Show of HandsShow of Hands

Rotavele November 11th, 2014 6:36pm

Would you watch a government ran "unbiased" news station with at least 1 person of each political spectrum for every show, or would you rather hear the information through an "unbiased" media team?

4 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

11/12/14 4:06 pm

Here's the thing. News is always bias. And if the government controlled the news we would be fed more lies than we already are.

11/12/14 11:59 am

We'd be in big trouble with government-run news because it would be a big step toward government-controlled news, spelling the end of democracy.

11/11/14 4:17 pm

Hahaha govt run news. So like China & North Korea? I bet they're told that their news is unbiased as well.

Rotavele Alabama
11/11/14 5:46 pm

You have more than just state run as an option.

smacc DunningKruger
11/11/14 3:57 pm

If both were unbiased would it matter?

Rotavele Alabama
11/11/14 5:48 pm

Because the non govt ones are biased in reality.

To be unbiased for a govt channel they'd have to just say what happened today, do direct quotes and not allow people to do anything partisan.

smacc DunningKruger
11/11/14 6:04 pm

I did choose gov because they know exactly what happens.

chinito Florida
11/11/14 3:46 pm

Rota, I am sure you have never watched FoxNews but the have a bunch of liberals there.

Rotavele Alabama
11/11/14 5:48 pm

I watch it a lot and "libertarians" are not liberal.

omniku dot com
11/11/14 6:12 pm

They have Colmes and the fat guy on The Five which means they have twice as many as MSNBC who just has Scarborough.

Rotavele Alabama
11/11/14 6:13 pm

Nope colmes left like 5 years ago

rons screw politicians
11/11/14 3:44 pm

But MSNBC is a government run station!

catpillow Florida West Coast
11/11/14 3:30 pm

Both are bad choices. I chose government because it said "unbiased"; but I don't believe in real life it would be unbiased.

omniku dot com
11/11/14 1:48 pm

Ironically, a study by the Quarterly Journal of Economics ranked PBS News Hour as the least-biased major news source. See page 30 of this PDF for rankings...

ludophile following back from IL
11/11/14 1:29 pm

There is no such thing as unbiased news. Let many sources thrive and I'll do my own sifting, thank you very much.

Rotavele Alabama
11/11/14 5:49 pm

Yes there is. It's called just hearing what happened and bloop. End of news story, make your own opinion.

nnifer Alpha Quadrant
11/11/14 1:17 pm

I don't trust any news; therefore, I like to hear as many perspectives as possible.

RepMorris Pennsylvania
11/11/14 1:04 pm

It blows my mind that anybody would actually trust government delivered news.

11/11/14 1:16 pm

I know. It would be far from unbiased.

firefly5 the verse
11/11/14 5:38 pm

I think the point is that we're getting biased news from sources claiming to be otherwise, regardless. government-run doesn't sound great, but neither does what we have.

RepMorris Pennsylvania
11/11/14 1:01 pm

I wouldn't trust either of them, but there are few things I could think of more untrustworthy than government news.

skinner Wisconsin
11/11/14 12:14 pm

I am always skeptical of government news agencies. Their ideas may be noble, but all too often state run media becomes corrupted. Private media has it's own set of problems, but I feel if you imbibe it en mass it's more reliable.

brenstal Florida
11/11/14 12:09 pm

A diversity of news articles and television to form a rounded opinion of the issue. I wouldn't trust a government-controlled news channel. I don't think presenting a liberal and conservative host makes it better.

swervin Maryland
11/11/14 12:00 pm

The first option would allow the government to control what news they released. I do not approve of such control.