this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
-13 points (24.0% liked)

Conservative

375 readers
56 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Journalism use to be about the story. Now days it’s garbage. People should be given the information in the least biased method.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, that’s because the fairness doctrine was removed from application by the FCC, and congress’ attempt to codify into law was veto’d by Reagan.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think it should be forced. I just think ethical people would require it. This isn’t a my side good. Your side bad. Both sides have done this. It use to be the news was less biased and the opinion piece was biased

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Yes….because of the fairness doctrine. Once again it wasn’t perfect but the quality of the information was much better than it is today.

I’m not trying to take sides I just stated historical facts. Not sure why you’re getting defensive about it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’m not being defensive at all.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The bit about taking sides was a little defensive. I’m not trying to take a side here. You and I both have to deal with shitty “news” organizations in part because of what happened to the fairness doctrine. Everything you’ve been commenting in this thread about is because of that

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I didn’t say you took a side. The news has been taking sides

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Cool thanks for clearing that up.