anatta47 ([info]anatta47) wrote,

media bias

this article once again shows how the media plays into the superstitions and wishes of the credulous. http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20051126182709990003&ncid=NWS00010000000001 the media is supposed to be unbiased and so that would include giving a natural scientific explanation of the phenomonon but instead they only include statements of people who went there believing it before they saw it. the media does this because most people believe in miracles and the supernatural and so they want to play to their audience and so boost their ratings. when will journalists remember that it is there job to report both sides not that which is most prevalent. I which the skeptic movement would get more media attention. well i guess that's my rant for the day.

  • Post a new comment

    Error

  • 2 comments

[info]hyla_cinerea

November 28 2005, 10:41:37 UTC 6 years ago

Classic! What about all the other times this exact same thing happened? The idea that it's a sign of a coming disaster is unfortunate. There are disasters all the time. Anything could be attributed to it. I like what one person thought about being more loving though. If it takes a statue's tears to make you more loving, GO STATUE!

[info]mikos_feeder

November 28 2005, 16:31:49 UTC 6 years ago

Great post! I thought the article's voting survey results were interesting:

Is this Virgin Mary statue really crying?
I'm not sure 41%
No, it's a hoax 37%
Yes, definitely 22%
Total Votes: 98,996

That's why the internet is so important as a news source - because we (the receivers) can interact and dispute things more easily than with TV or newspapers.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…