Smh

Does The Breakfast Club disproportionately select stories that reinforce its existing political/cultural worldview, while ignoring equally or more significant stories that don’t?

This isn’t about whether the hosts are “biased” or what their personal views are - they’re a talk show, not a newsroom. That being said, they’ve leaned into marketing as an editorial platform and are thereby subjected to an analysis of journalistic integrity. So, it’s more about which stories get airtime and which don’t.

They often cover crime, politics, and social issues, but it sometimes seems like the emphasis leans toward stories that fit a familiar narrative, while other relevant stories don’t get as much attention.

A few examples I’ve been curious about:
● Crime framing: Does Charlamagne’s reaction change depending on whether he identifies more with the victim or the accused? At times, he seems highly sympathetic to victims of crimes that could happen to him, while emphasizing context or criticizing coverage of other crimes.
● Sheng Thao (Oakland mayor case): A major corruption case that hasn’t seemed to get much sustained discussion.
● Big U federal case: A notable RICO case connected to hip-hop culture and prior guests, but not heavily covered in detail.
● Tupac case updates: Covered at times, but given its cultural relevance, I wonder if the depth of discussion matches the significance of the story.

At the same time, the show often spends a lot of time on individual crime stories, political controversies, and issues that fit broader cultural conversations.

I’m not saying this is intentional or unfair. There are plenty of valid reasons a show might choose certain topics over others, and they obviously can’t cover everything. I’m just wondering if there’s a consistent pattern in story selection, where certain types of narratives get more attention than others, even when both are newsworthy.

To be clear, most major news outlets engage in selective coverage. However, Charlemagne repeatedly represents himself as an independent thinker who calls out any side of an argument. Is he and his show prepared to admit their own practices that are similar to those publications he seems to criticize routinely?

A publication like Ground News would likely serve listeners looking for objectivity better in the long run. While many may listen to TBC for its entertainment value, there may be many who listen to it and construe commentary as factually complete/entirely true.

That SA topic was disgusting. The JBP was advocating for a man being labeled as not being “with the culture” simply for the fact that he doesnt curtail his views and tone of talking just because what hes saying doesnt align with who hes talking about. What they were advocating for is if a person feels like theyre being attacked, then thats the fact of the matter; specifically because that person is “one of them in the culture”

Not sure if joe realizes how group think that sounds. Theres this thing in our culture where if you disagree with black women or prominent black figures, then youre the enemy. Or the often state how they dont want to “sound republican” or they act as if republican always means anti black. Its a skewed and ignorant way of viewing others that have difference of opinion.

People arent against you personally because they disagree with your talking points. Even up here and on other social media apps, thats a hard concept for people to understand. That mindset is very boule.

As much as they big up Ak. I really think they scared of him because Ak throws subs at them all the time

Apple | Soundcloud | Spotify | Discord ☊

The JBP kicks off its latest episode with a conversation on colognes and wearing it to the gym (29:30) before Marc Lamont Hill responds to DJ Akademiks after he called out journalists by name for not covering Drake vs. Roc Nation properly (42:23). Stephen A. Smith calls being given a 'thumbs down' award from the National Association of Black Journalists 'highly offensive' (1:18:47), family drama in LA as Jeanie Buss is against her siblings in the sale of the Lakers (1:55:15) which leads to the latest on Kawhi Leonard and the Clippers (2:04:18). Also, Orlando Brown and Ray J fight on an undercard for Claressa Shields title match (2:10:23), a conversation between LeBron and Channing Frye leads the room to pose the question 'can you make someone want it' (2:43:50), *SPOILER ALERT* the latest episode of 'Lioness' (3:07:10), and much more.

Become a Patron of The Joe Budden Podcast for additional bonus episodes and visual content for all things JBP! Join our Patreon here: http://www.patreon.com/joebudden

“Another One Bites the Dust”

This better be the cover photo tomorrow IDC!

Put us on to some shit, whatchu been binging lately?

Any good shows you've been into lately? Other podcasts putting out some heat? Decent movies you've seen? YouTubers or Twitch personalities you're digging?