[ferdo]

> If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy.

All "news" is someone's, or a group of someones, opinion. There's no such thing as objective journalism.

> chicken little reddit-level bullshit

It's only been a couple of weeks since people became aware that the largest spy agency in the world is spying on pretty much anything they can get a bead on.

Perhaps cutting people some slack until 24/7 surveillance becomes the New Normal might be in order?

[hobs]

In my opinion, there is about a 30 minute wait on the I9, and now in sports news, in my opinion the raiders beat the muskrats last night.... etc.

There is definitely such a thing as reporting the facts, and just because there are levels of opinion doesn't mean that all outlets of journalism are somehow comparable. Fox News != Anyone with credibility.

[ferdo]

> Fox News != Anyone with credibility.

There are very few mainstream sources that have a shred of credibility left. I see little qualitative difference between Fox and CNN, for instance. They only differ in style and delivery but their main entrees are still lies and rubberstamped government press releases.

[Volpe]

Yes, but even the choice of facts expresses an opinion.

I could report how many murders were caused by black people, how many robberies by mexicans, and how much drugs by asians, Then how many illegal immigrants entered the country this month.

All fact, no opinion?

[tkahn6]

He anticipated this point and explicitly acknowledged there are levels of opinion.

[mcpie]

Nobody is claiming all news is objective. I also think that the constant claims about 'msm' 'ignoring' important stories is annoying, incorrect and in fact distracting from the proper discussion to be had.

There is in fact a very distinct difference between opinion articles and 'proper' news articles. You see, journalism is not a claim to objective truth, but a procedure aimed at achieving a minimum level of validity where it comes to events. When you read a news article, you should (to some extent) be able to trust its contents on the merits of the journalistic method. Whereas with an opinion piece, it's not bound by this procedure. Note - nobody is arguing 'absolute objectivity' here. It's a matter of trust in a procedure. Of course, it's fine to distrust the journalistic method, to not see it as absolute truth, but to deny or entirely dismiss the distinction is annoyingly daft.

Also, afaik, this story is still everywhere. If you want it to remain that way, start working for change - newspapers report on events, not 'the truth'. Make events happen, and it stays in the cycle.

[ferdo]

> I also think that the constant claims about 'msm' 'ignoring' important stories is annoying, incorrect and in fact distracting from the proper discussion to be had.

You're welcome to your opinion.

[dllthomas]

Just because they're all grey doesn't mean there aren't significant differences in the shade.