Billionaire Mark Cuban took to Twitter to show just how little grasp he has on the current state of journalism in America, albeit in a well-intended tweet on the need for honest, fact-based news to reduce partisanship in the country.
The owner of the NBA Dallas Mavericks announced he would vote for any politician who would back a fact-checking requirement for news networks, the problem being who is checking the facts, as established fact-checking services almost exclusively lean left.
And when it comes to controlling speech, there’s that document known as the U.S. Constitution.
Cuban tweeted: “Any politician that says they will push for a law that says no tv or streaming network can brand,market or name themselves a News Network unless the 6 most viewed hours of every night is >80% fact checked news and opinion is clearly labeled as opinion only, gets my vote.”
“IMO, It would reduce the partisanship in this country almost overnight,” he said in a follow-up tweet.
IMO, It would reduce the partisanship in this country almost overnight
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) November 4, 2019
Of course, this does nothing to address one of the biggest biases of all, that being the stories that are NOT reported on.
Cuban stood by his suggestion though, even responding to inquires, such as would he want government deciding what the truth is?
His response was to compare journalism to the standard of categorizing books, before gong off in a whole different direction about politicians lying in political ads.
We do it with other products. You can’t say a fiction book is non fiction. And only politicians get to lie in ads.
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) November 4, 2019
He also compared it to mislabeling products when asked about opening a can of worms.
I have. And I know what it did. Do you ? We already have laws saying you can’t mislabel products. I’m not saying a network can’t air whatever they want. Just that they have to be honest about what they are airing.
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) November 4, 2019
Cuban was less interested in naming offenders, though the list of is fairly compact.
I don’t care which is which. I think they all should label news as news and opinion as opinion. On @cnbc any commentator has to reveal stock positions and affiliations. So do researchers and scientists. Should be the same for news.
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) November 4, 2019
In a show of how uninformed he really is, Cuban suggested “peer review” as a means to ensure honest reporting.
Seriously.
“News reporters will hold each other accountable,” he tweeted. “Sure there will be misses and issues, but it works fairly well in other originated content industries and would certainly be an improvement over now and in the case of news, reporters accuracy is career impacting.”
Peer review ? News reporters will hold each other accountable. Sure there will be misses and issues ,but it works fairly well in other originated content industries and would certainly be an improvement over now and In the case of news, reporters accuracy is career impacting
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) November 4, 2019
Perhaps we can get CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta to head up that endeavor.
On that note, the Center for Public Integrity reported that in the 2016 general election campaign, 96 percent of donations from journalists went to the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton.
The Media Research Center said that between 2008 and 2016, 94 percent of donors affiliated with ABC News, NBC News, CBS News, the New York Times, and the Washington Post contributed to Democrats.
Despite its often toxic nature, social media actually produced some sound ideas on the matter. Here’s a sampling of responses from Twitter:
I on the other hand will vote for people who support citizens making their own decisions
— Tom Davis (@tomarama) November 4, 2019
Because we aren’t adults and can’t find out for ourselves. Better check out how fascism begins it’s work, Mark. It starts with weaponizing the arts and media with a slant to their views. Your brand of politician smells like that!
— judy f (@Genesis4913) November 4, 2019
All in on China apparently @mcuban
— Peter Moody (@pmoodyaz) November 4, 2019
This is a bad idea. Fact checkers are in many ways biased and that already has been seen on Facebook.
— Key Influencer Dinner Club (@CryptoDinner) November 4, 2019
Unfortunately, that would only address one or two types of bias. Story selection is an obvious one that can’t be nixed by fact checkers. Commercial bias is another.
— Rob Wood (@RobWoodWasHere) November 4, 2019
You could start such a network and be an example instead.
— Jeremy Cady (@jeremycady) November 4, 2019
Why do people think is government’s responsibility to tell people what they can or cannot say? It’s not the job of congress or the president to “reduce partisanship” in the country. They should work on reducing partisanship in government. THAT’S their job and responsibility.
— Jeff Stockwell (@stockwell) November 4, 2019
People can’t even agree on what’s fact these days.
— Ryan (@ryano3232_ryan) November 4, 2019
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
[email protected]
The longest-tenured writer at BizPac Review, Tom grew up in Maryland before moving to Central Florida as a young teen. It is in the Sunshine State that he honed both his passion for politics and his writing skills.
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
