# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Outfoxed • Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism • FULL DOCUMENTARY FILM exposes Fox News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stop Trusting Viral Videos - The Atlantic - Medium

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stop Trusting Viral Videos. A controversial video of Catholic students clashing with American Indians appeared to tell a simple truth. A second video called that...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
AllSides Headline Roundups™ bring you top news stories from the left, center and right of the political spectrum - side-by-side so you can see the full picture.

We rotate the order of headlines to avoid biasing our coverage in favor of the left, which otherwise would always be listed first.

Learn how AllSides provides balanced news

MSNBC (Left bias) announced it's canceling opinion commentator Mehdi Hasan's Sunday night show on Thursday, drawing opinions from journalists and media outlets. For Context: Hasan is known...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AllSides | Balanced news via media bias ratings for an unbiased news perspective

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We use media bias ratings to provide balanced news, perspectives and issues across the political spectrum. Unbiased news coverage doesn't exist - there is no such thing as unbiased news or t

# data[].attributes.body
# me too
look at the medium as well as the message

# data[].attributes.body
You can look at these from different cultural and political perspectives

# data[].attributes.body
Think of them as Texts; i.e., words and visuals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Actual News Headlines Vs. Fox News Headlines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fox News cited each of these "actual news headlines" as their "source." Fair and balanced. Yup.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two television ads, one featuring new dads bungling comically while looking after their babies and the other a woman sitting next to a pram, have become the first to be banned under new rules designed to reduce gender stereotyping.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) banned the ads for Philadelphia cream cheese and Volkswagen, following complaints from the public that they perpetuated harmful stereotypes.

The new rules, introduced at the beginning of the year, ban the depiction of men and women engaged in gender-stereotypical activities to help stop "limiting how people see themselves and how others see them and the life decisions they take".

In the ad for Philadelphia, the Mondelez-owned cream cheese brand, two new dads were shown eating lunch at a restaurant where food circulated on a conveyor belt. While chatting they accidentally find their babies are whisked away on it. "Let's not tell mum," one of them says.

Complainants said the tongue-in-cheek ad perpetuated a harmful stereotype suggesting men were incapable of caring for children and would put them at risk as a result of their incompetence.

Mondelez told the ASA it was stuck in a no-win situation, having specifically chosen two dads to avoid depicting the stereotypical image of showing two new mums handling all the childcare responsibilities.

The ASA banned the ad, saying it reinforced the idea that men were ineffective childcarers.

The ad for Volkswagen's electric eGolf vehicle showed a series of scenes including a man and a woman in a tent on a sheer cliff face, two male astronauts, a male para-athlete and a woman sitting on a bench next to a pram. Text stated: "When we learn to adapt we can achieve anything."

Complainants said the ad showed men engaged in adventurous activities, that unlike her male counterpart, the female rock climber was "passive" because she was asleep, and that the woman with the pram was depicted in a stereotypical care-giving role.

Volkswagen said its ad was not sexist and that caring for a newborn was a life-changing experience about adaptation, regardless of the gender of the parent depicted.

The ASA, however, "concluded that the ad presented gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm".

Critics said the new rules were too draconian and that banning even the most innocuous use of gender stereotypes showed the watchdog had gone too far.

"It is concerning to see the ASA take on the role of the morality police," said Geraint Lloyd-Taylor, an advertising expert at the law firm Lewis Silkin. "It has let its zeal to enforce the new rules override its common sense in this first batch of rulings.

"The ASA seems to be out of sync with society in general. As it stands, the ASA's definition of 'harm' is unworkable and urgently needs to be clarified. I hope that these advertisers seek an independent review of the latest decisions."

Clearcast, the body responsible for vetting ads before they are broadcast, also expressed its frustration at the decisions. "We are naturally disappointed," it said. "The ASA's interpretation of the ads against the new rule and guidance goes further than we anticipated and has implications for a wide range of ads."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
First ads banned for contravening UK gender stereotyping rules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two television ads, one featuring new dads bungling comically while looking after their babies and the other a woman sitting next to a pram, have become the first to be banned under new rules designed to reduce gender stereotyping.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
English Translation to Dolce&Gabbana All 3 DELETED Controversial Ads for The Great Show

# data[].attributes.body
1. How is the Chinese model presented in this advertisement? Why does it matter? Write about her actions, appearance, facial expressions, and more.

2. What are the various ways in which D&G depict China and Chinese people? Why does it matter?

3. What are the various objects and/or symbols used to depict Chinese culture and why?

4. How is Italian culture presented here and why?

5. Discuss the impact and effect of the sounds at the start of the advertisement? What are they and why are they used?

6. There is a male voice off-stage (not present). Why and what effect does it have on the audience?

7. What words and phrases are used to describe the pizza? What connotations do they have and why?

8. What words and phrases are used to describe the chopsticks? What connotations do they have and why?

9. Noodles and pasta are very similar yet they are depicted as quite different in the 3rd video. How so and why?

10. Overall, how do the advertisements represent an aspect of the culture of a particular place and group of people?

from inthinkingib

# data[].attributes.body
1. Examine different forms of communication within the media:
news coverage, editorials, blogs, advertising...etc.
2. Show an awareness of the potential for educational, political or ideological influence of the
media: propoganda, censorship, satire...etc.
3. Show the way mass media use language and image to inform, persuade or entertain: identify audiences, recognize style, register, tone, use of rhetoric, bias, layout and use of images...etc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Example of Media Bias:

President Trump received 92% bad press, vs. just 8% good press on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening news shows in the month of September, according to a study by MRC news analysts.

Since Inauguration Day (January 20), the broadcast networks have tilted 90% anti-Trump, vs. 10% pro-Trump, not counting partisan statements or neutral/informational coverage. (See our methodology statement at the bottom of this article for details.) Regardless of the topic, there has been little variation in the negative tone of coverage each month.

September's news coverage focused on six big topics:

the showdown with North Korea

immigration policy (the DREAMers and border wall)

the President's response to three major hurricanes

President Trump's criticism of NFL players who kneel during the National Anthem

the latest effort to repeal ObamaCare

the controversy over several cabinet officers using expensive private jets

These six topics accounted for two-thirds of the administration's TV news reports in September. While the North Korea crisis received the most attention, this was also the topic with the fewest evaluative comments - just 20 during nearly an hour of coverage - which translates into a large percentage of neutral coverage.

The networks focused most of their evaluative coverage on immigration, the NFL and the private jet flights of cabinet officials (especially Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, who resigned September 29).

Not surprisingly, 100% of the coverage of the expensive jet flights by Cabinet officials was negative.

Nearly all (96%) of the coverage of the administration's immigration policy was negative. On September 5, for example, CBS Evening News anchor Anthony Mason framed the President's decision to end the Obama-era DACA program as "a dream lost for thousands of undocumented immigrants," while a subsequent story by correspondent John Blackstone focused only on the negative reaction of those who benefited from the policy.

"In Phoenix, DACA recipients and their families listened to Attorney General Sessions' announcement and shed tears," Blackstone said. Over on ABC that same night, correspondent Cecilia Vega also attempted to push viewers' emotional buttons - "DREAMers like Jesus Conteras are terrified" - while NBC's Kristen Welker said "immigration advocates say his move to end DACA is cold-hearted."

The networks framed the President's tweets about the NFL as divisive: ABC weekend anchor Tom Llamas on September 24 argued that "outrage" was "building over the President's heated comments" as correspondent Ryan Smith saw "growing backlash across the country."

The next night, CBS correspondent Dean Reynolds visited a cafeteria where all of the patrons he showcased criticized the President, including one woman who declared: "He has a lot of supporters that's probably cut from the same cloth that he is: angry, bitter, racist, ignorant."

But the next night, correspondent Jim Axelrod found fans who agreed with the President, including one Steelers' fan who "is upset with his team for what he sees as caving to political correctness."

A CNN poll taken in late September found more Americans (49%) said players who knelt during the National Anthem were doing the wrong thing, compared to 43% who said it was the right thing. Yet broadcast evening news coverage of this topic was slanted about four-to-one against the President, with 59 comments criticizing him (81%) vs. 14 in support (19%).

One other note from this month's study: by September 30, Trump's response to Hurricane Maria had already drawn nearly six times more coverage than his response to Hurricane Irma in Florida - nearly 27 minutes vs. 4 minutes, 37 seconds, with about 3 minutes spent on August's Hurricane Harvey. (Please note: These figures do not include all network coverage of these storms, only the coverage focused on the administration's response.)

And, while there were few evaluative comments about Trump's response to Irma (just four, three of which were positive), the networks transmitted 29 negative statements about his response to Maria, vs. just 2 positive comments (yielding a 94% bad press score).

Methodology: Our measure of spin was designed to isolate the networks' own slant, not the back-and-forth of partisan politics. Thus, our analysts ignored soundbites which merely showcased the traditional party line (Republicans supporting Trump, Democrats criticizing him), and instead tallied evaluative statements which imparted a clear positive or negative tone to the story, such as statements from experts presented as non-partisan, voters, or opinionated statements from the networks' own reporters. Using these criteria, MRC analysts tallied 393 evaluative statements about the Trump administration in June, July and August, of which 361 (92%) were negative vs. 32 (8%) which were positive. Since Trump took office on January 20, there have been 4,537 such evaluative statements, of which 4,073 (90%) have been negative, vs. 464 (10%) which have been positive.

(Adapted from a report by Rich Noyes and Mike Ciandella, Oct. 5, 2017, MRC .org)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Example of Media Bias: President Trump received 92% bad press, vs. just 8% good press on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening news shows in the month of September, according to a study by MRC news analysts. Since Inauguration Day (January 20), the broadcast networks have tilted 90% anti-Trump, vs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The shift is affecting children's lives. Researchers have consistently found that children born outside marriage face elevated risks of falling into poverty, failing in school or suffering emotional and behavioral problems.

The forces rearranging the family are as diverse as globalization and the pill. Liberal analysts argue that shrinking paychecks have thinned the ranks of marriageable men, while conservatives often say that the sexual revolution reduced the incentive to wed and that safety net programs discourage marriage.

Here in Lorain, a blue-collar town west of Cleveland where the decline of the married two-parent family has been especially steep, dozens of interviews with young parents suggest that both sides have a point.

Over the past generation, Lorain lost most of two steel mills, a shipyard and a Ford factory, diminishing the supply of jobs that let blue-collar workers raise middle-class families. More women went to work, making marriage less of a financial necessity for them. Living together became routine, and single motherhood lost the stigma that once sent couples rushing to the altar. Women here often describe marriage as a sign of having arrived rather than a way to get there.

Meanwhile, children happen.

Amber Strader, 27, was in an on-and-off relationship with a clerk at Sears a few years ago when she found herself pregnant. A former nursing student who now tends bar, Ms. Strader said her boyfriend was so dependent that she had to buy his cigarettes. Marrying him never entered her mind. "It was like living with another kid," she said.

When a second child, with a new boyfriend, followed three years later - her birth control failed, she said - her boyfriend, a part-time house painter, was reluctant to wed.

Ms. Strader likes the idea of marriage; she keeps her parents' wedding photo on her kitchen wall and says her boyfriend is a good father. But for now marriage is beyond her reach.

"I'd like to do it, but I just don't see it happening right now," she said. "Most of my friends say it's just a piece of paper, and it doesn't work out anyway."

The recent rise in single motherhood has set off few alarms, unlike in past eras. When Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then a top Labor Department official and later a United States senator from New York, reported in 1965 that a quarter of black children were born outside marriage - and warned of a "tangle of pathology" - he set off a bitter debate.

By the mid-1990s, such figures looked quaint: a third of Americans were born outside marriage. Congress, largely blaming welfare, imposed tough restrictions. Now the figure is 41 percent - and 53 percent for children born to women under 30, according to Child Trends, which analyzed 2009 data from the National Center for Health Statistics.

Still, the issue received little attention until the publication last month of "Coming Apart," a book by Charles Murray, a longtime critic of non-marital births.

Large racial differences remain: 73 percent of black children are born outside marriage, compared with 53 percent of Latinos and 29 percent of whites. And educational differences are growing. About 92 percent of college-educated women are married when they give birth, compared with 62 percent of women with some post-secondary schooling and 43 percent of women with a high school diploma or less, according to Child Trends.

Almost all of the rise in nonmarital births has occurred among couples living together. While in some countries such relationships endure at rates that resemble marriages, in the United States they are more than twice as likely to dissolve than marriages. In a summary of research, Pamela Smock and Fiona Rose Greenland, both of the University of Michigan, reported that two-thirds of couples living together split up by the time their child turned 10.

In Lorain as elsewhere, explanations for marital decline start with home economics: men are worth less than they used to be. Among men with some college but no degrees, earnings have fallen 8 percent in the past 30 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the earnings of their female counterparts have risen by 8 percent.

"Women used to rely on men, but we don't need to anymore," said Teresa Fragoso, 25, a single mother in Lorain. "We support ourselves. We support our kids."

Fifty years ago, researchers have found, as many as a third of American marriages were precipitated by a pregnancy, with couples marrying to maintain respectability. Ms. Strader's mother was among them.

Today, neither of Ms. Strader's pregnancies left her thinking she should marry to avoid stigma. Like other women interviewed here, she described her children as largely unplanned, a byproduct of uncommitted relationships.

Some unwed mothers cite the failures of their parents' marriages as reasons to wait. Brittany Kidd was 13 when her father ran off with one of her mother's friends, plunging her mother into depression and leaving the family financially unstable.

"Our family life was pretty perfect: a nice house, two cars, a dog and a cat," she said. "That stability just got knocked out like a window; it shattered."

Ms. Kidd, 21, said she could not imagine marrying her son's father, even though she loves him. "I don't want to wind up like my mom," she said.

Others noted that if they married, their official household income would rise, which could cost them government benefits like food stamps and child care. W. Bradford Wilcox, a sociologist at the University of Virginia, said other government policies, like no-fault divorce, signaled that "marriage is not as fundamental to society" as it once was.

Even as many Americans withdraw from marriage, researchers say, they expect more from it: emotional fulfillment as opposed merely to practical support. "Family life is no longer about playing the social role of father or husband or wife, it's more about individual satisfaction and self-development," said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University.

Money helps explain why well-educated Americans still marry at high rates: they can offer each other more financial support, and hire others to do chores that prompt conflict. But some researchers argue that educated men have also been quicker than their blue-collar peers to give women equal authority. "They are more willing to play the partner role," said Sara McLanahan, a Princeton sociologist.

Reviewing the academic literature, Susan L. Brown of Bowling Green State University recently found that children born to married couples, on average, "experience better education, social, cognitive and behavioral outcomes."

Lisa Mercado, an unmarried mother in Lorain, would not be surprised by that. Between nursing classes and an all-night job at a gas station, she rarely sees her 6-year-old daughter, who is left with a rotating cast of relatives. The girl's father has other children and rarely lends a hand.

"I want to do things with her, but I end up falling asleep," Ms. Mercado said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The shift is affecting children's lives. Researchers have consistently found that children born outside marriage face elevated risks of falling into poverty, failing in school or suffering emotional and behavioral problems. The forces rearranging the family are as diverse as globalization and the pill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The New York Times may as well have headlined its most emailed piece this weekend: Single Mothers Take Over the World. The point of the piece, with its peculiar moral undertone, was that the majority of babies born to women under 30 in this country are now born to single mothers, and in Lorain, Ohio, that number has climbed as high as 63 percent.

Conservatives will no doubt be elaborately hysterical over the breakdown of morals among the women of Lorain, but they will be missing the major point, which is that however one feels about it, the facts of American family life no longer match its prevailing fantasies. For those who have associated single motherhood with the poor and uneducated, and increasingly, with the urban very-educated (see the New York Times piece, the same day, on Casey Greenfield) they now have to confront the changing demographics of the vast American middle. No matter how one sees this development, and as a single mother myself I have my own views, one has to recognize that marriage is very rapidly becoming only one way to raise children. (And other countries are obviously way ahead of the United States in incorporating a rational recognition of the vicissitudes of love, and the varieties of family life, into cultural attitudes toward unmarried parents.)

One of the ways condescension makes its way into a neutral seeming New York Times story is the note the reporter chooses to end the piece on. Both of the two pieces on the single mothers of Lorain, Ohio, this weekend end with implicit judgments, with anecdotes that telegraph the unhealthiness of this new state of affairs, or whisper to the reader: "How do these women think they can get away with it?"

One ends with a freighted quote from a single mother saying she would like to do more with her daughter. (Actually it claims she would agree with a professor from Bowling Green State University's vague conclusion that children born to married parents "experience better education, social, cognitive and behavioral outcomes") Apparently she would agree with this professor because she would like to do more with her 6-year-old, but she often falls asleep after working full time and taking nursing classes. As if that feeling of wishing you could spend more or better time with your child is unknown to the married working mother, who of course never feels that she is too tired or distracted to do something she wanted to do with her 6-year-old, and anyway has a roast chicken in the oven, and a homemade pie cooling on the windowsill.

The Times reporters' analysis of the economics and sociology of Lorain is punctuated by a pat "meanwhile, children happen" that is perhaps not quite as respectful as it could be of the fact that these independent-minded, apparently hard-working women are making decisions and forging families, after thinking clearly about their situation. One of the mothers quoted in the pieces says that to her and her friends "marriage is just a piece of paper." Meaning of course that it does not ensure eternal love, or even eternal security, acknowledging, perhaps, that the father in the home is not necessarily more happily or fruitfully involved than the father outside of the home. Others describe the economic realities of not needing a man to support children, feeling the men around are too childish, or criminal, or jobless to help much, and not feeling a stigma about having a child outside of marriage. (By the time one finishes these strangely inflected articles, they seem to be arguing that these women should feel a stigma about having children out of wedlock.)

Of course, one of the reasons children born outside of marriage suffer is the culturally ubiquitous idea that there is something wrong or abnormal about their situation. Once it becomes clear that there is, at least, nothing abnormal about their situation, i.e. when this 53 percent of babies born to women under 30 come of age in the majority, the psychological landscape, at least, will be vastly transformed.

Even people who are certain that the children of single mothers are always and forever doomed to a compromised existence, are going to have to await more information about a world in which these kids are not considered illegitimate or unconventional or outsiders, where the sheer number of them redefines and refreshes our ideas of family.

In fact, the tacit judgment of the New York Times-style liberal is in many ways more pernicious than the overt moralizing of conservatives on the downfall of family and marriage. It is easy to dismiss the Santorum faction for its cartoonishly old-fashioned view of extramarital sex, and this group is at least forthright about its view, whereas the subtle psychologizing put-down of the New York Times-style liberal, the slight hint of self-congratulation that they are not a single mother in Lorain, Ohio, bringing their son to the bar where they work, is more poisonous for its pretense of fairness and open-mindedness.

This is a new world, and there are no studies or professors from Bowling Green State University, or subtly condescending New York Times reporting, that can tell us what it will be like for these children to live in it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The New York Times may as well have headlined its most emailed piece this weekend: Single Mothers Take Over the World. The point of the piece, with...