“Moran’s job is to deliver the news and let the audience decide. If his opinion is based on what he has uncovered as a newsperson, he should let his investigative skills do the explaining.”
Agreed.
However, journalists and networks still impact their viewers' opinions and feelings on a topic by what they choose to report and what they choose to ignore or gloss over. This selective coverage is more deceptive and manipulative than Moran stating his personal feelings about the administration.
A very good point. It's hard to find a news outlet that covers various topics and from all sides. That is probably how it has always been, but perhaps not with such blatant political leanings.
These days journalists are very open and share their opinions even when they shouldn't. Moran chose to share his personal opinion on a very public platform and then had to retract it. If he kept it within his own group it would have been different. We never knew what Cronkite, Brinkley, Huntley or Jennings thought about a topic (except when Cronkite broke up announcing the death of JFK). No doubt they were very liberal politically. But now it's not just reporting, it's reporting with your personal bias. It becomes more difficult to know what to believe about their report when the opinion so differs from yours.
I thought about Cronkite while I was writing this. There are moments when a subject is so divisive, it's hard to be impartial. Vietnam is an example. This business of lambasting politicians because you hate a political party or its leader is really bad.
Some people, I'm sure, want to hear news from people who think exactly as they do. That's what keeps MSNBC, Fox and the like afloat.
I agree, that was one of the few areas he let his opinion show. It's sad we all fit into echo chambers, but if the networks tried more middle they might succeed. Although now I think the problem is that many get their news from social media, which isn't always even correct let along impartial.
“Moran’s job is to deliver the news and let the audience decide. If his opinion is based on what he has uncovered as a newsperson, he should let his investigative skills do the explaining.”
Agreed.
However, journalists and networks still impact their viewers' opinions and feelings on a topic by what they choose to report and what they choose to ignore or gloss over. This selective coverage is more deceptive and manipulative than Moran stating his personal feelings about the administration.
A very good point. It's hard to find a news outlet that covers various topics and from all sides. That is probably how it has always been, but perhaps not with such blatant political leanings.
These days journalists are very open and share their opinions even when they shouldn't. Moran chose to share his personal opinion on a very public platform and then had to retract it. If he kept it within his own group it would have been different. We never knew what Cronkite, Brinkley, Huntley or Jennings thought about a topic (except when Cronkite broke up announcing the death of JFK). No doubt they were very liberal politically. But now it's not just reporting, it's reporting with your personal bias. It becomes more difficult to know what to believe about their report when the opinion so differs from yours.
I thought about Cronkite while I was writing this. There are moments when a subject is so divisive, it's hard to be impartial. Vietnam is an example. This business of lambasting politicians because you hate a political party or its leader is really bad.
Some people, I'm sure, want to hear news from people who think exactly as they do. That's what keeps MSNBC, Fox and the like afloat.
I agree, that was one of the few areas he let his opinion show. It's sad we all fit into echo chambers, but if the networks tried more middle they might succeed. Although now I think the problem is that many get their news from social media, which isn't always even correct let along impartial.
I have been pleased with News Nation as far as cable news goes. Very logical and fairly balanced.