Even The Headline is biased. (1 Viewer)

[LaMidRighter]

Hey All !;
I was reading the local paper the other day and it pretty much proved it has a liberal bias....., well, either that or the reporter is just an idiot. Here goes, even the headline told you this one was gonna be a laugh riot "SUV kills toddler on sidewalk", after reading the headline, I figured, nah, no-one can be this dense, let's see what else the author wrote, he went on to say this SUV lost control and then jumped the curb and hit a child that was playing on the sidewalk, of the one and a half paragraph read, only one sentance was dedicated to the fact that the driver was going excessively fast and lost control the rest was dedicated to the make/model/etc. I say this is a liberal bias because of the massive green movement and it's attack on owners of bigger vehicles.

 

[ShamMol]

You are kidding me right? Please tell me you are kidding me. If you are seeing liberal bias in that, you are either an idiot or so paranoid that you don't go outside your house. I don't normally go into bashing a poster, but wow.

It is accurate. A driver of an SUV hits a child on a sidewalk is the exact blipping same thing as this. Are you really b*tching about that? You are moronic and should live under a rock because you are seeing bias where it doesn't exist.

 

[LaMidRighter]

You are kidding me right? Please tell me you are kidding me. If you are seeing liberal bias in that, you are either an idiot or so paranoid that you don't go outside your house. I don't normally go into bashing a poster, but wow.

It is accurate. A driver of an SUV hits a child on a sidewalk is the exact blipping same thing as this. Are you really b*tching about that? You are moronic and should live under a rock because you are seeing bias where it doesn't exist.

I am a broadcasting student, which also means I have to learn about print and other forms of media, one of the things that constantly gets beaten into our heads is message delivery. The reason I feel it's important to note is this; if you want to deliver the news that an accident involving a child and a vehicle resulted in a fatality, that is fine. The problem is when you say the SUV killed the child, this is not true if the driver committed and error, if a tire would have blown out, or a manufacturing flaw, or anything else could have hindered the driver's ability to remain in control, then you could blame the vehicle. This was a properly functioning vehicle blamed by a reporter for a driver induced fatality, see the difference? Now, you have called me stupid for bringing this up, here is my challenge, the next time you listen to non-editorial news, actually pay attention to the wording(and all of the mannerisms in delivery of electronic media(radio, t.v, webcast, etc.)) and pick out the obvious spin if it exists, look for the 5 W's (who, what, when, where, why(sometimes What does it mean(the 6TH W) when necessary(also known as "what's the message") if you do this properly, you will cringe at the grand scale possibilities of what this "little observation" of mine could produce with a bigger story. If you do all this and still call me an idiot with a straight face, I'll buy you a beer.

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

It's misleading just as the headlines that read "23 killed in Iraq." You go on to read the article & it turns out that no Americans died even though that's the belief of 'headline readers.'

Now about the SUV killing a child. I see it as biased simply because the left has been working hard to convince Americans that SUVs are the big evil against our environment. Funny thing...I have an uncle who is quite the liberal & was just short of scolding my parents when he found out they were thinking of buying an SUV. But, when they bought a mini-van instead he was OK with that. Does anybody else see the hypocrisy? (by the way...my uncle also owns a mini-van)

The point being that the mini-van they bought & the SUV they were looking at have the exact same size motor (3.8 V-6). Gas mileage is about the same & the emissions are about the same. Someone please explain what is so wrong with SUVs...?

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

So since the 23 dead weren't american, that makes them less newsworthy? I wouldn't call that a liberal bias, I'd call that a not-racist bias.

Of course not...& I would hope you're intelligent enough not to even think that. The point being that newspapers know that a good number of Americans are "headline readers" & they use those headlines to fool those folks into believing certain things. The other point is that if you read some these articles you see a lot more violence being perpetrated by Iraqi insurgents as well as foreign fighters against Iraqis who are trying to make a better life for themselves. It's not even about us anymore.

 

[edb19]

I'm not saying it is a good or bad thing, nor am I saying it is intentional - but the news media is no longer satisfied with simply reporting the news. Due in large part to the effect the media had on the Viet Nam War and Nixon/Watergate - the media has gone from reporting a story to being part of the story.

And let's be honest - most people read the headlines and only scan the article.

 

[Fantasea]

While the mission of the news media used to be 'to inform', it now seems to be, 'to enflame'.

 

[26 X World Champs]

I say this is a liberal bias because of the massive green movement and it's attack on owners of bigger vehicles.

Huh? The only bias that I see here is your bias reading between the lines...problem is that you've got it wrong, sorry.

BTW - The people who own SUVs are paying for the excess, at the pump. It costs more than $50 to fill 'er up. Then you get 8 MPG. Why don't you attack the oil companies for their high prices (have you checked out their record profits?) and the car manufacturers (except Toyota & Honda) for not being smart enough to change their paradigm and to mass produce very viable hybrid engines that use much less fuel?

The evil of suggesting that cars stop polluting and that they get at least 25 MPG.....but that would be un-Republican, right? Are Republicans against hybrid engines and better gas mileage?

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

Huh? The only bias that I see here is your bias reading between the lines...problem is that you've got it wrong, sorry.

BTW - The people who own SUVs are paying for the excess, at the pump. It costs more than $50 to fill 'er up. Then you get 8 MPG. Why don't you attack the oil companies for their high prices (have you checked out their record profits?) and the car manufacturers (except Toyota & Honda) for not being smart enough to change their paradigm and to mass produce very viable hybrid engines that use much less fuel?

The evil of suggesting that cars stop polluting and that they get at least 25 MPG.....but that would be un-Republican, right? Are Republicans against hybrid engines and better gas mileage?

You seem to have a rather good handle on humor; too bad you don't have the same handle on facts.

 

[26 X World Champs]

they bought a mini-van instead he was OK with that. Does anybody else see the hypocrisy? (by the way...my uncle also owns a mini-van)

The point being that the mini-van they bought & the SUV they were looking at have the exact same size motor (3.8 V-6). Gas mileage is about the same & the emissions are about the same. Someone please explain what is so wrong with SUVs...?

I own a Toyota Sienna and I get 23 MPG, not 8 MPG that an SUV gets. SUVs are also far less safe on the road, they tip over easily, and they do cost a fortune to fill up. My Sienna has an 18 gallon tank, SUVs have a 20+ gallon tank so my Sienna goes 414 miles per tank vs. an SUV with a 25 gallon tank goes only 200 miles....If you fill up an SUV once a week @2.20 per gallon you spend $2860 per year on gas for the SUV but only need to spend $1029 on the Sienna....so there's quite a difference....

It's a shame that American car makers make such horrible cars. I've owned exactly one American car and without question it was the worst car I ever owned. Toyota, Honda, the German car makers and even Hyundai and Kia kick the big three's butt.

 

[26 X World Champs]

You seem to have a rather good handle on humor; too bad you don't have the same handle on facts.

Pray tell what facts that I lost the handle of?

 

[LaMidRighter]

Huh? The only bias that I see here is your bias reading between the lines...problem is that you've got it wrong, sorry.

You''re right, I am reading between the lines, I should have realized that a journalist and hopefully a college graduate should know the difference between an inanimate object killing someone and driver error killing someone are two completely different things but does not and it was a simple error of incompetence. But you're right, I overreacted.

BTW - The people who own SUVs are paying for the excess, at the pump. It costs more than $50 to fill 'er up. Then you get 8 MPG. Why don't you attack the oil companies for their high prices (have you checked out their record profits?) and the car manufacturers (except Toyota & Honda) for not being smart enough to change their paradigm and to mass produce very viable hybrid engines that use much less fuel?

I'm not. I own a midsize SUV and fill up once a week at less than 30$, I get around 19 MPG and in fact there are only about five vehicles in existence right now that get under 10 and are allowed in the U.S. most of them are V-10's or exotics.

The evil of suggesting that cars stop polluting and that they get at least 25 MPG.....but that would be un-Republican, right? Are Republicans against hybrid engines and better gas mileage?

I come from a car family and can tell you that all of those polution controls you guys have asked for make cars harder to work on, less dependable, and cut their life short by about 10-15 years. Also, yeah, those hybrids are great aren't they, like the Toyota Prius that just got around 750,000 to 1 million recalled because of a major safety concern, yeah, great cars, if you need a paperweight.

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

I own a Toyota Sienna and I get 23 MPG, not 8 MPG that an SUV gets. SUVs are also far less safe on the road, they tip over easily, and they do cost a fortune to fill up. My Sienna has an 18 gallon tank, SUVs have a 20+ gallon tank so my Sienna goes 414 miles per tank vs. an SUV with a 25 gallon tank goes only 200 miles....If you fill up an SUV once a week @2.20 per gallon you spend $2860 per year on gas for the SUV but only need to spend $1029 on the Sienna....so there's quite a difference....

It's a shame that American car makers make such horrible cars. I've owned exactly one American car and without question it was the worst car I ever owned. Toyota, Honda, the German car makers and even Hyundai and Kia kick the big three's butt.

I own a Chevy Malibu (15 gallon tank & get about 400 mile out of a tank) it gets about 26 miles to the gallon. It also a has a 3.0 V-6. I also own a Chevy Trailblazer...not sure of the gas mileage as my wife drives that vehicle (I will get back to you on that). I know for a fact that it's never taken $50 to fill it as you suggested in a previous post. In addition to those facts your gas pricing is a little off...in NW Ohio just yesterday gas $1.97 a gallon. It has been for about a week.

 

[Shadowlands]

I own a Toyota Sienna and I get 23 MPG, not 8 MPG that an SUV gets. SUVs are also far less safe on the road, they tip over easily, and they do cost a fortune to fill up. My Sienna has an 18 gallon tank, SUVs have a 20+ gallon tank so my Sienna goes 414 miles per tank vs. an SUV with a 25 gallon tank goes only 200 miles....If you fill up an SUV once a week @2.20 per gallon you spend $2860 per year on gas for the SUV but only need to spend $1029 on the Sienna....so there's quite a difference....

It's a shame that American car makers make such horrible cars. I've owned exactly one American car and without question it was the worst car I ever owned. Toyota, Honda, the German car makers and even Hyundai and Kia kick the big three's butt.

I like American cars, and please American cars makers I do believe are behind, but I don't really care I just love muscle cars. Suvs don't go 8 mpg the main average is actually 12 to 13 to be exact. Proof ---> http://environment.about.com/cs/globalwarming/a/SUV.htm

Anyways it's all about what you buy and how much money you have in your wallet if you make over 120k+ a year and have some money to spare sure why not buy a SUV for looks.

To tell you the truth man people don't go really for MPG when looking for a car they just got for what it looks like. Thats the truth and even the auto industry knows that.

 

[Pacridge]

I own a Toyota Sienna and I get 23 MPG, not 8 MPG that an SUV gets. SUVs are also far less safe on the road, they tip over easily, and they do cost a fortune to fill up. My Sienna has an 18 gallon tank, SUVs have a 20+ gallon tank so my Sienna goes 414 miles per tank vs. an SUV with a 25 gallon tank goes only 200 miles....If you fill up an SUV once a week @2.20 per gallon you spend $2860 per year on gas for the SUV but only need to spend $1029 on the Sienna....so there's quite a difference....

It's a shame that American car makers make such horrible cars. I've owned exactly one American car and without question it was the worst car I ever owned. Toyota, Honda, the German car makers and even Hyundai and Kia kick the big three's butt.

I don't know. My wife drives a Toyota 4-Runner. I know she gets about 19mpg. We bought the 4-cyl mainly for gas mileage. We bought the 4-runner because it's four wheel drive and higher. We live in the middle of nowhere and the roads really aren't that good and in winter they're often icy. I actually fell she's safer in the four wheel drive mainly due to road conditions. As for the it's higher center of bal. and thus easier to over turn. We have a bigger problem with rocks and mud on the roads on a reg. basis then her driving so fast she flips on a corner.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Fonz, I the Trailblazer gets about 16c/20h MPG if I'm not mistaken, this at 275HP and being the most powerful SUV in it's class(midsize) This is before you choose the 300HP V8 that gets 15/20. Consequently, the C6 Corvette at a whopping 400HP gets about 18/28 with the manual transmission option.

 

[Fantasea]

Fonz, I the Trailblazer gets about 16c/20h MPG if I'm not mistaken, this at 275HP and being the most powerful SUV in it's class(midsize) This is before you choose the 300HP V8 that gets 15/20. Consequently, the C6 Corvette at a whopping 400HP gets about 18/28 with the manual transmission option.

If these are the 'sticker' mileages, they are determined by engineers who drive the vehicles on a closed track and carefully monitor the rpms, shift points, and optimal speeds.

Once the vehicles get into the hands of consumers, the usual driving habits of each person determines the results. Few, if any, can match the stats on the stickers.

The Corvette might do it if it gets into top gear at about 10 mph, very slowly accellerates to about 50, and stays there on a level straightaway. Anyone ever see a 'Vette being driven that way?