this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
247 points (99.6% liked)

World News

41185 readers
3090 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When some of the mind games and manoeuvres that turned a Murdoch family “retreat” into an ordeal appeared in Succession, the TV drama about squabbling family members of a right-wing media company, members of the real-life family started to suspect each other of leaking details to the writers. The truth was more straightforward. Succession’s creator, Jesse Armstrong, said that his team hadn’t needed inside sources – they had simply read press reports.

Future screenwriters have been gifted a whole load of new Murdoch material in the past few days, after two astonishing stories in the New York Times and the Atlantic lifted the lid on the dysfunction, paranoia and despair at the heart of the most powerful family in global media.

The stories followed the end of the secret trial involving the fate of the Murdoch family trust. The mogul’s four eldest children – Lachlan, James, Elisabeth and Prudence – were set to inherit the family firm following Rupert’s death. But four years ago, just after turning 90, Rupert had tried to cut James, Liz and Prue out of their inheritance and hand the businesses over to Lachlan, his favoured heir who also happens to share his increasingly right-wing politics.

The lawsuit was brought by the three errant offspring, and in December a Nevada commissioner ruled in their favour, accusing Rupert and Lachlan of acting in “bad faith”. The trial took place in secret, but the fallout – thanks to the New York Times investigation and a 13,000-word Atlantic interview with James – has been anything but.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] robbinhood@lemmy.world 138 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (14 children)

Reagan removing the fairness doctrine and Murdoch setting up Fox News rank among the biggest blows in democracy and prosperity IMO.

I acknowledge that many left and center-left news organizations will also push agendas, tell partial truths, etc. (Fairness doctrine would help reign them in as well).

edit: Fairness doctrine didn't cover cable only radio. That'd still help cut down some misinformation but in an ideal world IMO it'd apply to most forms of media.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 63 points 12 hours ago (7 children)

I write about the Fairness Doctrine all the time.

Someone commented that they thought it was a terrible idea, because a Flat Earther would be given time.

People today are so used to propaganda that they can't even imagine what a level playing field looks like.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 22 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

If it is interpreted in malicious intent, that is indeed how a fairness doctrine can be abused.

For instance during Covid in German public broadcasters, far right politicians and conspiracy theorists were given disproportionately much screen time and often not followed by fact checking. So if you have 70% science based and 30% lies and deceptions, at the end the lies will make up 70% of what the audience receives.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 12 points 11 hours ago

The original laws were written in broadcast days. Even if we had it today, so many people get their news from privately produced videos that there'd always be a huge number of deliberately uninformed people.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)