Experts and critics question intentions of orca in SeaWorld Orlando trainer death

The "taboo" is only gone if you're willing to accept it.

Lord Gonchar said:
I don't see what any of them do as any different than (not to trivialize it) what we do with the podcast - present our opinions alongside the news.

It's not that simple. The "opinions" on FOX come from the top via directive. You're not hearing FOX Anchor A's opinion or take on some news item. Rather, you're hearing the news item as filtered through the prism that FOX News has established via documented (remember the John Moody memos?) directive.

I know I'd rather hear the news from someone who shared my POV then someone who didn't.

Nonsense. That's like having a meeting with a bunch of "yes men". What's the point of asking questions if you already know the answer? As Jeff pointed out, you're not going to learn anything. You're just standing in a room with people screaming how much you all agree.

The individual does not have to accept it. However the taboo is gone for the major news outlets. And I don't see that changing because its working well for those outlets. People typically do not see the bias in a statement if they agree with the underlying statement. And they will find bias in a statement with which they disagree even if its not there. And often times, people do not understand a given issue so there is no way they will see or understand the bias. They will just fall along with the news outlet that gives them view points with which they agree. That to me is the most dangerous aspect of the business of news today.

I am all for animal rights, don't get me wrong. But there is usually beneficial research going on in any situation like this as well and people seem to forget that from time to time. Sometimes it is to gain a better understanding of how an animal works or their natural instinctive behavior. Though yes, I do think it is nuts to try and determine the whale's 'mindset'. Thats...nutty.

It is a fine line though. Look at some Zoos, for example. Do I think the tigers and giraffes are particularly happy to have three year olds tapping on their display glass daily? No, but I do know that, as Jeff pointed out, most of them were born in captivity and know nothing of the world without human interaction.

It was a sad event, and obviously some precautions need to be taken. But these are wild animals, and no amount of captivity will probably drive the instinctive habits from any animal. It might just be their natural way of dealing with things.

Regarding animal rights, I'm not even sure what the point of zoos and giant fish shows are anymore. When created, these exhibitions allowed people to see animals they'd otherwise never know existed.

Now that we have TV's, movies and the Internet, what's the point? I can learn far more about the true behavior of, say, lions by watching a documentary about them in their natural habitat than I'd ever learn watching a depressed, captive version of the wild animal at the zoo.

I suppose there's something to be said for being able to directly interact with the animals, but how often does keeping them captive offer that opportunity, and is it worth the effort?

djDaemon said:
Nonsense.

No, really, it's not. :)

Well, when you put it like that...

As long as you're talking about news organizations...

I think the Los Angeles Times had the best wild headline to go along with this story:

"1 DEAD IN WHALE ATTACK"

By the time I got to that one I already knew what had happened. But I about fell off my chair when I read it. I didn't bother with that article, but talk about slanting the facts...!

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Lord Gonchar said:

djDaemon said:
Nonsense.

No, really, it's not. :)

I agree. I think the majority of people want to hear their own opinion regurgitated back to them. It allows them feel like they're right without having to do bothersome things like thinking.

Fox News doesn't kill in ratings because a bunch of liberals are watching. They get the ratings from people who think cryin' Glenn Beck justifies their opinions.

^Exactly. The majority would in fact prefer to have their own opinions shouted back at them via a Beck-a-phone...

It is certainly a more well-rounded and educated perspective to want to hear the opinions of those who disagree with you....but that's not very anti-intellectual (which is one of the foundational bases - intellectuals and white wine drinkers from the Northeast can't tell me what to think!).

The news is not meant to be editorialized at all. It's supposed to be a reporting of the facts without opinion, regardless of what that opinion might be.

Carrie M. said:
The news is not meant to be editorialized at all. It's supposed to be a reporting of the facts without opinion, regardless of what that opinion might be.

That's why I watch The Daily Show :)

Carrie M. said:
The news is not meant to be editorialized at all. It's supposed to be a reporting of the facts without opinion, regardless of what that opinion might be.

In it's truest form, sure. But it's still a business and long gone are the days where one organization could truly 'scoop' another and be known as the place that gets you exclusive news or gets you the news first.

The only way to really differentiate yourself is in the presentation.

I don't necessarily have a problem with that - assuming the news is coming across...or at the very least that opinion isn't being sold as news.

Mamoosh said:
That's why I watch The Daily Show :)

You jest, but I bet we'd be surprised by the number of viewers who go to Stewart and Colbert for their news.

That's Fox's problem though, that they do sell their content as news. I mean, it's "Fox News." I only half blame them, though. The other half goes toward the morons who actually believe it's news.

As stupid as I think people have decided to be, I still think there may be backlash in the long run. I've never had a problem with politics that one may categorize as conservative or even Republican, but only in cases where I can see rational and well-thought out positions. What Fox does is anything but that. It's little more than an emotional narrative intended to inflame people. There's no value in that. I truly believe that eventually people will see through that.

Yeah, and Music Television doesn't play music anymore.

Just because you're watching "Fox News" doesn't mean Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck and their ilk are doing news programs for the most part...and I'm not sure they claim to be. (I dunno, I apparently don't watch Fox as much as you guys ;) )

I'm not trying to entirely defend Fox News here. A lot (much of, most?) of what they do isn't news...but then again, if you're watching O'Reilly or Beck and thinking you're watching news, you have bigger issues at hand.

I don't think what they do is any different than Rachael Maddow or Keith Olbermann on MSNBC - just presented from the other side of the fence.

Carrie M. said:
The news is not meant to be editorialized at all. It's supposed to be a reporting of the facts without opinion, regardless of what that opinion might be.

But a lot of the news goes beyond "just the facts" particularly when you are looking at causes for many of the big/complicated issues of the day. If you look at just the economy, watch FOX and MSNBC and you will think they are talking about two different countries when they report on where we are/why/where we are going in terms of the economy.

Carrie M. said:
The news is not meant to be editorialized at all. It's supposed to be a reporting of the facts without opinion, regardless of what that opinion might be.

Funny, you don't LOOK like Walter Cronkite... ;)

Colbert and Stewart don't consider their program to BE "news". I think that's where Fox differs...but I'd be willing to bet that Maddow and Olbermann consider themselves to be more editorial in nature.

rollergator said:
but I'd be willing to bet that Maddow and Olbermann consider themselves to be more editorial in nature.

The Maddow "I am not pushing an agenda" ads that MSNBC ran during the Olympics seem contrary to that bet.

Walter Cronkite said:
Objective journalism and an opinion column are about as similar as the Bible and Playboy magazine.

:)

This is why Fox isn't going to change anything anytime soon.