Do you really think you are receiving a fair view of events when you watch a news channel that is overly biased on its reporting?

If I think a news channel is overly biased, why would I think it’d also be giving me a fair view?

P.S. Being unbiased is not realistic.
P.S.S. TV is more for entertainment than news.

What @dxs said, yet it’s amazing to me that people still watch it. The biggest example I can think of is FOX news.

I have found our Canadian news, the CBC the least bias of any news channel I have viewed.
Also PBS is pretty good as well.
These channels seem to really try to stay unbiased and let the public make their own mind up.
@dxs and @jca isn’t it their responsibility to report the news in an unbiased manner?

Of course not. Though I am also sensitive to the “pro-corporate” bias, which has been very obvious recently with all the media trying to ignore Bernie Sanders as much as possible, and when they do talk about him, act like he’s a “radical” who can’t win, and talk about Hillary as the only serious Democratic Party candidate. But also all the time on so many other issues. The “news” distorts not just directly by what it says about its subjects, but by which stories it focuses on, its assumptions and assertions of truth and meaning, and by what it doesn’t say.

No. It is run by people who are wealthy- all persuasions. They, in turn, hire editors et.al. to sway public opinion. Any journalist worth their salt can write and give you ideas mixed of fact, opinion and heresay. By the end of the piece they can convince you that Armageddon is indeed here, and to send your money to purchase a bottle of snake oil with a sprig of nightshade to enhance the taste. The better the writer’s words, the better to reel you in with. Some never see it coming.
You have to shop.
Read several different sources on a more-recent news item. See how, now that the event has passed, the sources covered it. Their ‘slant’. What do they want you to believe by the end?
It doesn’t hurt to read an opposing opinion. Never read just what you favor. Do I suggest jumping in heart and soul? No. But scanning and learning the entire world-take is invaluable.
Don’t judge a newsource by it’s cover. Even the most ridiculous articles hit things dead on at times. Ignore the other brainless articles. But enjoy the rapid release of info, or their take on the world.
Remember the first Men In Black film? They purchased the grocery chekout-line rags to read. The logic? They always have the stories first. Their ‘twists’ sell print. It’s frightening, but true. Why do some ‘come clean to the world’ before the threat of tabloid’s releasing bad or private info first? Because it’s been gleened from somewhere.
Why do people sue them at times? They have bad press online and don’t sue. Why the difference? People put stock in the printed word. Smart people read it and siphon the real message.
Put all the various sources and methods together…and you’ve got it. Your opinion.
One source only- one opinion. One interpretation. Political figures especially love that!
Sorry for length.

No, because. for one reason, no news reporting can accurately communicate or even provide all the facts of any event.

I accept the reality that everything human is somehow biased. Just the choice of what is and isn’t newsworthy is skewed; anything that makes the cut will be reported with at least some degree of bias.

I think it’s helpful if something is very obviously leaning. The alarm goes off in my head, and I research and learn more.

Not at all.
There is no liberal or conservative mass media. There is only corporate owned mass media, with many board member of major media networks, sitting on the boards of many other major corporations.
Also, did you know that Clearchannel Communications, the owner of the most radio stations in the country, is owned by Bain Capital, Mitt Romney’s old company?
If you haven’t seen it before, check out the movie, Network, from the 70s, starring the “mad prophet of the airwaves, Howard Beale(Peter Finch).”
A few good documentaries to check out on the media:
Manufacturing Consent
Century of Self
Weapons of Mass Deception

The movie, Network, can be found here.

Obviously not. You state it’s biased. That answers your question.

@SQUEEKY2 isn’t it their responsibility to report the news in an unbiased manner?

Before the 1980’s US TV stations were required by the FCC to use a certain amount of air time for “public service” programming,and this could include news, weather and sports reporting. At some point, that requirement was dropped, and stations migrated their news departments from “public service” to “revenue stream”.

It would borderline on insanity to imagine for a second that watching a news channel that is overly biased on its reporting that is remotely fair and balanced in what it presents.

@Cruiser Then why for the most do people just love FOX NEWS??
They like hearing biased news stories?

@SQUEEKY2 Fox is nowhere near as bad as MSNBS and maybe a distant 3rd to the Clinton News Network.

@cruiser You forgot to mention “The 700 Club,” religious proselytizing in the guise of a newscast.

I think any that are bias are bad, you don’t mind fox because they are right wing, unlike MSNBC which is left wing and doesn’t share your views.

@SQUEEKY2 Explain to me how anything can be reported with out bias. It doesn’t make logical sense. The world is not black and white.

@dxs: Things can be shown without bias when they show both sides, both opinions (for example, the Republican opinion on Scalia’s replacement and then the Democratic opinion on the same thing).

Exactly @jca which I am proud to say our CBC news does just that,they go out of their way to try and get both sides of any story they are covering.