Politics

11067 readers

185 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

kalanggam@beehaw.org

circularfish@beehaw.org

knokelmaat@beehaw.org

Gaywallet@beehaw.org

JuBe@beehaw.org

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

JCPhoenix@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

The tug-of-war over CNN shows how dysfunctional US media has become (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 days ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

On Thursday evening, as rumors about the Brown University gunman swirled, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins posted on social media, noting the confusion and directing people to her network’s 9pm newscast.

CNN is certainly not a flawless news source, but her words rang true to me. The network is one of the outlets where you can find reality-based and largely dependable reporting – especially in breaking news situations like the one that was developing near a New Hampshire storage facility.

But CNN, now 45 years old, is in a precarious situation as two huge media conglomerates vie for ownership of its parent company, Warner Bros Discovery.

Whatever the outcome, the fate of CNN has become part of a high-stakes game of corporate ownership, not as a question of what benefits the information-seeking public.

Which has been an ongoing problem in the industry for quite some time.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

The correct solution is to not have a moral panic about social media that plays into the hands of rich radical conservatives who own said social media platforms and are purposefully driving the moral panic and rightwing toxicity.

[–] TehPers@beehaw.org 1 points 4 days ago

Two things can be bad at the same time. Social media is problematic because people are monetarily incentivized to get attention. Corporate news outlets are problematic because of the same reason.

The correct solution is improved media literacy and actual consequences for the harm that people do. And maybe a correction to the incentive structure for news while we're at it.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Framing it as "moral panic" is disingenuous. It's just people who love money more than community having found a way to exert control by distracting from what's actually going on.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I agree in a sense buy I am not invested in framing it as a moral panic I am just pointing out the fact that it is clearly a moral panic.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

According to whom? If this is "clearly" the case, how am I unaware of it?

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Have you heard of a place called Australia before?

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 4 days ago

Mate, I've been to Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Adelaide.