Generally speaking, I consider myself to be a moderately politically conscious person–meaning, I attempt to keep up with current events (in particular, those regarding government policy and foreign affairs) but do not regularly seek out updates. Instead, I rely on a few news platforms to keep me up to speed, and keep myself informed in that way. This is where I got my news for the week of 2/4/18:
- Sunday: nowhere (sorry)
- Monday: Exposé from the New Yorker. Read about the opioid crisis.
- Tuesday: Article in The New York Times. Read a summary of the Republican and Democrat memos regarding Republican claim that federal officials spied on a Trump campaign official.
- Wednesday: Various news links on Twitter (NBC, CNN). Read about Nancy Pelosi’s 8-hour stand in support of Dreamers.
- Thursday: Article in The New York Times. Read about the bipartisan budget deal and what it contains.
- Friday: News links off of Facebook. Read about the upcoming Olympics.
- Saturday: Youtube. Watched Kylie’s pregnancy documentary.
Because I don’t have cable at school, I generally rely on sites like Twitter or Facebook to connect with with major news outlets. While I think this still allows me to see some coverage of events, I know that sites like these (especially Facebook) often only promote stories that have gone viral, or are getting a lot of attention. As a result, I often only see the most sensational stories and miss many others. In addition, while I think both CNN NBC are generally unbiased, social media sites often show you users’ reactions to the stories covered (including politicians’). Most of the reactions I see to public policy are negative, since most of the popular tweets are pretty liberal in their content. I think that’s an interesting phenomenon, because it shapes the reader’s opinion about the article or event even before they’ve read it.
In addition, I keep up with the New Yorker and The New York Times pretty regularly. I chose these sources both because I consider them to be trustworthy and reliable, and because I really like the way they’re written. Both outlets have columns dedicated to creative writing (like the Times’ Modern Love column) which I enjoy reading, and that’s what originally drew me to them. Furthermore, I know that both of these sources are slightly left-leaning, which aligns with my political stance and is perhaps another reason that I am drawn to them. However, I do wonder whether or not my view of these sites as “objective” stems from active analysis of their content or rather a general agreement with the political stance they usually take. I feel like for me to gain a better understanding of multiple viewpoints, I should start paying attention to the way various outlets report news, and if they are truly covering both sides equally.
Media and Politics at SU 