Can You Trust The Press? | 5 Minute Video
Is the press trustworthy? Can we believe what reporters and journalists tell us? Judith Miller, Pulitzer Prize-winning former reporter for the New York Times, explains why Americans’ trust in the news media has fallen, and why that matters.
Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt
Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they’re released. http://prageru.com/signup
Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.
iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG
Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e
Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Join PragerU’s text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful.
VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com
FOLLOW us!
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru
Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru
Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/
PragerU is on Snapchat!
JOIN PragerFORCE!
For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX
JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff
Script:
Liberal or conservative, male or female, young or old, Americans love to bash the news media. Once among the nation’s most trusted institutions, the news media have fallen from grace.
According to Gallup, even as recently as 2000 a majority of Americans trusted the press; by 2015 it had fallen to 40 percent; and lower than that, 36 percent, among those 18 to 49. It’s hard to see how this decline will be reversed. The industry has become politically polarized and, in the highly competitive age of multiple 24-hour cable news channels and the Internet, it’s under severe financial pressure. And this compounds an even deeper problem – failing journalistic standards.
In the 1950s, the media universe consisted mainly of a few national television broadcast networks, and local TV and radio stations, most of which got much of their “news” from major wire services and the nation’s large newspapers. Most journalists were committed to producing “objective” journalism – fact-based stories independent of the government and of political parties. A reporter’s job was to report, not offer opinion or advocate. Presented with the facts, it was up to readers to make their own judgments about news events. Opinions were supposed to be confined to editorial and op-ed pages.
That world no longer exists.
This lack of objectivity and the decline of standards is one reason, though not the only one, why newspapers and news magazines are a declining industry. According to Pew Research, print revenue from newspaper sales has declined from $47 billion in 2006 to $16 billion in 2014. Digital sales haven’t come close to making up the difference. Most papers have been forced to cut operating expenses: slash staff and close bureaus – overseas, in particular. Ironically, there are more stories than ever to cover and fewer staff than ever to cover them.
This lack of information from professional journalists has been filled by a new source – social media and the blogosphere. When the Iraq war, which I covered for the New York Times, began in 2003, there were roughly one hundred thousand bloggers. Only a few years later, there were an estimated twenty-seven million.
The Internet as a news source has obvious pluses and minuses. On the plus side is that information is spread widely and instantly. The minuses have to do with the fact that the quality of reporting varies dramatically. It’s not easy to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Furthermore, many sites, including mainstream sites, have abandoned traditional journalistic practices and standards in search of more and more “eyeballs.” Objectivity, once the gold standard of reporting, is now often seen as old-fashioned, a ratings loser. When success is measured mainly in terms of “clicks,” the outrageous beats the sober just about every time.
Inserting opinion, even in the middle of a news story, is a way in which journalists can distinguish themselves. And in mainstream media outlets, those opinions overwhelmingly tend to be liberal. This might not be so bad if journalists acknowledged their bias. But they almost never do. Yet the bias is obvious.
For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/can-you-trust-press
source
This is very important for people to hear. This is also one of the most un-biased news reporting that I have heard in a very very long time. Good job on the video!
私の住む日本の報道局も同じ状況です
What theay're not telling you is that PragerU is media, too
The objective news of yesterday has turned to subjective and feeling and opinions.
When my local tv station in reparing for hurricane Ida said something about "climate change" I wanted to kick the tv screen in, not only is the media not trusted I think a majority of people now actually hate them, and with good reason. Time after time stories are told as fact only to be debunked later, they no longer confirm stories because they only want to be first not correct.
Letting this lady, who got fired from the NYT for not properly vetting her sources on Iraq WMDs, do a video on media misinformation is peak PragerU.
Trusting the media is like trusting a lion wont eat you I take my chance with the lion
It is their own fault. They have destroyed the very spirit of The Constitution Of The United States. They have actually become the Propaganda Machines for their favorite Political Party. They are no better than the North Korean News. They have divided America for their own greed & that is Treason.
people want the truth but are usually not willing to look for it the activist media count on this and also the ability to lie continually without consequences or any punishment
You can always hear the truth, you just have to listen, and you will hear his voice!
The puppets are controlled by the puppet masters! They speak what the masters dictate! The truth be dammed!
so this video is 6yrs old and the answer is NO. Go back an additional 50yrs and the answer would still be NO.
We can thank Fox News and conservative media for what we have now.
Nope.
Outstanding !
No.
I have a quibble with this piece. After mulling it over this morning, I think I'll tell you what it is. Sorry this is so long, but I want to be precise.
Ms. Miller illustrates her point about editorial bias by contrasting the reporting of a story – that Ms. Clinton had classified documents on her personal email server – by Fox News and the New York Times. Fox News reported it as "breaking news," while the New York Times "buried" it deep in the paper.
I believe this is a false comparison. First, these are very different companies that deliver news differently and submit to different business pressures – leaving aside editorial bias for now. Fox News is a 24/7 news channel, and they have to fill their broadcast. It was relatively easy to report this as it happened. The New York Times is a newspaper. It has to suffer under the strictures of its layout. That is, it has a front page, promoted stories, etc. Fox has two "pages," the live reporting and the crawl. If a story arrives late in the day, or if other promises about the front page have been made by the editors, it ends up where it will fit.
Second, the New York Times has a very heavy journalistic process. It produces a print copy as its primary output. The stories have to be ready by a deadline to make it to printing, and after they are delivered they cannot be changed. Fox News delivers the copy to its anchors, and corrections and adjustments are relatively cheap. As such Fox can have a lighter journalistic process. I am not saying one is better than the other; I am pointing out that they are different, and this difference manifests in ways that are not obvious. Fox can call a source and confirm the news about Ms. Clinton, line it up quickly, and count on their anchors to correct on-the-fly minor typos and errors. The New York Times simply cannot do this. Whatever delays a story there likely pushes it off the front page, unless it is a "stop the presses" story.
Let me add a bit about Ms. Miller, herself. I am not trying to defame her and this is not an ad hominem attack; I just happen to know some things about her history and I wish to disclose these because they likely color my view of her statements. I am generally positively disposed toward Ms. Miller. She went to jail to protect a source: Mr. Libby. I think that's admirable. Ms. Miller shared a Pulitzer Prize for her reporting while at the New York Times.
Ms. Miller has been a professional reporter at both the New York Times and Fox News, so she undoubtedly has a deeper and keener insight into the editorial and reporting process at these two companies than I could hope to have. It is worth noting that she was forced out of the New York Times, and ended up at Fox News. (She is no longer at Fox News, but she left on good terms.) While this might not color her view, it colors my view of her view – and I think it is fair to consider it.
Ms. Miller was dismissed from the Times because her reporting on the existence of and search for weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq relied on bad sources. (Remember Ahmed Chalabi?) This reporting was, in turn, used by members of the Bush administration to make the case for the war. This continued, with her announcing that she'd been proven right on WMDs (a story later shown to be false). The editors of the Times later concluded that Ms. Miller had violated their journalistic standards. I do not believe Ms. Miller intentionally compromised her standards, and she defends her work. I suspect her journalistic objectivity was compromised by her being embedded with the troops, and by her over-reliance on partisan sources that had been reliable in the past.
I do not dispute that editorial bias can affect a news source; it certainly can. I just think her example is a poor choice that fails to illustrate her point convincingly. Show me a compelling story covered by Fox, but ignored by MSNBC. Show me a compelling story covered by the Chicago Tribune but ignored by the New York Times. That's a compelling and apt example.
Short answer: hell no
6 years later, this video has aged like a fine wine.
DEATH TO DEMOCRACY.
Whole heartedly NO ! This before I even watched this ! They are now the enemy of the people and a tool for propaganda of the democrat party ! Never to be trusted again EVER !
"The bias is obvious".
Mainstream Media bias is disheartening. Their continued claims of free & fair reporting is discouraging. The propaganda they pick & choose to report in order to fit the Democrat narrative is nearly criminal.
What is truly maddening, though, is their utter lack of respect for the intelligence of the American people.
Absolutely on point. I recall the days before cable when my parents got both major newspapers in our city, it was easy to tell what was opinion and what seems mostly factual. Very little if any sensationalism or drama, weather was limited to a few minutes and there were stories from all over the world. Trusted reporters and faces have long departed and local stations just echo what command central spews out. Everything is breaking news and full of crime and for the last to years "the situation". Absolutely detest watching anything. I'll read the WSJ and The Epoch Times but even then be cautious of the bias. I don't see any recovery from it and recommend Internet detox on a regular basis.
the press has been heavily infiltrated by leftists and brain dead fools.
It looks like same situation of south korea. All crooked main news paper company, All fake news of internet press, and disgraceful internet search company like google. They always talk about north korea, and suck japanese rightwing.
It is sad that we don’t believe in the news anymore, like people use to. And it all started in the 1960s with Nixion.
Trust Press!? The press is as ethical and trustworthy as Satanic pedophiles.
Can you Trust PragerU?
It’s all about paving the way for dictatorship.
This video is ever-more impactful in 2021 where we are experiencing excessive censorship bolstered by the legacy media bias and monopoly on perceived truth. it's horrifying.
Thomas Sowell
"The media is very powerful in it's image making role, it can make the criminal look like he's the victim and make the victim look like he's the criminal. This media is an IRRESPONSIBLE media and if you are not careful this media will have you hating those who are being Oppressed and loving those who are doing the Oppressing!"
-Malcolm X…
Can you trust PragerU? I mean, it's not like they are biased or anything right?
I don't Trust the Corrupt Media..
When Children who are White be Reported Missing & Children who are Non-White don't be Reported Missing are Hypocritical.
Right wing propagandists like Dennis Prager desperately need you to reject all information that comes from sources subject to journalistic standards and institutionalized mechanisms of editorial oversight, fact checking, and legal departments. Dennis Prager and everyone else in right wing media needs you to believe the unfiltered opinions of right wing propagandists and to reject verifiable facts. That’s what this YouTube channel is all about.
Legitimate news sources that are subject to editorial oversight are held to standards that compel them to issue corrections, retractions, and even apologies, they also face the possibility of being sued if they get it wrong. And sometimes they do get it wrong. No source of information is perfect. But one thing you can be sure of is that people like Dennis Prager and everyone else in rightwing talkradio are free to lie at will, hiding behind the claim that they are simply entertainers. There is no one looking over their shoulder, holding them to any standards. They never issued a correction or a retraction or apologize for getting it wrong. Don’t kid yourself. The effort to get you to reject legitimate journalism is about empowering and enriching people who deal in right wing propaganda for a living.
Five years later and it's gotten so much worse. I used to more or less trust CNN and scoff at Fox. Now I do the reverse.
No they all socialistic communist who don't tell the news they lie about what's going on in this country
The big network news shows have become nothing more then biased, gossip oriented, opinionated, liars club, freak shows.They are as bad as cheap opinionated tabloids. Their reporters should be wearing clown makeup. And yet there are imbeciles who continue to believe them.