Biased Kaiser News

[MedicareMillionair]

It is so disappointing that Americans are exposed to a constant barrage of biased news. Unfortunately the Kaiser Foundation which puts out a significant amount of news related to the health insurance industry is equally biased. I enjoy reading their material but always found they are pushing an agenda.

They are one of the most resourceful publications in our industry, with a list of credentialed contributors. This is not to take sides or oppose any viewpoint they have. It's just to accept that, like all other news we get today, it's not honest. If you take a look at their board of directors (google it), you'll be surprised to see the names you recognize there. We would be much better served by nonpolitical experts delivering what we hope would be factual information. I suppose there is no such this as nonpolitical any longer.

It's unfortunate that politics has inched its way into every nook and cranny of our lives. I would be interested in obtaining a list of (as unbiased as possible) online news resources for health insurance news. Your suggestions are appreciated.

 

[leevena]

Could you please provide examples?

 

[MedicareMillionair]

Could you please provide examples?

I'll give you two examples of politicians on their board of directors; Bill Frist - US Senator, Kathleen Sebelius - Former HHS Secretary. Some may say that its great to have politicians in these influential positions, I don't believe that's true.

As for stories, you'll have to look at that over a period of time. You'll see the bias.

 

[leevena]

As with any article, the author, or organization, does tend to have a particular viewpoint or agenda, I get that. But in your original post you charge Kaiser Foundation with releasing news that is not honest.

All I am asking is for a few examples, I am not accusing you of anything.

 

[MedicareMillionair]

Not honest, meaning using opinion or manipulation of data over a period of time to push an agenda. Lots of polling data and statistics interpreted to create a desired outcome. You'll have to analyze that for yourself. If you look at the politicians and institutional figures at the helm of this organization and don't understand that they are the same as the politicians and others that constantly lie to Americans every day, you'll not get this post at all.

 

[keith48]

They do provide a ton of great data and helpful information, but it is definitely slanted towards their political leanings. However, the days of just getting the news without any agenda driving it are behind us. This is the new norm.

 

[VolAgent]

They do provide a ton of great data and helpful information, but it is definitely slanted towards their political leanings. However, the days of just getting the news without any agenda driving it are behind us. This is the new norm.

Please. Bias has been a part of the media as long as it has existed. We just got lulled into believing the media was completely unbiased.

If you think it is bad now, you should research newspapers in the 1700 and 1800s.

 

[somarco]

Vol is right.

The Hearst and Pulitzer newspapers were in a "war" to amp up circulation in the late 1800's. They found that by publishing stories with tantalizing headlines (clickbait in today's terms) people would buy their papers. The stories themselves usually had some semblance of fact. Jack Nicholson had a line in one of his movies where he said he "always tells some version of the truth".

The lines between real reporting and social media have blurred. This is more than Uncle Walter failing to report the full story of the Viet Nam war because social media did not exist then.

In the last 2 national elections far too many folks under 40 claimed to get their news from Comedy Central. Many rely on Facebook and Twitter as news sources.

We live in an age where there is more accurate reporting by the National Enquirer and TMZ than traditional news sources.

And that is a real shame.

 

[leevena]

Vol is right.

The Hearst and Pulitzer newspapers were in a "war" to amp up circulation in the late 1800's. They found that by publishing stories with tantalizing headlines (clickbait in today's terms) people would buy their papers. The stories themselves usually had some semblance of fact. Jack Nicholson had a line in one of his movies where he said he "always tells some version of the truth".

The lines between real reporting and social media have blurred. This is more than Uncle Walter failing to report the full story of the Viet Nam war because social media did not exist then.

In the last 2 national elections far too many folks under 40 claimed to get their news from Comedy Central. Many rely on Facebook and Twitter as news sources.

We live in an age where there is more accurate reporting by the National Enquirer and TMZ than traditional news sources.

And that is a real shame.

I agree with this view, and with MedicareMillionaire view that articles, etc. can be slanted to a view point. All I asked was for him to back-up his accusation that KFF is not honest.

 

[VolAgent]

I agree with this view, and with MedicareMillionaire view that articles, etc. can be slanted to a view point. All I asked was for him to back-up his accusation that KFF is not honest.

Complete agreement here. Otherwise we are just throwing around accusations without even attempting to justify our position.