Media literacy means having a sense of which outlets lie about which issues and why. eg: the Wall Street Journal editorials and op-eds are used as a means of introducing lies for commercial advantage, and New York Times politics writers put out puff pieces to maintain access to wealth and power.
Fair enough. Also knowing the general bias of a given outlet. I’m pretty much never going to trust anything from the NYT that coincides with the US state Dept narrative, and I feel similarly about the BBC and the British ministry.
I wouldn’t go where you are; I can think of several examples of the NYT and US State Department agreeing about Ukraine in ways that turned out to be very right. It’s more important to look at what evidence is brought to bear to support a conclusion, and whether the conclusion is valid based on the evidence, and to look at more than one outlet to understand an issue, so it’s not easy to use paltering to mislead.
Media literacy means having a sense of which outlets lie about which issues and why. eg: the Wall Street Journal editorials and op-eds are used as a means of introducing lies for commercial advantage, and New York Times politics writers put out puff pieces to maintain access to wealth and power.
Fair enough. Also knowing the general bias of a given outlet. I’m pretty much never going to trust anything from the NYT that coincides with the US state Dept narrative, and I feel similarly about the BBC and the British ministry.
I wouldn’t go where you are; I can think of several examples of the NYT and US State Department agreeing about Ukraine in ways that turned out to be very right. It’s more important to look at what evidence is brought to bear to support a conclusion, and whether the conclusion is valid based on the evidence, and to look at more than one outlet to understand an issue, so it’s not easy to use paltering to mislead.