• 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!

Most conservatives don't understand purpose of journalism, says founder of website on media bias

quote
Most conservatives don't understand purpose of journalism, says founder of website on media bias

Over the last decade, however, Sheffield — who founded NewsBusters with his brother Greg and worked there until 2014 — has come to believe that he was part of a problem, not a solution, and is now working to correct that error.

The problem, as he describes it, is that most conservatives think the purpose of journalism is to wage partisan political warfare, and that has created an ecosystem on the right where facts and truth are increasingly irrelevant.

This dynamic is at play most recently in the move by many Trump supporters to stop watching Fox News because, while it is conservative, it is not slavish enough toward the president. Instead, many Trump supporters are moving toward channels that repeat the president’s lies about a stolen election without any scrutiny or standards for fact checking.
“If you go to and look at the history of conservative media enterprises that are large scale and exist presently, every single one of them was created to "propagate and propagandize for a particular political viewpoint", literally without exception,”
end quote

This is the mess of conservative media, created under the Reagan Administration championed by Rodger Ailes as a strategy tool to use for future campaign management agenda to push a narrative for its candidates .... it has less concern with facts, but more driven and directed toward indoctrinations, via the efforts to propagate and propagandize a particular political viewpoint. it uses "drama incitement" wrapped in a bastardized play on religious principle, and negligence and selective disregard of the true and full spectrum of principles and values laid out in The Preamble.


quote
The Reagan Administration created "The Federalist Society'... to promote an agenda
“Founded in 1982, the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians dedicated to reforming the current legal order…

In its mission and purpose, the Federalist Society is unique. By providing a forum for legal experts of opposing views to interact with members of the legal profession, the judiciary, law students, academics, and the architects of public policy, the Society has redefined the terms of legal debate.
end quote
"the purpose of journalism is to wage partisan political warfare"
No, the purpose of journalism is to 'Speak Truth to Power' and 'Hold the nation's leaders accountable'.

The problem is, as we have seen, that the veracity of those two things, 'Speak Truth to Power' and 'Hold the nation's leaders accountable', varies greatly based on the political affiliations of those leaders being questioned by 'journalists', so much so that the vast majority of the lamestream media have become political activists participating in politics rather than being objective reporters of politics.
 
Pretty much..rightwing media is trash.

The people that consume it wallow in the trash and come out extremely misinformed.

There’s really nothing else to say.
 
Over and over again you prove the point of the thread. You took Barr’s statement at face value and ignored the entire contents of the Mueller report itself.
I've never referenced Barr's statement and have only cited Mueller's report. As explictly recognized by Pelosi, Schiff Nadler and the rest of your miscreants on their impeachment team wen they rejected it, the obstruction charges in Muller's report were complete bullshit.



While your loon media was screaming for it.

 
I've never referenced Barr's statement and have only cited Mueller's report.

Objectively untrue, since if you did you would know that trump committed obstruction of justice and that his campaign colluded with Russia but that it didn‘t meet the standard of a crime.

You‘re position is equivalent to insisting that you read The Grapes of Wrath but your book report says it’s about angry fruit.
 
Objectively untrue, since if you did you would know that trump committed obstruction of justice and that his campaign colluded with Russia but that it didn‘t meet the standard of a crime.

You‘re position is equivalent to insisting that you read The Grapes of Wrath but your book report says it’s about angry fruit.
And your position is the one that your media has shoved down your throat for four years now, and you refuse to give it up despite objective reality.
 
Last edited:
And your position is the one that your media has shoved down you throat for four years now, and you refuse to give it up despite objective reality.
My position is based on the contents of the Mueller Report. Yours is based on somebody else’s false summarization of the report.
 
I've never referenced Barr's statement and have only cited Mueller's report. As explictly recognized by Pelosi, Schiff Nadler and the rest of your miscreants on their impeachment team wen they rejected it, the obstruction charges in Muller's report were complete bullshit.



While your loon media was screaming for it.


Even Republican senators admitted he was guilty in the Ukraine matter. His own words showed he was guilty.
 
My position is based on the contents of the Mueller Report. Yours is based on somebody else’s false summarization of the report.
For the third time, my posts have never relied on anything but the Muller report itself. If you continue insisting on making shit up, particularly after being corrected, were done.
 
Even Republican senators admitted he was guilty in the Ukraine matter. His own words showed he was guilty.
If you are going to jump in, at least follow what we are discussing.
 
For the third time, my posts have never relied on anything but the Muller report itself. If you continue insisting on making shit up, particularly after being corrected, were done.
Sure, and The Grapes Of Wrath is about angry fruit.
 
QED Two years after the entire story has been completely debunked, the base remains faithful

No it has not been debunked. It simply has not been proven. It could have been debunked had Trump not obstructed the investigation, (assuming it is in fact a false allegation.) Obstruction, of course, being what all innocent people with nothing to hide do when they are under investigation.
 
No it has not been debunked. It simply has not been proven. It could have been debunked had Trump not obstructed the investigation, (assuming it is in fact a false allegation.) Obstruction, of course, being what all innocent people with nothing to hide do when they are under investigation.
LOL Two and half years, $40M, 19 lawyers, 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, more than 230 orders for communication records, 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, 500 witnesses.

What more did you need? More time? More money? Different facts perhaps?
 
How long would it take a dozen or so monkeys typing randomly on typewriters to come up with that exact same story? Not very long I'd wager. Conservatives by and large understand liberal anti-conservative reporting is biased.

You might want to avoid proving the point of the OP in your first rebuttal


Just sayin'...
 
And once again, the historically atrophied Left don't want to acknowledge the Lamestream Press have ALWAYS been the propaganda arm of the Democrat party.
And FOX is now revealed as an arm of the Deep State as well.

Tricky bastards.
 
What more did you need?
For you to read the report instead of relying on Barr’s false summary of it, but we all know that’s not going to happen.
 
For you to read the report instead of relying on Barr’s false summary of it, but we all know that’s not going to happen.
Fourth time. Kudos. Monkeys banging on the keyboard got nothing on you. Please take my lack of response going forward personally.
 
Blah, blah, blah. Opinion noted and discarded, like every other racist screed you post.
I am impressed at the extent to which you have been conditioned. It is amazing how far down the rabbit hole you have been led.

By your fear of liberals.

You know, the cuck soy boy snowflakes crying for their safe space.

Do you realize how weak that makes you look to us?
 
LOL Two and half years, $40M, 19 lawyers, 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, more than 230 orders for communication records, 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, 500 witnesses.

What more did you need? More time? More money? Different facts perhaps?

How about an investigation by someone who doesn't directly answer to the suspect?
 
How about an investigation by someone who doesn't directly answer to the suspect?
Are you really arguing that Mueller (Weissman) pulled his punches to please Trump?
 
Are you really arguing that Mueller (Weissman) pulled his punches to please Trump?

He dropped the interview demand because he didn’t want to anger trump. That’s a fact.
 
Are you really arguing that Mueller (Weissman) pulled his punches to please Trump?

Of course he did. It was made abundantly clear by Mueller and his boss William Barr on numerous occasions before the investigation was even complete that Mueller was legally prohibited from concluding that the president committed a crime. The DOJ does not have the power to indict a sitting president. The purpose of the Mueller investigation was to exonerate Trump. It failed. Hence his determination that "if we could have exonerated the president, we would have done so."

Does a failure to exonerate mean that the suspect is guilty? No. But the reason the investigation failed to exonerate the suspect is because the suspect did everything he could to obstruct it. And the Republican jury decided that this was acceptable. What does that tell you?
 
Last edited:
None of us needs to read an article to learn the warped view of media of most conservatives.

Look around. Just read what they type. Talk to one. It's funny.
Yes, but this call is coming from inside the house.
 
Of course he did. It was made abundantly clear by Mueller and his boss William Barr on numerous occasions before the investigation was even complete that Mueller was legally prohibited from concluding that the president committed a crime. The DOJ does not have the power to indict a sitting president. The purpose of the Mueller investigation was to exonerate Trump. It failed. Hence his determination that "if we could have exonerated the president, we would have done so."
Wow. Not sure whether to blame that on media brainwashing, or something native. There was absolutely nothing prohibiting Mueller from concluding that the president committed a crime. Who in the media told you that whopper?
 
Back
Top Bottom