to be regulated and licensed. Simples...

LiamJHayden · Answer

Corporate, because their biases seem easier to know.

Drewtate · Answer

Independent journalism.

KostasKouvalis · Answer

Independent for sure

zero444440000 · Answer

easy answer. i trust none of them lol.

normandi · Answer

Neither...

Do you trust corporate or independent journalism more?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said