Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing Â
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
â–ª
Cranbury School
â–ª
Cranbury Township
â–ª
Cranbury Library
â–ª
Cranbury.org
â–ª
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="Guest"][quote="NYT"]Then, while standing before a stately desk and an American flag, Mr. Obama, in a suit, says: “We’ve been talking about the same problems for decades and nothing is ever done to solve them. For the past 20 months, I’ve traveled the length of this country, and Michelle and I have met so many Americans who are looking for real and lasting change that makes a difference in their lives.”[/quote] I like Obama - great motivational speaker and delegator. However, it's this flashiness that really bothers me. He has been a senator since 2004 but spent a large portion of that time (approx 2 years) in running for the presidential office. I worry that he is resume only and not thrilled about his actual accomplishments. Not only that, his funding is not all from the little people. Those other major contributors will want favors at a later date. This in my view does not make him a president for the people; only for the well oiled political machine. I would like a "Change", but extemely worried that this would be an inexperienced change.[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
Author
Message
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 2:58 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
I heard that someone running for assembly like Linda or Wayne needs to spend 500,000. To me that is insane. Unfortunately, so long as we have people with deep wallets running we'll have this situation. The average Joe who wants to make a difference can't afford to run.
Not average Joe. We need a Joe with integrity, leadership, etc. I'll donate to elect this Joe if he does not have money to run.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 2:48 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
I heard that someone running for assembly like Linda or Wayne needs to spend 500,000. To me that is insane. Unfortunately, so long as we have people with deep wallets running we'll have this situation. The average Joe who wants to make a difference can't afford to run.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 2:00 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Quote:
If the media can sway the presidential election in this country, then I think our democracy is flawed.
Why would they both spend $1billion in Advertising if Obama and McCain did not think that media (specifically TV) WOULD NOT AFFECT or SWAY THE ELECTION AND POPULAR OPPINION?
And the more sillyness there is on TV, the more party advertising budget they will get.
What you are talking about are candidates' ads, not the media bias mentioned above.
Well, if the ads can sway an election, then the candidate who can afford to pay for more ads and produce more effective ads wins.
Bill Gates or Warrent Buffett will become the president of the US in the near future.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 1:51 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
Quote:
If the media can sway the presidential election in this country, then I think our democracy is flawed.
Why would they both spend $1billion in Advertising if Obama and McCain did not think that media (specifically TV) WOULD NOT AFFECT or SWAY THE ELECTION AND POPULAR OPPINION?
And the more sillyness there is on TV, the more party advertising budget they will get.
What you are talking about are candidates' ads, not the media bias mentioned above.
Well, if the ads can sway an election, then the candidate who can afford to pay for more ads and produce more effective ads wins.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 1:37 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Quote:
If the media can sway the presidential election in this country, then I think our democracy is flawed.
Why would they both spend $1billion in Advertising if Obama and McCain did not think that media (specifically TV) WOULD NOT AFFECT or SWAY THE ELECTION AND POPULAR OPPINION?
And the more sillyness there is on TV, the more party advertising budget they will get.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 1:12 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
Depending on what the story is. You can spin it however you want, but the source cited is indpendent. It's not your stats or mine. If you want to believe the media is unbiased and is not showing support that's fine, but the stats don't back it up.
Believe what you want but the study does not even claim to show bias, only the ratio of favorable quotes. To establish bias they would have to establish that the ratio is inconsistent with the general facts (i.e. that they skewed contrary to the rate of quotes they received) or selected stories based on the rate of favorable quotes, etc. You have not demonsrtated any cause and effect, which would be critical to a bias case.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 12:47 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
When you are hiring an employee, do you just read his/her resume and the recommendation letters? Of cause not. There will be interviews and see how the candidate answers to your questions. That's why I base my decision on watching the debates, interviews, and see what the candidates stand on the issues that are important to me.
If the media can sway the presidential election in this country, then I think our democracy is flawed.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 12:32 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Depending on what the story is. You can spin it however you want, but the source cited is indpendent. It's not your stats or mine. If you want to believe the media is unbiased and is not showing support that's fine, but the stats don't back it up.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 12:26 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
Who do you think chooses the quotes that are used and the stories that are aired? It's not the voters. Quotes don't magically show up on TV and for every person shown more are interviewed.
So let me understand your premise. You think they sit around and say, "let's give more quotes to these people because they like Obama and we like Obama." Then they are a fickle bunch so during the McCain convention they suddenly decide they support McCain more and send more favorable quotes his way. Etc.
If you look at the rate of favorable to unfavorable quotes and correlate it with national polls around the same time on an issue you will see them in very close parity. 60% of quotes across the network come out negative about Palin and, gee whiz, about 60% of voters view Palin negatively. So that’s just a coincidence or do you believe that the networks conspire to get that 60% (since the study is aggregating the total across all their coverage) knowing that if they 60% negative quotes that it will magically translate to 60% of viewers viewing her negatively? It is more logical that if 60% of people view her negatively and across the networks they interview hundreds of people that, like a representative sample from a poll, they will get about 60% negative quotes. So if they end up airing a percentage of positive or negative quotes proportionate to the overall balance of opinion they receive that is bias according to you? But it would be fair if 3-of-4 people say one thing to edit the coverage so it appears to by 50-50? That is not biased?
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 11:43 am EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
oh, and why is it then that ABC was shown as being more impartial than CBS or NBC? If it's not the networks.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 11:42 am EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Who do you think chooses the quotes that are used and the stories that are aired? It's not the voters. Quotes don't magically show up on TV and for every person shown more are interviewed.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 11:20 am EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
You should read the full study not just the press release, though a close read of the press release would demonstrate the facts as well. Just look at most of the quotes they provide as examples. They are not from the reporters or anchors. They are from people being interviewed or doing commentary. That is not inherently media bias, unless there is a conscious effort to selectively pick quotes and viewpoints to reflect that bias, which there study did not demonstrate. The other thing the full study demonstrates is the changing percentage of the "favorable" vs. "unfavorable" over time and in relation to specific events. For example, during each candidate's convention the rate of "favorable" quotes goes significantly up for that candidate, including McCain. Similarly, when Palin was announced she had a much higher favorable ratio. That's logical, if the media is reflecting what is happening that week and general sentiment. If there was intentional bias you should see a consistent skew toward one candidate over another regardless of timing or circumstances. The facts support the previous statement that the media reacts to and reflects public sentiment, not the other way around.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Nov 1 2008, 9:20 am EDT
Post subject: Proof of Media Bias
Well, here's the proof of media bias that apparently doesn't exist, at least on the networks.
http://www.cmpa.com/media_room_press_8.htm
Barack Obama has widened his lead over John McCain in the race for good press, and Sarah Palin's press has turned sharply negative on network news shows, according to a new study by Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA). The study also finds that network news coverage is more substantive than in other recent presidential campaigns.
- comments about Senator Barack Obama on the network evening news shows have been 65% positive, compared to only 36% positive comments about Senator John McCain.
-comments about Governor Sarah Palin have been only 42% positive. (There have been too few evaluations of Senator Joe Biden for meaningful analysis.)
- On Fox News Channel, by contrast, Obama's press has been only 28% positive during the general election, even worse than the 38% positive evaluations of McCain. Palin's coverage has been 49% positive on Fox, slightly higher on than on the three networks.
CNN and MSNBC were not reviewed in the study.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Oct 30 2008, 9:08 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
A little NYC-based company called Blue State Digital is really the force behind his .com success. But his key aides do include former Facebook execs.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Oct 30 2008, 7:46 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Quote:
Guest wrote:
Mr. Hughes, was one of four founders of Facebook. In early 2007, he left the company to work in Chicago on Senator Obama’s new-media campaign.
FYI: McCain has Meg Whitman on his side (CEO of eBay) .vs.
Obama and Hughes (coFounder of Facebook)
Who made the right choice in this Digital Media world? Founders always trump Managers, good choice Obama.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/technology/07hughes.html
My main point was about WHO was driving the ONLINE strategy of each campain (and Meg was not a big part of McCain's at all) So not just traditional TV channel, McCain has been out played on the Digital Internet.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Oct 30 2008, 5:20 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: ABC only major TV network not airing Obama infomercial
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Mr. Hughes, was one of four founders of Facebook. In early 2007, he left the company to work in Chicago on Senator Obama’s new-media campaign.
FYI: McCain has Meg Whitman on his side (CEO of eBay) .vs.
Obama and Hughes (coFounder of Facebook)
Who made the right choice in this Digital Media world? Founders always trump Managers, good choice Obama.
and that statement just goes to show you that Obama only cares for the press... Mccain picked the CEO to me that is a smarter choice... obamo is so fake it makes me sick!
The argument is ridiculous on both sides as both have plenty of credible CEO's and Founders. It would be a toss-up at best if this were a judging point. Obama has the CEO (not founder, though he has them too, but the CEO who built the business) of Google, McCain the former CEO of HP, etc. etc. They both have plenty of billionaires in their court too, though I read that Obama ironically has a little more, despite those being the people most negatively affected in pure dollars by his tax plan.