| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed, Oct 29 2008, 6:21 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Obama Redistribution of Wealth tape uncovered |
 |
|
| Guest wrote: | | Are you serious in saying CNN, CBS, NBC (part of MSNBC family), LA Times, NY Times don't have a liberal bias? I'm a Democrat and even I can see the bias. Heck, even our own Cranbury Press is biased. Now, that being said I enjoy it as such as it makes my mornings easier to read and breakfast easier digest. |
Yes, that is what I am saying. Where's your science to prove otherwise?
I don't even agree about the Cranbury Press. I am not a fan of the Press and their official editorial positions and columns by Hank are clearly very far to the left, no doubt. But I don't see bias in their general news coverage. I'd be curious for you to cite examples where their news articles, not their editorials, bias toward the left?
The TV news shows often blur the line between their hard news segments and their "commentary" shows so I can see the confusion. Similarly, the lesser NY dailies have a strong bias by design -- one strongly right (also owned by Rupert) and the other strongly left. But papers like the Times (LA and NY) and channels like CNN (when they are doing the straight news and not commentary shows) are pretty even and certainly try to be. BTW, CNN's commentary shows have some pretty die hard righties, like Glen Beck. The mistake is when one blurs the line between the commentary shows (which are plentiful on these TV news channels) and the straight news, like MSNBC did when they put Oberman on election coverage for example. But CNN, NBC, CBS and ABS have not done that. I noticed you left the WSJ out of your list of biased sources. That's interesting. I suppose you consider that non-biased? Interesting because many liberals consider it biased to the right, and it has historically editorialized in favor of the right (and Rupert owns it too now). But I would say it is non-biased as much as the NYT is. Both cover the news fairly and credibly, with editorial leanings kept distinctly separate.
This has been studied in dozens of ways, both qualitatively and quantitatively. There are PhD’s from institutions like the Annenberg School that have made entire careers on the subject of media bias. The net result is these major media outlets are for the most part not distinctly bias with the news. 15 years ago you could say that almost without exception. Since the success of Fox News, the other channels have copied it (sometimes in intentional contrast) with more commentary shows. But that hasn’t changed their straight news. I presume your opinion is mostly anecdotal. But the problem is studies show everyone perceives bias when it is not consistent with their own opinions. People often also misinterpret news as implicitly endorsing the views they cover. If a channel gives airtime to a liberal saying something they find outrageous, even if the reporters and anchors do and say nothing to endorse it, they often perceive that they are biased. Interestingly the studies counter this. People will say “they give more time to liberal speakers or interviews” then others will sya the opposite. Then they will catalogue and annotate all the time and find its actually pretty even. Most of these news organizations actually have people on staff whose job is to actively make sure they try to give equal time in fact. The other interesting phenomenon is people will selectively only recall the news coverage that is counter to their views in forming their opinion, much as my young son will perceive that “you always take her side” [referring to his sister] and really believe it, despite it being far from true. If the media is devoting much coverage to the Sarah Palin designer clothes issue, people will call the media outlets bias, ignoring that they spent even more time covering the Rev. Wright issue. Etc.
Speaking of Wright, why is it that the media spent months on this – literally thousands of TV hours and pages and pages of articles – but very little on Palin’s equally controversial, reactionary spiritual leader, who claims anyone who doesn’t support Bush is going to Hell and that God commanded us to go to war in Iraq, etc.? Is this bias against liberals by CNN, NYT, etc? Nope. But it wasn’t worked up as a story. Unlike with Wright, the Obama campaign didn’t play it up and push it into big media coverage. The fact is, the major news outlets are usually reactionary, not the other way around. They don’t create the news or set the agenda, they react to what rises to the top based on a combo of public interest and what opinion makers like politicians push on them. Every now and then you get the News leading an issue, the way the Times recently did in uncovering the corruption in disability benefits at the LIRR. But this is the exception.
Anyway, I doubt I’ve changed anyone’s mind. Its an aspect of psychology that most people will be fixed in their beliefs and interpret everything around them with a bias based on those beliefs. So it is human nature to presume and see a media bias whether it is there or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
publius
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Nov 11 2008, 6:01 pm EST Post subject: Re: Obama Redistribution of Wealth tape uncovered |
|
|
Ah.........yes, a republican's view of wealth redistribution is to give MORE money to those who already have it, THEN, in order to make up for the shortfall, raise taxes at THE BACK END (so, nobody will notice, of course) on the lower-to-middling classes, (cuz, they don't really need money anyway) THEN lose it all on this Monopoly game called Wall Street, then beg the lower-to-middling classes for a handout, (cuz, they can't be allowed to go out of business, the poor dears) then accuse the incoming president of being a Socialist!
See how it all works now, kiddies?
It's all a scam by the elites to screw us all out of our own money!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Nov 11 2008, 6:52 pm EST Post subject: Re: Obama Redistribution of Wealth tape uncovered |
|
|
I agree it's a scam, and that it's being done by the elites OF BOTH PARTIES!!
But then, who's to blame, since we sent THE SAME PEOPLE back to the Congress.
Shame on us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
publius
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Nov 15 2008, 8:00 pm EST Post subject: Re: Obama Redistribution of Wealth tape uncovered |
|
|
HMMMMMMMMM..........
Seems to me that thy gop doth protest too much.
republicans redistribute wealth as well. They just take it from the lower classes and push it upward! Then the corporations get a p.o. box in Bermuda, Cayman Islands, and somewhere else nice and sunny, and pay NO taxes. The shortfall must be made up somewhere. Therefore the middle-class shall eat cake and pay the difference!
The gop has been sucking at the public teat for a while now. We, The People, just want to spend money on OURSELVES. Not fork it over to those who already have theirs. You see. We have roads, bridges, schools, the military to pay for. Oh Yes, the gop LOVES the military. In words, but not in deeds. They talk a good game, and the pliant, docile sheep who vote for them all bleat out in agreement with them. But, then, the politicians vote AGAINST most anything that DOES INDEED SUPPORT THE TROOPS. Look at their records...........NOT at what they say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's too damn easy to plaster your gas-guzzling suv with "Support the Troops" stickers. But, Oh so much more difficult to understand that troops are dying so that you can fill up your suv with "cheap" gas!!!!!!!!
Wake up and smell the fumes, sheeple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
