Do you believe mainstream media?

[jujiju]

I don’t. I used to and I miss being in that safe bubble. I still have a look to see what is being reported, but I’m no longer in that place where I just assume what I’m being fed is correct without doing my own research.

I miss the safe bubble too, a lot. But no I don't trust the MM any more. Following the trans debate did it for me. The,Guardian on Wi Spa was just outrageous lies. The BBC disciplines journalists who point out that a transwoman is a biological male. And they both ignore important stories about women's rights, misrepresent the issues and dish up mountains of indoctrination instead. I read several newspapers now and follow primary sources such as parliamentary debates, live court cases, live YouTube coverage and long-form podcasts.

No.

Substack, independent podcasts etc.

christ on a bike, OP. 🤦‍♀️

I neither disbelieve or believe "mainstream media"
Anyone who as a rule believes or disbelieves everything from a particular news source is an idiot.
There are so many different people involved in all the different ways you might come across news. All with different opinions, perspectives and agendas.
There is no "mainstream media" really. It's such a broad pool. It makes me think that you may have gone down a conspiracy rabbit hole tbh.. "mainstream media" is the new "they"
I'm sorry but when you weigh up and assess information it's important to look at a variety of different sources and compare them.
Sometimes I see people who use the term "mainstream media" focusing on a small amount of sources from very sketchy people who massively have an agenda.. but because it's not "mainstream" they put this faith in it.

No

i guess it depends what news you are interested in.
weather?? well news site or not after 60+ years on the face of the earth i know to take that with a pinch of salt, zero conspiracy theories necessary.
birth/marriage/death of any "celebrity" not that that interests me but again most likely accurate zero need to deep dive into fact checking there.
financial info tsx/s&p 500 again zero conspiracy theories necessary that's pretty black and white.
traffic/bridges? that too shall pass zero worries anyone is fudging that report.
politics here in canada is being handled nicely with no noticeable bias including the us issues.
what topic do you think is NOT being well covered?

Dont believe, dont watch
Stopped fully in 2021

I look at the bbc website for brief info. I don't think they are always that great at giving the weight and gravity to different stories. The FT is much better for that and as broadsheet go is the best we have, I think.

Am also an academic so will often reach out to friends and colleagues to follow up on certain stories. Will also use bluessky (used to use Twitter before musk) to do a bit of my own research. However, I have a job and family so my time is limited.

No. I'm marvelling that you would believe this means they don't print lies! They can get away with it by printing an apology in small print at the bottom of page 47. Or by printing things that are not quite outright lies, just not really the truth.

Missed this one. The BBC have standards but they get away by giving their spin. Have you never watched Question Time? Or some of the analysis by certain commentators on the news?

I think they all lie and sensationalise. They're human after all, being a journalist won't make them a different breed or better people unfortunately.
If there is a story I'm specifically following, I like to shop around. I will read from different sources, and then from that I try to come to my own conclusion on the story.

Anything from crime stories to politics, I think will come with a dash of personal opinion, a dash of sensationalism, a dash of truth, and dash of outright lies.

This isn't just mainstream media, it's all media. Independents aren't any better.

Absolutely not.

This is actually one of the scariest threads I have ever read in mumsnet. Mostly what it shows is that people don't seem to have a clue how media works.

Do you not remember that back before you all decided all media are big liars , that we used to split into "tribes". Were you a guardian or a telegraph reader? Did you read the daily mail or the Sun? These decisions on which media you consumed were made because all media is, intrinsically, biased (its delivered by people after all) and we tend to seek out information delivered in a format and context we appreciate. Anyone who thinks media can or should be completely unbiased is, frankly, desperately naive. And it frightens me that so many people have forgotten this and are now outraged and and shocked to.discover that a story can be reported differently in one paper to how it's reported in another and that as media consumers we should all be applying at least some critical thinking skills!

Meanwhile, is the mainstream media lying when they report on government rules and announcements re covid? Again, that's not how media works. A journalist REPORTS on what's happening. A news report on the latest lockdown announcement in which the government says we all have to stay home as NOT the media colluding, it's reporting. The journalist may or may not agree. But their job is to tell us what the people in power have decided. Parts of the newspaper may be dedicated to opinion or challenging people in power, and sometimes media even run campaigns on issues (clearly signposted), but why do you think it's the medias responsibility to decide "no, the government is wrong and we will tell everyone that and then they will all refuse to lockdown".

Media was never perfect. But we used to know that and consume it accordingly. Now it's all conspiracy theories and thinking it's blatant lies. I despair of people who are so clueless that they now decide to get their news on Xi

Meanwhile, is the mainstream media lying when they report on government rules and announcements re covid? Again, that's not how media works. A journalist REPORTS on what's happening. A news report on the latest lockdown announcement in which the government says we all have to stay home as NOT the media colluding, it's reporting.

On this

Well the previous state premier in Qld went on mainstream media and said covid will 'hunt down and get unvaccinated' like it was a gun for hire, im still yet to ever catch it

nightly news, morning shows, politicians were all saying cut your unvaxxed friends and family, to shun them into compliance AKA treat people like crap cos media says so

'safe and effective' well thats turning out great.......

So its little wonder i just DGAF anymore and dont watch or consume any news
Sport and weather is all i seek out now
I may see a headline in passing but dont bother clicking anymore, i turn the channel over if news comes on tv, i just tune completely out
I only worked out Aus having an election cos the stupid posters started littering the sides of the road

Well, exactly. He said it. Media reported it. You don't have to agree but it frightens me that people don't understand that media REPORT.

News outlets put politicians, scientists etc on to talk about issues. Those people say things. That's the medias job... to let people in power or with specific expertise say things. Ideally they also challenge those people.and offer other views where appropriate.

The thing is that you don't trust government and you don't trust scientists. Fine. I think a healthy scrptism is good although blanket mistrust is stupid in my view. But stop thinking media make these decisions.

Definitely not since Covid.

Which news sources do you trust?

Absolutely this. All news reports have bias- be it mainstream or otherwise.

For the most part, I trust them. They are held to certain standards and would land themselves in hot water legally if they printed outright lies, but I am aware of bias, hyperbole, and taking things out of context.

I prefer to get news from various sources to get a broader picture of what is happening in the world. If something doesn't sound right, I try to fact-check it via reliable sources, eg, medical studies for Covid, impartial fact-checking sites for politics and the government-published stats etc.

it was not a lie at the beginning of the pandemic about facemasks. It was because there was limited data on how the virus was spread, so the science seemed to indicate that it was spread by symptomatic people via large droplets. Which later turned out not to be the case and the advice changed.

This.

I also trust them more than randomers on X. Like honest to god. I can’t believe anyone finds X trustworthy.

Not always but lately the alternative including some social media influencer who are vile and full of right wing propaganda covered up as awake truthers (mostly idiots) There are some good independent journalists I like who do occasionally write for some mainstream media papers, but I’d be very wary of listening to all these new so called new alternative ones too!

When was there ever a safe bubble? Propaganda has been around since recorded history began and the idea of political spin for a good while.

News is never outright lies (the laws of slander and libel have existed for awhile) but facts can always be open to as a PP said bias/hyperbole/changing the narrative.

DS and DH are huge football fans and there was a massive contract announcement this morning - that is fact. The reporting/response to it changes from being amazing to being well that is a total waste of money to OMG look at how much footballers are paid all depending on your view.

Now in terms of the actual factual bit that has been reported on social media for all this week but wasn’t seen as 100% until verified at the source and then news outlets but DS has been pretty confident all week

Media literacy should be taught in schools.

But being really honest, I wouldn’t value the opinion of anyone who gets their “information” from social media.

Yes broadly I do

the traditional media channels have legal rules and a regulator they have to adhere to. They don’t always get it spot on but broadly it does look to me like they try to verify sources, be more impartial and try to tell the truth.

going “off piste” with your “research” can be a mixed bag. Sure some can be honest and truthful and say more than the MM can. Some are horrifically biased, some are outright liars.

if “research” down by you is things like verifying sources then good on you and that’s fair. If it’s reading x and YouTube, less so