I Think That Journalists Are Scumbags?

Question

I mean, worse than ambulance chasers.

I mean, worse than tow truck drivers who write down license numbers in hotel parking lots where there are a lot of bars then go and ask to tow vehicles that aren't registered.

I mean just plain scumbags and lowlifes.

Anyone else feel this way?

Ha, the tow truck incident happened to a buddy of mine a few years ago. I've never had a favorable impression of them since.

I just look at the way reporters swarm people and areas trying to get stories, chasing politicians' cars, hounding people at press conferences, not caring about the ramifications of their actions and think "there are the scumbags"

I suppose all aren't bad, but the bad outshine the good.

Answer 1

I have several problems with the media. First, they believe they are exercising their God given right to tell us everything. The public has a right to know, and the public wants to know. Honestly, there are somethings the general public do not need to know. It does violate national security. And, a lot of people could really care less about all the trival crap.

Second, the media reports the terrible things. Take Iraq and Afganistan for an example. How many stories have you read about the schools being built or the medical attention we are giving the sick (I'm not talking about the wounded) people? I believe if you are going to tell a story, then you should tell the whole story and tell it accurately.

Third, they believe they are smarter then the public they serve. They are so unbelievably intelligent, they decide what we should be told. For example, how many gun commercials do you see on TV. Yet, it is a proven fact that drinking kills more in one year then gun violence does in several years. They report the stories involving gun violence is there is a sad ending, but they fail to report the stories where guns were used by private citizens to stop crimes. The media is totally one sided.

This is America. One of the things that makes the USA great is our freedom of speech. Unfortunately, there are not enough people reporting the other side of the coin. Hence, we are given partial truths. This in turn generates hate, lack of acceptance of others, and a misinformed public. Maybe someone will open a company the tells the other side of the story.
Third,

Answer 2

Although we do enjoy freedom of speech and freedom of the press there should also be a code of ethics they have to abide by.
Too many people these days cite "Freedom of Speech" to justify acting like a depraved degenerate when that isn't what freedom of speech stands for.
And yes Journalists are scumbags always filling the uninformed with filthy lies and omitting the truth so as to deceive and manipulate the masses.
I don't know why they have such credibility with the majority of Americans when in my opinion they don't deserve to have any.
If I saw a building on fire and wanted to know what happened if to the right of me were a Journalist and to the left a drunk transient I would first hesitate then ask the transient.

Because at least then I might get an honest answer.

Answer 3

Journalists serve a very important function in this country, to impartially inform the public and question the government. This is something they have recently failed at. They are turning into entertainment gossips, corporate shills and propaganda pushers. Ambulance chasers?? Lawyers are another important group in this country, recently the Judiciary has been dismantled also. Towtruck drivers?? Then and bill collectors I dont think will or should get much praise.

Answer 4

Considering that Rupert Murdoch is a major player when it comes to ownership of the media, it comes as no surprise to me that we get biased media reportiing when it comes to Iraq. And for that matter, Iran.

I question whether the Iraqi's get the same information we get and vice versa.

Of course, who do you think feeds the media what we read and hear? The answer is our own elected leaders.

The true journalists are the one we usually reject. They are the ones who forewarn of us of things that are getting ready to happen in this world.

Edit: To Jack Copeland below me. The press should inform us of everything that Washington does. That is what their job is. That is why they are protected by the Constitution. So that politicians are kept in line.

Go back and do some research and you'll find that is why our forefathers gave them their first amendment rights.

Answer 5

Cant' say as how I've actually met a "journalist" of the professional cadre. Judging by the output of most news outlets in the USA, though, it's definitely a biased profession, although not all of that could be due to the Journalist themselves. Probably true, not all Editors could be scumbags, either. Have you met many, to have that opinion? Judging by Dan Rather, and some other major newsheads, yeah, they seem to be biased scum.
- The Gremlin Guy -

Answer 6

a million. The IPCC based their end that the planet is warming on no longer purely thirty years of direct remark, yet dozens of form and proxy based temperature reconstructions to boot. 2. The temperature grew to become into down in those years for countless diverse motives. no person thinks that CO2 is the only motive force of climate. in fact, many scientists have self belief that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 weren't intense sufficient to force the replace till around 1940. So the warming as much as that factor grew to become into on the whole pushed by making use of another forcing agent like the solar. declaring that the warming ought to all be by way of a "organic cycle" is incomprehensible except you supply info of a few form of lively organic forcing agent. All those cases while the Earth "have been given warmer or cooler", it did so by way of fact something grew to become into =making it= get warmer or cooler. The climate purely would not replace without something forcing it to. 3. little or no in technology is shown. i do no longer see why it relatively is appropriate. in fact the full factor of this form of technology is to offer us stronger warning =before= the info grow to be obvious to anybody. 4. call one single scientist who has ever misplaced a supply or their job for no longer accepting international warming concept. i do no longer care approximately some nut on CNN announcing that scientists who do no longer settle for the thought have no credibility. tutor me a single occasion of this easily occurring.

Answer 7

Yes, I agree, but not only for the reasons you state. My main reason is because "when the truth becomes a lie", the country a journalist reports their "findings" to, is on it's way to death. Journalists are always changing the truth to suit their personal agendas, not for the TRUTH, or the good of the world.

Answer 8

Some are, sure.

Some aren't.

Unfortunately, due to rising costs (so cost cuts to reporting offices) and increasing corporate control, less real reporting is happening. Ever notice how many times you hear "According to official sources"? That means that the White House told them XXX - not that the reporter came up with the information independently.

It was independent reporting that brought down the Nixon administration and saved the country from a Constitutional collapse, arguably far worse than Bush & Company are attempting now.

Where were the reporters questioning whether or not we should invade Iraq?

Yeah, reporters are scum. We need more of them, we need them to have better resources, and most of all, we need them to be independent.

We need them.

Answer 9

Not worse than ambulance chasers, but close. I have seen too many times where reporters make up stuff and deliberately omit things.

Answer 10

Yes, I do.

Even Tucker Carlson recently said that the media is obviously liberal and listed these examples of the reasons:

he doesn't know anyone in the media who is religious, is anti-abortion or, pro-gun.

I thought that summed it up pretty nicely.