journalism blah blah professor

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/07/201372891029632277.html

I don't like AlJazerra.
no thanks.

It’s a good article. It basically argues that anon and Wikileaks exist because traditional/mainstream journalism has failed to properly challenge the narratives and PR spin from those in positions of political/economic power – and that the focus on the use of technology by anon/Wikileaks is distraction from this clear failing.

I understand. The truth can really hurt sometimes. Still, try it out by starting with watching just five minutes, then ten, then twenty and so on. Before long, you will find that its Fox News you don't like. Promise.

And I agree. I am sick of watching the news and seeing nothing but regurgitation of spin. I had a conversation about this with a local reporter once, and she thought she was being fair because she regurgitated both sides equally. No analysis, just a pretty girl in front of a camera quoting both sides equally. THAT IS NOT REPORTING, folks. That is nothing but PR vomit.

I think Fox news sucks, too. Very rarely watch it.

Sometimes people have this absolutist black and white way of seeing things, while somehow stroking themselves while they smugly think that they are more open-minded, and thus intellectually honest.

Al Jazerra, from a journalistic point of view is not intellectually honest.
Therefore, I do not like it.

When Al Jazerra starts to focus on women's equality, I might respect it a tiny bit more.
Remember, this is a Muslim theocracy supported media outlet coming out of a country that does not even allow women to drive cars or go out by themselves without being covered at the very least, and if of means, accompanied by a guardian. Plural marriage still happens there as well. As does the middle ages brutal punishment for criminals, such as cutting a mans hand off for having been a thief. There is a painful amount of corruption, based on nepotism. If one is a part of the Royal family, they are extravant billionaires, with a small middle class and a tremendous amount of poverty. Some of these Muslim countries are fine with various forms of slavery. In brief, their own human rights records are for shit. They can criticize the United States, and some of it may even be true in some aspects, but quite often it is slanted to really undermine what may be remaining of American pride.

I would also be just as skeptical of Russia Today, for some similar reasons as stated above.

It's an op-ed by a Swedish professor and says is not views of Al-Jazeera.

ITT: a closed mind, into which nothing can enter.

All media, all reporters, have biases. To think otherwise is naive. But they can be useful.

For example, I like RT coverage of the US, because they have good reason to point out the flaws of the US. But by the same token, I wouldn't trust RT to report accurately on Russia.

As for US media, they are all highly biased, so when I hear how terrible Fox news is (pretty f*ing bad) without also pointing out how bad CNN or MSNBC are, this highlights the biases not just of the news media, but of the listeners. To say Fox bad CNN good (or vice versa) is to reveal your own biases

Fox/MSNBC are not even pretending to be unbiased. CNN tries to do analysis from both sides, and does a better job. I hear a much more diverse set of opinions from CNN, but in essence they are all moderate views. Moderate Dems vs Moderate republicans. Fox is right wing nutjobs, MSNBC is the far left democrats, CNN just stays in the moderate/mainstream zone. The best US news comes from out of the country.

its good article ,but more information can also be added