Because this is a topic-specific forum that aggregates stories from all over the country into one place. When viewed in context of all news stories from all networks in the nation, the ones we see here that are positive are still an extremely small amount.
Negative pieces also aggregate here but aside from rants aboout editorials I don't see those mentioned that often in threads either. There do tend to be other things going on in the world so i'm not so sure what is expected.
Negative pieces also aggregate here but aside from rants aboout editorials I don't see those mentioned that often in threads either. There do tend to be other things going on in the world so i'm not so sure what is expected.
Which part does the metanarrative get wrong; that guns are generally reported on negatively in the media, or more specifically that New York city media trends strongly anti-gun?
The metanarrative is the one that defines the media as being liberal due to the individual person's dissatisfaction with the information conveyed. If anything, the narrative regarding the presence of negative reporting in the media is subservient to that metanarrative.
Ragnar Danneskjold said:
Instead of talking around it, if you have something to postulate, you can come out and say it.
Are you attempting to claim the media does not have a bias against gun ownership?
There are 2 postulates in that statement:
1. The media coverage of negative gun pieces being collected here is infrequent, as are the positive gun pieces.
2. The relative infrequency of both negative and positive articles reflects their presence in context to all of the other topics for coverage.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.