Should the media be an advocate for democracy?

I know. It's a lot to take in. But it is actually possible for a person to be both an individual and a citizen.

 

Yes. Logically implied by what I said. No fallacy.

 

You might consult a dictionary at this point. I'm afraid I can't help you any further. Have a great weekend!

 

An individual refers to a person as such. A citizen refers to the individual as a member of a nation or society.

 

Or my sarcasm.

 

good times

 

There is a fight for the heart and soul if the soul of the Republican party. The authoritarians aka neocons are currently in full retreat. There is no such argument in the Democrats, all they have left us useful idiots like the squad and and the left overs from the last thirty years and their all would authoritarians.

 

•​

~ " Some know not of what they speak ..."

 

I think that it’s more important that the media is free.
Forcing the media to promote democracy is no different than China forcing the media to promote its totalitarian agenda.
In free countries, we already have media that promote democratic values as well as right wing cult values and every shade of opinion in between.
The answer is not to repress opinions that we don’t like.

 

I agree. What you can’t be is a cult worshipper and a good citizen.

 

What is meaningful? What is confirmed?[/QUOTE]
I will direct you to any of the many online dictionaries.

 

Nobody hates Democracy. They hate its "excesses". That often works out to be the same thing

I will direct you to any of the many online dictionaries.[/QUOTE]

Dictionaries rarely get even diction completely correct.

 

Thread win.

 

Dictionaries rarely get even diction completely correct.[/QUOTE]
Then I guess you will have to interpret words for yourself.

 

The trust in the media to report the news fairly, fully and accurately is way down. Whether on thinks they're promoting democracy or not, a majority of Americans think the media has taken sides in our political battles.


36% in U.S. have a "great deal" or "fair amount" of trust in mass media

68% of Democrats, 31% of independents and 11% of Republicans trust media

Democrats' and independents' trust are down five points since 2020, GOP's flat

Notice the independents, the non-affiliated, the less to non-partisans, only 31% of them trust the media to deliver the straight news without political slants and biases.


https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526...utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication


and


56% of Americans agree with the statement that "Journalists and reporters are purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations."

58% think that "most news organizations are more concerned with supporting an ideology or political position than with informing the public."


https://www.axios.com/media-trust-crisis-2bf0ec1c-00c0-4901-9069-e26b21c283a9.html


Perhaps the best way for the media to support democracy is to get back to straight reporting of the news, to report what happens, the event or whatever in an accurate, full and fair manner. They don't do that now, they throw in all their biases, slants, support for one party or the other and add guests to tell the public what they should think, act and do.


I think one reason why most Democrats trust the media, 61% is the vast majority of the media is reporting the news in a pro-democratic party way or slant. Cable news is the worst in taking sides, one can say FoxNews is nothing more than a propaganda wing of the Republican Party, CNN and MSNBC, propaganda wings of the Democratic Party. Each gives their viewers the news in a way their viewership wants the news to be presented to them. After all, news is a big money-making proposition to the corporations which own them. The more views, the more they can charge for their commercials, the more money they make.


Fact is before the media can promote democracy, they need to start reporting honest news, fully, fairly and accurately or most Americans will think their reporting is just taking sides in our political battles.

 

Sadly, there are many cultists in our midst.

 

Then I guess you will have to interpret words for yourself.[/QUOTE]

That's what we all do under any circumstance.

What gets to me sometimes is the way lots conservatives say we are obligated to deal with the Constitution just "as written" and must never "interpret" it. Just what do they think the whole process of reading any document IS anyway?

 

That's what we all do anyway.

What gets to me sometimes is the way lots conservatives say we are obligated to deal with the Constitution just "as written" and must never "interpret" it Just what do they think the whole process of reading any document IS anyway?[/QUOTE]
Good point. My response to that is, why have a Supreme Court if the words themselves in the Const. tell us all we need to know?

 

No one other than antifa and BLM are interested in the over throw of the government and anyone who thinks 1/6 was any sort of an attempt to over throw the government they need to quit sucking down the koolaid.

 

Good point. My response to that is, why have a Supreme Court if the words themselves in the Const. tell us all we need to know?[/QUOTE]

I've heard arguments that we shouldn't. That is, the whole process of Judicial Review can be called into question if you object to Marbury vs. Madison. Mind, most of the Founding Fathers were still alive at the time and most of them went along quite readily so it can't really be argued that we don't in fact have three branches of government but it's an interesting speculation.

 

Challenge you to present evidence.

 

I would be more than satisfied if the media simply returned to journalistic reporting.

 

Me too. If only they constantly called Trump a liar when he lied.

 

I don't follow your if only. The vast majority of the media does constantly call Trump a liar whether or not he is lying or not or sometimes not even saying anything.