The 1735 Project (Page 1/1)
olejoedad JUL 25, 02:27 PM
https://www.realclearpoliti...an_introduction.html

Let the discussion begin....
rinselberg JUL 25, 04:07 PM

quote
This essay and the series it inaugurates, The 1735 Project, is not about the failings of the two dominant political parties. Rather, it will focus on the media’s role in the degradation of U.S. politics and America’s national discourse. This endeavor, which will consist of numerous reported essays, is about the abdication of a responsibility that the press willingly—often courageously—shouldered throughout the 20th century.

Most of the Fourth Estate has abandoned its historical pursuit of nonpartisanship. While grasping for new sources of revenue, the press is adopting new codes of journalistic ethics. Some traditional outlets are honest about this, at least to a point. Some are not. Nonetheless, it’s obvious to tens of millions of Americans that the legacy media take sides while covering politics and social issues.

The pitfalls of agenda-driven or narrative-based approaches will be explored in future essays of The 1735 Project.


This looks to be an interesting resource that I could use to continue my pastime of emulating the formats and styles of online discourse, via the Pennock's online messaging board—the "forum", as we often say.

That's an unsparingly honest reaction to it.

I look forward to the next installment of the 1735 Project.

There's nothing in this introductory episode that is making me want to "post", beyond just this, but I did read through it and I found it an interesting "read."

I hail forum member "olejoedad" for singlehandedly bringing about this august milestone in the history of the Pennock's forum.

------------------
Viva la revolución del 15 de agosto

ray b JUL 25, 05:10 PM
what '' historical pursuit of nonpartisanship'' that NEVER WAS

HYSTERICALLY PARTYS OWNED NEWSPAPERS
AND PAID CASH TO THOSE THEY DIDNOT OWN

HONEST ONES SO NAMED THE PAPER

DEMOCRATIC OR REBUBLICCANT
WITH A VERY FEW CLAIMING TO BE INDEPENDENT
EVEN FEWER DID SO CORRECTLY
fredtoast JUL 26, 02:58 PM
The proof I see of how bad it has become. . . . . The way one "news network" reports the news is sometimes "news" on other networks. The networks are actually part of the news they report. In fact, on Foxnews website the number one story at the top of the page is often about the "mainstream media" instead of the actual news story. "Victim mentality" under the "mainstream media" a BIG part of their game.

But ALL networks do it to some extent. Tuckers face was all over CNN for a few days. And today it was Gutfelds.

[This message has been edited by fredtoast (edited 07-26-2023).]

olejoedad JUL 26, 03:14 PM
When the FCC allowed the networks to sell advertising during news broadcasts I knew, even as a high school student, that it would lead to bias and sensationalism in an effort to attract advertising dollars.

My History/Sociology/Government teacher just looked at me with a startled look on his face and said, "I never considered that!".

One of the stupidest (or brilliant if your looking to divide a Nation) moves our government has ever made.
fredtoast JUL 26, 03:24 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

When the FCC allowed the networks to sell advertising during news broadcasts I knew, even as a high school student, that it would lead to bias and sensationalism in an effort to attract advertising dollars.

My History/Sociology/Government teacher just looked at me with a startled look on his face and said, "I never considered that!".

One of the stupidest (or brilliant if your looking to divide a Nation) moves our government has ever made.


I don't think the FCC never banned advertising during news broadcasts.

However, the FCC rescinding the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987 had a big impact.
Zeb JUL 26, 03:32 PM

quote
Originally posted by ray b:

what '' historical pursuit of nonpartisanship'' that NEVER WAS

HYSTERICALLY PARTYS OWNED NEWSPAPERS
AND PAID CASH TO THOSE THEY DIDNOT OWN

HONEST ONES SO NAMED THE PAPER

DEMOCRATIC OR REBUBLICCANT
WITH A VERY FEW CLAIMING TO BE INDEPENDENT
EVEN FEWER DID SO CORRECTLY



Ya know what? ray b is absolutely correct. The "Independent" and "Accurate" and "Impartial" media never was. Anybody who says otherwise is selling something. I was actually taught about "Yellow Journalism" in school. And it didn't mean Chinese.
olejoedad JUL 27, 07:24 AM

quote
Originally posted by fredtoast:

I don't think the FCC never banned advertising during news broadcasts.

However, the FCC rescinding the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987 had a big impact.



Radio and TV licensing originally included the provision that news broadcasts could not be sponsored by advertisers.
The stations were allowed to broadcast public service announcements only.

The FCC rescinded that requirement sometime in the late 1960's.

The "Fairness Doctrine" was an attempt to correct the FCC's earlier mistake, and it was anything but "fair".

[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 07-27-2023).]

olejoedad JUL 27, 07:27 AM

quote
Originally posted by Zeb:


Ya know what? ray b is absolutely correct. The "Independent" and "Accurate" and "Impartial" media never was. Anybody who says otherwise is selling something. I was actually taught about "Yellow Journalism" in school. And it didn't mean Chinese.



"Yellow journalism"was before the time of broadcast media.

The printed media has always run amuck.

[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 07-27-2023).]

ray b JUL 27, 11:00 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:


"Yellow journalism"was before the time of broadcast media.

The printed media has always run amuck.




YELLOW JOURNALISM = FOX NEWS OR ANY OF HIS PAPERS

OR msNBC

it started ''before the time of broadcast media'' true
but never died
and likely is BOTH immortal AND IMMORAL

[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 07-27-2023).]