Nem said:
I agree that story could have been better covered. I did say they weren't completely unbiased.I don't think there's any network that is completely unbiased. But, you see, those were opinion pieces. The facts themselves were accurately reported. It was the interpretation that was biased. If you ask me, this is the consequence of reporting twitter as news. Though faced with attacks from a lying president, it is not difficult to understand they will retaliate when they can as well. This Kanye stuff is completely subjective. But you know, if you are gonna judge them in one story, what about all the times Trump called them Fake news and they were accurate/correct? So, we can't really compare water to oil, imo. |
And there are different degrees of "incomplete unbias". A 32% integrity rating is not good and as I said already, CNN rarely gets over 60%.
The "It's just an opinion, man" argument is also weak. CNN does not differentiate between opinion and fact, as their headline says "#IfSlaveryWasAChoice marks bad week for Kanye West". "Bad week" is subjective. The Knife Media also stated that CNN implied that Kanye's remarks are problematic without explaining their reasoning. There are differences between a well-supported opinion, a badly-supported opinion, and in this case, an unsupported opinion.
I'm also not judging CNN on one story. Note that I said "Here's an example of" and how CNN usually gets low integrity ratings. So you are effectively making a strawman fallacy. And what about Trump? That's a moot point. We're talking about CNN and Trump is not CNN. Oh, I see. If you can't make a convincing counterargument, sway the conversation to another topic with an unsupported assertion. As a matter of fact, I have the perfect Knife Media article for you.
You can see that Trump's tweets have low integrity, but that doesn't excuse CNN and the other mentioned outlets from being guilty of being opinionated and slanted in what are supposed to be reports/observations. To quote an example of CNN's lack of objective reporting from The Knife Media:
"Trump is clearly stating his opinion via his tweets. Yet news outlets, if they purport to be publishing objective journalism, lose the luxury of expressing opinion as fact. Yet many slip in their own opinion, and when they do some readers may not distinguish it from the facts. Here’s an example from CNN:
But even those occasions [upcoming meetings Trump has with four heads of state] are unlikely to divert the President’s mind from the ever-expanding controversies. Seemingly by the day, the legal distractions have mounted. And next week will provide little respite.
This is the outlet’s opinion and speculation about what might or might not “distract” Trump from his duties. Did CNN attribute this to a verifiable source? No. Did it back its opinion with data? No. Those are two questions that can easily set fact apart from fiction."
An honor to work with CNN indeed....
