Gore Has An Energy-Expending Mansion!

[gullivers travails]

While George W. Bush has an eco-friendly ranch!

At first glance, it seems that Gore is a hypocrite energy waster! Bad man!

But, that's the 'liberal' media for you - they conveniently overlook the millions of other Americans, liberals and preponderately conservative wealthy ones, who own 'castles' that make Gore's place look like a 'shed.'

Is it possible to ever achieve 'unbiased' reporting of political matters?

 

[debate_junkie]

While George W. Bush has an eco-friendly ranch!

At first glance, it seems that Gore is a hypocrite energy waster! Bad man!

But, that's the 'liberal' media for you - they conveniently overlook the millions of other Americans, liberals and preponderately conservative wealthy ones, who own 'castles' that make Gore's place look like a 'shed.'

Is it possible to ever achieve 'unbiased' reporting of political matters?

Good luck with that. :rofl

 

[Iriemon]

Given that there have be 3-4 threads on this subject already in just this Forum, it doesn't seem to have been that overlooked.

 

[Mr. X]

Is it possible to ever achieve 'unbiased' reporting of political matters?

And who would give this unbiased reporting? We are all human, even journalists and editors within a news organization. Stories are cherry picked because there are six billion people in the world. There is no Earth Today paper, because people don't want to read it. Are you interested in the agricultural forecasts of Outer Mongolia? Want to read the police blotter in Luxembourg? How much are you reading about the run up to the election in France?

My point, and I admit I took a roundabout, is that "reporting" is not a universal. Have you read Arab News Newspaper and seen the same reporting in www.wsj.com? You are a consumer, find the source that you believe is credible and use it. Just don't do so with blinders on. Some organizations are far more credible than others, but credibility is earned and kept every minute, so don't fall into the trap of "I only watch (or read, or link from) X, because they publish the truth". Google (or Lexis Nexis if you can) a story that you are interested in and look at all the different views.

Do you really want to spend all your time watching C-Span for unbiased coverage? Or would you rather have some poor sap that spent four years in journalism school sifting the results for you even if that means he or she naturally injects some of their bias into it? What about 1,000 different journalists doing the same with 1,000 different biases? I could go to every Indian restaurant in London searching for my "perfect" curry and then recommend it to you, but if you don't like it, am I biased? Or simply giving you the information that I thought was most valuable?

I'm not trying to antagonize you, but it chaps my hide when I see people dismiss journalism because they found a journalist they didn't agree with.