Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rather Biased

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Rather Biased

    In the "Ann Coulter calls Helen Thomas and old Arab" thread, it was stated by a poster that the mainstream media is conservatively biased, then updated to say that it was not necessarily conservatively biased, but pro-administration.

    I called BS and was immediately assailed with the standard, "What about Fox News" retort. As if the emergence of a single News Network that doesn't read the New York Times to determine what and how to report is evidence that the entire mainstream media licks George Bush's shoes.

    Dan Rather for many years was the epitome of respected newsmen. His bias is not only obvious, but expected. This bias exists throughout major news media.

    Following are some examples of Dan's bias from the Media Research Center:

    So while Clinton was fulfilling a campaign promise, Bush was only pandering to the extreme right wing. Some of you will read this and say, "yeah, so where's the bias?" and I will laugh at you.

    This next one is a little more subtle:

    Feel free to read more at: http://www.mediaresearch.org/profile...topic.asp#gore
    People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

    #2
    Originally posted by Leodom
    I called BS and was immediately assailed with the standard, "What about Fox News" retort. As if the emergence of a single News Network that doesn't read the New York Times to determine what and how to report is evidence that the entire mainstream media licks George Bush's shoes.
    Debunking conservative bias by asserting liberal bias and Fox News being centrist? I LOL at you, sir.
    Originally posted by The Wastrel
    I think the forum's traditionally light-handed approach to moderation has become untenable.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Shuma-Gorath
      Debunking conservative bias by asserting liberal bias and Fox News being centrist? I LOL at you, sir.

      :BangHead:

      I either mis-read your post, or over-estimated your intelligence.

      I believe that Conservative bias and Liberal bias are mutually exclusive. Debunking Conservative bias by asserting Liberal bias makes sense, especially when examples can be shown.

      Please provide examples proving Fox News' non-centrist position that you assert. I realize that many believe that if you say a thing often enough, people will start to believe it. Try it on someone else, I'm not buying it.
      People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

      Comment


        #4
        bias exists on both sides ...

        the problem is that liberals believe the media is against them .... and the conservatives the same thing ...

        there is actually very little middle ground ... people simply no longer listen to things they dont want to hear ...

        civil discussion turn into the verbal equivalent of WWF Smackdowns ...
        totoro-san ... world sushi munching champion ...

        Comment


          #5
          You are correct. With the rise of so many different ways to obtain information, we are no longer beholden to the big 3 networks for news. There is such a wide variety that people will pick and choose where they gather their news. As such, they become more jaded about anything that doesn't match what they choose.
          People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

          Comment


            #6
            http://www.oreilly-sucks.com/foxbias.htmhttp://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html
            "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Leodom
              I believe that Conservative bias and Liberal bias are mutually exclusive. Debunking Conservative bias by asserting Liberal bias makes sense, especially when examples can be shown.
              Your assertion is "they all report what NYT tells them to" whereas people gave you examples that suggest Fox News reports what the political right-wing tells them to. How does that constitute "debunking"?
              Originally posted by The Wastrel
              I think the forum's traditionally light-handed approach to moderation has become untenable.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Leodom
                You are correct. With the rise of so many different ways to obtain information, we are no longer beholden to the big 3 networks for news. There is such a wide variety that people will pick and choose where they gather their news. As such, they become more jaded about anything that doesn't match what they choose.
                which of course brings up a very good point ... as "news" becomes for of a self serve option ... more and more people are helping themselves to sources which reinforce ... rather than challenges their views ...

                which kind of changes the notion that the internet encourages a diversity of viewpoints ... at least in a single person ... but rather encourages people to crusade and fight for their opinions which they believe in while disregarding those contrary ...
                totoro-san ... world sushi munching champion ...

                Comment


                  #9
                  O'Reilly is not Fox News.
                  Isn't Brit Hume the Fox News primetime anchor?

                  Do you have transcripts for these shows or is this a paraphrasing from someone with an axe to grind?

                  I can see a big difference between say "Saddam Hussein is planning to use flood water...." and "Saddam Hussein could use flood water...." What was the context? Was it a broadcast purporting to know Hussein's tactics and plans or was it a broadcast reflecting the speculations of dangers that the troops on the ground may face?

                  I believe that coalition forces did drop a MOAB on Saddam's bunker.
                  People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by nasty_totoro
                    which of course brings up a very good point ... as "news" becomes for of a self serve option ... more and more people are helping themselves to sources which reinforce ... rather than challenges their views ...

                    which kind of changes the notion that the internet encourages a diversity of viewpoints ... at least in a single person ... but rather encourages people to crusade and fight for their opinions which they believe in while disregarding those contrary ...
                    You are correct, which makes these types of forums, where beliefs are challenged, more important. I'll admit that I have been led to sites that I would not have found and viewpoints I would never have known had it not been for this forum. What is dis-heartening is when people take it seriously and personally attack or demean others for their views. I'm not innocent in this but I am definitely out-numbered on this forum.

                    "If two people always agree, one of them is unnecessary"
                    People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      the worst part ... by both sides ... is the ad hominem attacks ...

                      when neither side is able to convince the other of the rightfulness of their cause ... they usually pull out the personal attacks ... something you'd rarely do in real debates ... the wonders of the anonymous nature of the internet i guess ...

                      argument on the internet isn't about learning, right or wrong, facts or figures, challenging your preconceptions ... or any such bullshit ... it is simply about destroying the other person as effectively and messily as possible ... and getting the mob on your side ...

                      guess thats democracy and freedom at work ... =)
                      totoro-san ... world sushi munching champion ...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I forgot that you don't let facts bother your views, have a nice day Leo.
                        "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          touche'

                          you called it nasty_totoro
                          People of integrity expect to be believed. When they're not, they let time prove them right.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Afronaut said it best before:

                            The issues of liberal or conservative bias are not the most significant or consistent ones. The pro-establishment bias is far more prevalent, and in most lights, far more damaging for accuracy in the press.

                            If you're too vigilant in exposing shortcomings or inconsistencies in the federal govt, you can be shut out of press conferences and be unable to access people for your stories.

                            I've read Bernard Goldberg's book "Bias", where he tells of his own encounter with Dan Rather, and with what he claims to be a liberal bias in the media. One point that is substantiated by research is that journalists tend to hold more "liberal" positions on issues and vote more towards Democratic lines than the general population.

                            While one can read multiple sources of news to get a more comprehensive picture (for example, Israeli media has the center-right JPost and the left-center Ha'aretz) beyond partisan lines, it's much more rare to get news coverage outside of a pro-establishment bias.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Fox's founder and president, Roger Ailes, was for decades one of the savviest and most pugnacious Republican political operatives in Washington, a veteran of the Nixon and Reagan campaigns. Ailes is most famous for his role in crafting the elder Bush's media strategy in the bruising 1988 presidential race. With Ailes' help, Bush turned a double-digit deficit in the polls into a resounding win by targeting the GOP's base of white male voters in the South and West, using red-meat themes like Michael Dukakis' "card-carrying" membership in the ACLU, his laissez-faire attitude toward flag-burning, his alleged indifference to the pledge of allegiance--and, of course, paroled felon Willie Horton.
                              Fox daytime anchor David Asman is formerly of the right-wing Wall Street Journal editorial page and the conservative Manhattan Institute. The host of Fox News Sunday is Tony Snow, a conservative columnist and former chief speechwriter for the first Bush administration. Eric Breindel, previously the editorial-page editor of the right-wing New York Post, was senior vice president of Fox's parent company, News Corporation, until his death in 1998; Fox News Channel's senior vice president is John Moody, a long-time journalist known for his staunch conservative views.

                              Fox's managing editor is Brit Hume, a veteran TV journalist and contributor to the conservative American Spectator and Weekly Standard magazines. Its top-rated talkshow is hosted by Bill O'Reilly, a columnist for the conservative WorldNetDaily.com and a registered Republican (that is, until a week before the Washington Post published an article revealing his party registration--12/13/00).

                              The abundance of conservatives and Republicans at Fox News Channel does not seem to be a coincidence.
                              The most obvious sign of Fox's slant is its heavily right-leaning punditry. Each episode of Special Report with Brit Hume, for example, features a three-person panel of pundits who chat about the day's political news at the end of the show. The most frequent panelist is Fred Barnes, the evangelical Christian supply-sider who edits the Murdoch-owned Weekly Standard. He sits proudly on the rightward flank of the Republican party (and often scolds it for slouching leftwards).
                              http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067
                              "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire.

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X