• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Media Bias is CONSERVATIVE!

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
After this weekends' anti-protest rally's accross the nation, make no mistake about it, the media is definately CONSERVATIVE and definately PRO-WAR. There was hardly any mention of the largest anti-war protests since the Vietnam War from any of the major media outlets. The ones that did mention it, barely had two sentences of reporting. Unless you deliberately went looking for it, you would hardly know of the historical events of this past weekend. So I say to all media in the US, you suck!

If a liberal media bias did exist, there would have been a lot more coverage of what happened in Washington. Liberal media is a myth. Conservative media is a reality.
 
Billo_Really said:
After this weekends' anti-protest rally's accross the nation, make no mistake about it, the media is definately CONSERVATIVE and definately PRO-WAR. There was hardly any mention of the largest anti-war protests since the Vietnam War from any of the major media outlets. The ones that did mention it, barely had two sentences of reporting. Unless you deliberately went looking for it, you would hardly know of the historical events of this past weekend. So I say to all media in the US, you suck!

If a liberal media bias did exist, there would have been a lot more coverage of what happened in Washington. Liberal media is a myth. Conservative media is a reality.

Yes there's no doubt about it. Unless you listen to Democracy Now, or Air America there is NO such thing as liberal bias in the media. I've done ton's of research on this topic and found that in the 50's, 60's and throughout some of the 70's and 80's there was a liberal media bias. That all started to decline in the 80's because the bias was so apparent, the left felt they could worry about other ways to reach the public, primarily through new media and grass roots campaigns. Meanwhile conservative forces invested in mainstream media sources and eventually produced the tilt we see today. Although this is a gross over simplification of a process that occured over several decades, if you do the research, this is the truth I am confident you will find.

Also, the absence of coverage on both H.Res.375 and the 300,000 people in D.C., the largest anti-war protest since the Vietnam War, and not to mention the countless protests around the U.S. and the rest of the world, proves that the media is more concerned with pro-war and staus-quo, if not right-wing sentiments.

I should also mention the F.B.I. recently gunned down a 72 year old Puerto Rican man in his home. The assassinated freedom fighter was a puerto rican national icon, and was armed with only a gun. The FBI emptied over 100 rounds into his home yet eventually only managed to nip him with the help of a sniper. They prevented anyone from entering the home as they watched the mans blood seep from beneath the from door of his home. After ten hours he bled to death. He was only armed with a hand gun. Eye witnesses say that the FBI shot first. Fortunately, the wife was not harmed. The mans name was, Philliberto Ohederias.
 
Billo_Really said:
If a liberal media bias did exist, there would have been a lot more coverage of what happened in Washington. Liberal media is a myth. Conservative media is a reality.

Indeed, Liberal media bias is a myth, propogated by conservative factions. I have been viewing the news, and I didn't hear about the rallys at all, just on here. That's conservative media for ya.:2razz:
 
Only in America, would you find copyright protection for a corporation’s direct insult to the intelligence of their customers, “Fair and Balanced”.
 
You can't be serious. First of all I don't see how there is a relation to the media's political affiliation and the fact that there wasn't as much coverage for this event as you may have liked. There are many conservatives in the media, and there are many liberals in the media. The fact is this "protest movement" is way to fringe for the majority of the American people to identify with.

I am not sure if I should comment on the fact you think the media is conservative/pro-war, or on the fact that you think this demonstration should have gotten more support/coverage? These two things are just not connected. Although I disagree with it, the anti-war movement is of course legitimate. It is understandable for people to want to end a war, and they have a right to express that. However when you allign this movement with people like Cindy Sheehan, who has made some very public and very radical statements, it is hard for most Americans to relate.

This protest seemed more like an "Anti-Bush" protest than "Anti-war". From the pictures I've seen almost all the signs were saying "Bush is a murderer and a liar" or something to that effect. Also, I'm not sure what channel you watch for your news that you felt there wasn't enough coverage on this. But the day of, and the two days after this protest, it was covered in at least one segment of every major news show I watched. You wanted news agencies to devote entire hours to this or what? We have heard all of the things the people at this protest have been saying for the past months. There was nothing new to cover as far as substance. All you can really do is tell the viewers about the protest, say it was the largest since Vietnam, show some live footage, and mention some of the people that spoke there.
 
If you repeat something often enough and loud enough it starts to stick as a "fact".
 
If you repeat something often enough and loud enough it starts to stick as a "fact".

I agree 100%. For instance, when people say bush is a murderer and planned the Iraq war since he was a pre-teen. Or when people say the media is Conservative and pro-war. Even though many examples can be cited to show media liberalism or conservatism. This is what you meant right?
 
They were too busy telling Bush, Hurricane Katrina was his fault, which was heavily covered. BillO_Really your bias. Just admit it! It will be one less chip on your shoulder! And give me examples of the "Conservative" media groups that were pro-war? And I will give examples where they weren't Pro-War, from the same groups. :yes: CAUTION YOUR ABOUT THE ENTER "THE BILLO_REALLY ZONE", (underneath Logo reads) "BillO_Really is the only one allowed to call biases, your view means nothing to him, so don't bother saying anything."
 
After this weekends' anti-protest rally's accross the nation, make no mistake about it, the media is definately CONSERVATIVE and definately PRO-WAR. There was hardly any mention of the largest anti-war protests since the Vietnam War from any of the major media outlets. The ones that did mention it, barely had two sentences of reporting. Unless you deliberately went looking for it, you would hardly know of the historical events of this past weekend. So I say to all media in the US, you suck!

If a liberal media bias did exist, there would have been a lot more coverage of what happened in Washington. Liberal media is a myth. Conservative media is a reality.

If the media was conservative biased they would not show the war in a negative manner,Turban Durbin would have been criticized and called a traitor,Cindy Sheehan would have gotten no coverage,Arugab would have not seen the light of day in order to protect our soldiers over seas,OUr soldiers would be praised in the media instead of being shown in a negative manner.
If there truely was a conservative biasness in the media the moral of our troops would be up and the moral of our enemies would be down.

The liberal media is just scared and they do not want to loose viewership,because the public can only tolerate so much anti-American garbage spewing out of the mouths of our liberal media for so long before they change the channel and listen/watch a media who does not hate America and wants to see America succeed.Liberals too can be businessmen.
 
Billo_Really said:
After this weekends' anti-protest rally's accross the nation, make no mistake about it, the media is definately CONSERVATIVE and definately PRO-WAR. There was hardly any mention of the largest anti-war protests since the Vietnam War from any of the major media outlets. The ones that did mention it, barely had two sentences of reporting. Unless you deliberately went looking for it, you would hardly know of the historical events of this past weekend. So I say to all media in the US, you suck!

If a liberal media bias did exist, there would have been a lot more coverage of what happened in Washington. Liberal media is a myth. Conservative media is a reality.

This is hilarious! You think the bias in the media is CONSERVATIVE? Maybe the reason why they did not cover the anti-war protest was that they have been trying to stir up more inaccurate stories, such as dan rathers national guard report on bush or the false accusations at GITMO, that the gullaby people of america will believe!

Second of all, the media even know they fly left far more than do right! Im still boggled that you came up with this! I thought taxpayer would have! i guess you are along the same lines as him!
 
Originally posted by AK_Conservative:
This is hilarious! You think the bias in the media is CONSERVATIVE? Maybe the reason why they did not cover the anti-war protest was that they have been trying to stir up more inaccurate stories, such as dan rathers national guard report on bush or the false accusations at GITMO, that the gullaby people of america will believe!

Second of all, the media even know they fly left far more than do right! Im still boggled that you came up with this! I thought taxpayer would have! i guess you are along the same lines as him!
You should try listening to yourself before you talk. Because your reason for why they didn't is a lot more ridiculous than mine.
 
Originally posted by stsburns:
They were too busy telling Bush, Hurricane Katrina was his fault, which was heavily covered. BillO_Really your bias. Just admit it! It will be one less chip on your shoulder! And give me examples of the "Conservative" media groups that were pro-war? And I will give examples where they weren't Pro-War, from the same groups. CAUTION YOUR ABOUT THE ENTER "THE BILLO_REALLY ZONE", (underneath Logo reads) "BillO_Really is the only one allowed to call biases, your view means nothing to him, so don't bother saying anything."
Bias_billo_really...........its almost cowboy-like!
 
Originally posted by jamesrage:
If the media was conservative biased they would not show the war in a negative manner,
How can you possibly show war as a positive?
 
How can you possibly show war as a positive?


You are proably a dirty anti-war hippy so I will try to explain it to you in a way that you can understand.

How to show the war in a positive manner.

1.quit showing arugab and gitmo scandals,but instead show our soldeirs doing something positive like rebuilding.

2.Show the Iraqis who used to live under fear of Sadam now no longer living under his iron fist.

3.SHow the Iraqis who are now able to vote.

4.Quit reporting deaths of soldiers as though nobody in the whole history of warfare has never died.

5.Do a interview with some of the highly decorated soldeirs.

6.Show soldiers helping out the locals(censure their faces so that the enemy does not use them for target practice).

7.Quit showing terrorist hostage tapes,terrorist threats and anything else a terrorist puts out.
 
Originally posted by jamesrage:
You are proably a dirty anti-war hippy so I will try to explain it to you in a way that you can understand.
Sorry, I don't speak the language of skum-bag moron.

How to show the war in a positive manner.
Originally posted by jamesrage:
1.quit showing arugab and gitmo scandals,but instead show our soldeirs doing something positive like rebuilding.
I have.

Originally posted by jamesrage:
2.Show the Iraqis who used to live under fear of Sadam now no longer living under his iron fist.
But in a pile of rubble.

Originally posted by jamesrage:
3.SHow the Iraqis who are now able to vote.
For a government that doesn't live in the same country.

Originally posted by jamesrage:
4.Quit reporting deaths of soldiers as though nobody in the whole history of warfare has never died.
No.

Originally posted by jamesrage:
5.Do a interview with some of the highly decorated soldeirs.
I'll interview one as soon as you do.

Originally posted by jamesrage:
6.Show soldiers helping out the locals(censure their faces so that the enemy does not use them for target practice).
I have (without censure).

Originally posted by jamesrage:
7.Quit showing terrorist hostage tapes,terrorist threats and anything else a terrorist puts out.
I can't quit because I never have in the first place.

Maybe you should grow up before posting any more bullshit.
 
I can't quit because I never have in the first place.

Maybe you should grow up before posting any more bullshit.



You asked a question how can you show war in a positive way.I answered that question.Basicly I just listed everything the liberal media should and should not do.SO when are you going to strip off your metaphorical "I heart Osama Bin Ladin"T-shirt and start rooting for our troops?

Sorry, I don't speak the language of skum-bag moron.

Apparently you do with all the liberal crap that you spew.
 
Although the mainstream media is currently critical of the administration (how could not?) It never once says that it is intolerable, which is what liberal media believes.
 
Who cares. Why don't you all get your own experience with world issues instead of waiting for some reporter to feed you their opinions through half ass stories?




"I heart Osama Bin Ladin T-shirt" BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
purplehaze said:
The fact is this "protest movement" is way to fringe for the majority of the American people to identify with.

I think you confuse the fact that most Americans don't really care whether America is at war or not with an inability to identify with war protesters.



You wanted news agencies to devote entire hours to this or what?

They can devote months of their coverage to high profile murder cases. Why not?
 
GySgt said:
Who cares. Why don't you all get your own experience with world issues instead of waiting for some reporter to feed you their opinions through half ass stories?




"I heart Osama Bin Ladin T-shirt" BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

That would be a funny T-Shirt. But, I don't think anyone would get the joke :lol:
 
Last edited:
ban.the.electoral.college said:
That would be a cool T-Shirt. But, I don't think anyone would get eh joke :lol:


I would. If I saw it out in public, I would put it in perspective and laugh.
 
Billo_Really said:
Sorry, I don't speak the language of skum-bag moron.

I have.

But in a pile of rubble.

For a government that doesn't live in the same country.

No.

I'll interview one as soon as you do.

I have (without censure).

I can't quit because I never have in the first place.

Maybe you should grow up before posting any more bullshit.

Being an Active Duty Marine who can relate to this...I don't think it's "bullshit." Also, while not being a "highly" decorated "soldier", I did receive the Navy Commendation Medal with "valor" device for bravery. You can interview me, but I've been told that what I say is BS too.
 
Originally posted by GySgt:
Being an Active Duty Marine who can relate to this...I don't think it's "bullshit." Also, while not being a "highly" decorated "soldier", I did receive the Navy Commendation Medal with "valor" device for bravery. You can interview me, but I've been told that what I say is BS too.
Not everything you say is BS. Only the stuff I disagree with.
 
You wanted news agencies to devote entire hours to this or what?

They can devote months of their coverage to high profile murder cases. Why not?

Murder cases and trials are a story that progresses and changes. After new content is added there is more content to report. Personally I hate when media hounds one story like a trial for months, but you can't compare this to a protest in any way. What the protesters signs said will not change tomorrow. The content of the speakers speeches will stay the same as well. Seriously what more do you want? A two hour special at prime time where they show the speeches and interview some of those loons?

The fact is this stuff is shown as much as it warrents. If there was more interest in it it would be shown far more. News agencies run those trials and other crap I hate, but its because it gets ratings... as in people actually care about it. There is a really liberal news station you can get on direct TV called Linx or Links or something. It has shown all the speeches and interviews - a two hour segment - almost daily for the past week. If enough people wanted to see this crap it would be getting ratings similar to main stream cable news stations.

I think you confuse the fact that most Americans don't really care whether America is at war or not with an inability to identify with war protesters.

This is not to say Americans don't care they are at war, do you have some random idea generator or something? The war was one of the most important issues during the last election. People voted mainly on who they thought could handle this war more effectively. Everyone cant be as intelligent and informed as you. However you shouldn't assume just because people disagree they are uninterested or uniformed.
 
The Media is a harlot onto satan
it sleeps where the money is
rep in power now controls the Media
Anyone still thinking ,they are free in America, and that they did not have a dictator in power between 2000- 2004 . Have no idea of what free and democratic elections means
it certainly doesn't mean elected by the courts
if the balloting got mixed up somehow ( due to electronic voting stations that can be rigged and leaves no papper trail) or any other means.then there should have been another vote
Democrats stood by and did nothing
In America today you have 2 parties both servants to the ELITE
with a war machine run by expansionism as policy
there is NO hope not even a glimmer
both parties are one and the same with very limited powers
the ELITE run the GOVt.
each politician is sworn to protect america and it's borders
what do they do now is pure feed the elite the nations wealth
is it any wonder that more and more people dont vote
pretty soon mexicans will out vote all the anglo fat cats and war mongers
and send them to iraq
there is a day of reconing coming it will split america in 2 or it will destroy it
the choices are hard the struggle will be great
is thye American people ready for the mexican onslaught
Americans don't no how to live in a third world nation the mexicans will show you the ropes
All is lost when the enemy is any party you vote into power
Do you think the DEM will stop mexican influxes stop iraq war
they are in as deep as the rep in the harlots bed room the both parties
are now the elite's harlot the media is the elite the oil is the elite
your enemy I submit is the elite not the rep or dem
they are just the pawns
the elite pull the levers of power
the founding fathers of america would declare across the Delaware and show no mercy
out of rebellion America was born it will die from within with a wimper
revolution is now replaced with terrorism in the American language
and al terrorist must die unless the are the harlots of the ELITE
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom