546
Scott Pelley says Bari Weiss wanted 60 Minutes to say Renee Good was ‘driving toward officer’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
546 points (99.1% liked)
News
37971 readers
2122 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Has it? Has it served the american people? It served the corporate owners of said news organizations, but whether or not it's actually supplied the things an informed populace needs to know is a different question? What's your definition of relatively recently I guess?
Yes, it has. Most American news sources have reported about as accurately on current events as news sources from any other developed nation. The right wing ones (and by relatively recently, I would say it started when Fox News started spewing a deliberately skewed narrative in the 1990s) are a good point of comparison, since they clearly operate on a political mandate, whereas the other mainstream outlets are far better about just reporting the news.
So when even non right wing news was hyping the lead up to the Iraq War that was accuracy? The utter glee with which they covered the gulf war? The New York Times, among others, basically dripping with racist lies about the "crack epidemic"? Etc...
Seems to me that what you call accurate is better described as the corporate interpretation of the news. Accuracy has never been the chief concern.
I don’t remember any glee in the press on the Iraq war (maybe from Fox, idk, I’ve never watched them much). As for the crack epidemic, that has more to do with the CIA and racism in society at large than it does bias in the media.
Your contention that all the media outlets are controlled by corporate interests and that none of it is accurate is a biased and pessimistic take. I realize a lot of people on Lemmy are anti-capitalist, but you let it skew your vision of reality too much.
Probably because you just ate it up and never thought about it again. Why would you remember it as anything but "truth" i.e. Iraq was involved in 9/11, Saddam Hussein had WMDs, we were being cheered as liberators by the Iraqi people, the Dixie Chicks were traitors and Jessica Lynch was was getting gang raped the whole time she was a POW. Because that was what was being reported in the US media at that time.
The Gulf War was before Fox was founded. However there absolutely was glee in its coverage by American media.
I strongly deny your assertion that the way the so called crack epidemic was reported on came entirely from the alphabet agencies. I suggest you do a little bit more reading about that, because the way the media in particularly legacy media covered, it was psychotically racist. Look no further than the myriad of new york times editorials about so called crack babies overrunning our hospitals. Now, corporate media doesn't want you to remember how they reported on it, just like they don't want you to remember that when people did start reporting on the cia's complicity it was the ny times and the LA Times in particular who led the attacks on the reporters.
Major media outlets are controlled by corporations, they often are major corporations. This is an indisputable fact. One that absolutely colours, how all media is covered in our nation. It has always been thus. Though please note I never said none of it was accurate. I said it was incredibly biased toward corporate interests. Something nobody could argue against while maintaining any shred of reasonableness.
You don't remember how the media directly aided the Bush administration's lies to justify the Iraq War?