General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDo you think our media is giving an accurate portrayal of the war in Ukraine?
By media, I mean both "main stream" commercial sources and social media.
I am truly curious to hear my fellow DUers' opinions on this.
Thanks for any and all responses.
brooklynite
(94,518 posts)WarGamer
(12,440 posts)brooklynite
(94,518 posts)bluewater
(5,376 posts)I am interested in other people's opinions on this and do not want to bias responses or push a narrative, so pardon my silence.
Torchlight
(3,331 posts)Asking the standard question, e.g., "is X the best it can be?", does not carry the implicit value in and of itself that X is or is not the best it can be.
WarGamer
(12,440 posts)Social media is rubbish.
Anything of interest online must be checked 3x before believing it.
The MSM, cable shows... they're selling commercial air time.
You have to pick and choose your news. If something sounds absurd, it probably is.
bluewater
(5,376 posts)Also, as being "correct and complete in reporting the details"
Those are pretty much the standard dictionary definitions that would relate to news reporting.
dchill
(38,481 posts)Seriously, not joking.
WarGamer
(12,440 posts)First thing I do is check DU.
Tons of people here with their radar up almost 24/7.
After I read a quick headline about the 737-800 crash in China this morning... sure enough there was a link in LBN.
dchill
(38,481 posts)brooklynite
(94,518 posts)I would assume their selection is skewed by a mindset that is close to my own, which is not necessarily a good thing.
Takket
(21,563 posts)anyone can say anything on social media, but commercial media seems to be doing a good job of it, as long as you aren't watching the pro-putin right wing networks.
Lovie777
(12,257 posts)KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)I don't believe even our "serious" media gives an accurate portrayal of anything. They are ratings driven. If it bleeds it leads - unless it might upset a GOPer. Then we have to sugar coat it or ignore it altogether.
I realize the half hour national news has difficulty trying to jam complicated situations within the half hour but they don't even try. Of course neither do the "unbiased" (cough) 24 hr news outlets. They spend most of the day pushing an agenda instead of just getting us accurate information. To the point most people have just tuned out and decided Facebook and Twitter are "news" outlets.
ZZenith
(4,121 posts)Its not a fucking football game.
Bobstandard
(1,305 posts)msongs
(67,401 posts)ZZenith
(4,121 posts)Who would you say was the aggressor?
sinkingfeeling
(51,448 posts)being shown on TV.
ZZenith
(4,121 posts)ZZenith
(4,121 posts)Alsteen
(69 posts)But watching NHK news is to me like watching Walter Cronkite. Such a revelation.
marybourg
(12,629 posts)what I read on DU. (I dont use any news-supplying social media other than DU). So probably, yeah.
Caliman73
(11,736 posts)As one poster said, you can't really accurately portray a war while it it happening.
Then you have the bias of the news organizations, the countries covering the conflict, the reporters, etc... are all covering what feels important to them, or what they are being told is important by their news room or by polling or ratings.
You have straight up propaganda, you have conscientious journalists who can only cover so much.
War is a very complicated thing to cover accurately.
moondust
(19,977 posts)jalan48
(13,863 posts)commercials. Feels more like war porn for a profit to me.
Strelnikov_
(7,772 posts)milestogo
(16,829 posts)But I really don't want western journalists to risk their lives for this story. We know enough to know its really bad.
Swede
(33,236 posts)But the reporting is skewing anti-Russian. But fuck 'em.
SoonerPride
(12,286 posts)Not graphic enough.
A little too much cheerleading.
But overall a pretty fair assessment of the actual dynamics on the ground and state of Russian advances and setbacks.
IcyPeas
(21,865 posts)don't they already have war correspondents?
sciencescience
(109 posts)David__77
(23,372 posts)It is highly editorialized. A government brief of the situation probably has a significantly different tone and probably content as well. This reminds me of the coverage of the Syrian civil war. There was such a sense of certainty that Assad was a goner.