Perfect example of media bias

[joko104]

President Obama repeatedly has called the Republic of the Union of Myanmar "Burma" - although that is not the country's name anymore. He did so repeatedly, which is obviously inaccurate.

I guess to cover his ass, every network joined in, calling Myanmar "Burma." It would be no different than if the president called Bangladesh "West Pakistan" and the media then joined in renaming the country to the British assigned name decades ago - the media doing so for the President's benefit.

There is no country of Burma. There has been no country of Burma for over 20 years. But, for the President, the media all agree to legitimize the mistaken.

 

[Wiseone]

President Obama repeatedly has called the Republic of the Union of Myanmar "Burma" - although that is not the country's name anymore. He did so repeatedly, which is obviously inaccurate.

I guess to cover his ass, every network joined in, calling Myanmar "Burma." It would be no different than if the president called Bangladesh "West Pakistan" and the media then joined in renaming the country to the British assigned name decades ago - the media doing so for the President's benefit.

There is no country of Burma. There has been no country of Burma for over 20 years. But, for the President, the media all agree to legitimize the mistaken.

Actually that's done for a very specific reason. The United States and several other countries still refer to it as Burma despite what their domestic government would like you to call them, this goes back a election in the 1990s where the party that won the election favored the term "Burma" but was prevented from taking power by the military, who liked the term "Myanmar." And unlike you Obama knows all of this

 

[Rainman05]

Perhaps not that much.

Though you are correct that the official name of the country has been changed in '89, it doesn't mean that all the countries still abide by the new terminology. I honestly had to check wikipedia and other sources to clarify the situation because I too had known the country as being Burma or Myanmar. Not the Republic of the union of Myanmar. This is the first time I actually had this wee bit of knowledge sink into me.

Burma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And look at this:

'Burma' continues to be used in English by the governments of many countries, including the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. The United Nations uses 'Myanmar', as do the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Russia,[15] Germany,[16] Norway,[17] China, India, Australia[18] and Japan.[19] There are variations of "Myanmar" when translated to local languages. In Spain "Myanmar" is commonly known as "Birmania". The Government of Brazil uses "Mianmar",[20] for example. On November 19, 2012 during the first visit by a sitting President of the United States, Barack Obama referred to the nation as both Myanmar and Burma

LoL, wikipedia is so updated . When I learned the geography of the world in school, I never heard of the republic of the union of mynmar. In my textbooks, it was Burma. And I'm in Europe dammit . We KNOW geography here.

 

[hikari]

Came looking for media bias left disappointed....in the NPR coverage they made sure to explain the country having two names, did the mainstream media not?

 

[Paul Austin]

It would be no different than if the president called Bangladesh "West Pakistan"

That would be the former East Pakistan that you're talking about, I assume?

 

[Wiseone]

That would be the former East Pakistan that you're talking about, I assume?

nice I didn't even catch that.

 

[Fisher]

The Artist Formerly Known As Prince can probably sympathize....

 

[joko104]

Actually that's done for a very specific reason. The United States and several other countries still refer to it as Burma despite what their domestic government would like you to call them, this goes back a election in the 1990s where the party that won the election favored the term "Burma" but was prevented from taking power by the military, who liked the term "Myanmar." And unlike you Obama knows all of this

I do know that. It goes back to 1989 and is no different than the USA refusing to recognize China for decades because it was commmunist. The United Nations recognized Myanmaras do the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Russia, Germany, Norway, China, India, Australia and Japan.

Only the British (of which Burma was their colony by military conquest), Canada and President Obama still call it "Burma" - apparently still pissed off that it isn't still a British colony or trying to make his political statement by insulting the ruling goverment - ruling for over 2 decades. He really should have the UK send back that bust of Winston Churchill.

 

[joko104]

That would be the former East Pakistan that you're talking about, I assume?

Correct, my error.

 

[Wiseone]

I do know that. It goes back to 1989 and is no different than the USA refusing to recognize China for decades because it was commmunist. The United Nations recognized Myanmaras do the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Russia, Germany, Norway, China, India, Australia and Japan.

Only the British (of which Burma was their colony by military conquest), Canada and President Obama still call it "Burma" - apparently still pissed off that it isn't still a British colony or trying to make his political statement by insulting the ruling goverment - ruling for over 2 decades. He really should have the UK send back that bust of Winston Churchill.

So are you angry at Obama's diplomacy, which is a continuation of the Bush and Clinton policy regarding the name of Burma, or at the "media bias?" I fail to see how when the United States officially recognizing the nation as Burma and not Myanmar, that the American media is somehow biased for using Burma instead of Myanmar? Was Rambo 4 also bias towards Obama because they refereed to the country as Burma and not once by Myanmar?

You can say its incorrect to use Burma when the de facto government wants to call it Myanmar, but if you don't recognize that government than you don't have to refer to them as they want to. Heck even if you did recognize them you wouldn't have to refer to them as they wanted to be referred to but of course you typically do out of respect if there's no other reason why you wouldn't want to refer to them by their chosen name.

So depending on who you recognize and who you believe has the authority to name Burma/Myanmar would change your perspective on which name is right and which is wrong

 

[joko104]

So are you angry at Obama's diplomacy, which is a continuation of the Bush and Clinton policy regarding the name of Burma, or at the "media bias?" I fail to see how when the United States officially recognizing the nation as Burma and not Myanmar, that the American media is somehow biased for using Burma instead of Myanmar? Was Rambo 4 also bias towards Obama because they refereed to the country as Burma and not once by Myanmar?

You can say its incorrect to use Burma when the de facto government wants to call it Myanmar, but if you don't recognize that government than you don't have to refer to them as they want to. Heck even if you did recognize them you wouldn't have to refer to them as they wanted to be referred to but of course you typically do out of respect if there's no other reason why you wouldn't want to refer to them by their chosen name.

So depending on who you recognize and who you believe has the authority to name Burma/Myanmar would change your perspective on which name is right and which is wrong

I understand. You are saying that whatever country conquered and colonialized the country gets to name it and what government actually is in charge - for decades - is irrelevant. Like I said, exactly the same as the USA refusing to recognize China was a country for decades too.

 

[justabubba]

I understand. You are saying that whatever country conquered and colonialized the country gets to name it and what government actually is in charge - for decades - is irrelevant. Like I said, exactly the same as the USA refusing to recognize China was a country for decades too.

never realized this
i recall our opposition to china's being seated in the UN

and that had to do with taiwan - or as the chinese continue to refer to it (as a part of their country) 'formosa'
and nothing to do with recognizing china as a sovereign nation and everything to do with whether the government of taiwan was the legitimate representative of mainland china (it wasn't)

 

[Wiseone]

I understand. You are saying that whatever country conquered and colonialized the country gets to name it and what government actually is in charge - for decades - is irrelevant. Like I said, exactly the same as the USA refusing to recognize China was a country for decades too.

I'm just saying there's more to it than whos the de facto ruler of a certain piece of land, de facto (by the fact) doesn't have to mean de jure (by the law) as well. De facto isn't dependent on a perspective, by the very nature of what facts are, de jure can change depending on who's laws you use. Diplomacy for all nations use both and just because the Untied States didn't recognize the junta as being de jure rulers of Burma, doesn't mean they simply ignored them.

 

[rocket88]

So are you angry at Obama's diplomacy, which is a continuation of the Bush and Clinton policy regarding the name of Burma, or at the "media bias?" I fail to see how when the United States officially recognizing the nation as Burma and not Myanmar, that the American media is somehow biased for using Burma instead of Myanmar? Was Rambo 4 also bias towards Obama because they refereed to the country as Burma and not once by Myanmar?

You can say its incorrect to use Burma when the de facto government wants to call it Myanmar, but if you don't recognize that government than you don't have to refer to them as they want to. Heck even if you did recognize them you wouldn't have to refer to them as they wanted to be referred to but of course you typically do out of respect if there's no other reason why you wouldn't want to refer to them by their chosen name.

So depending on who you recognize and who you believe has the authority to name Burma/Myanmar would change your perspective on which name is right and which is wrong

Technically, Germany doesn't call itself "Germany" either. It's Deutschland. "East Germany" and "West Germany" didn't exist either.

 

[Wiseone]

Technically, Germany doesn't call itself "Germany" either. It's Deutschland. "East Germany" and "West Germany" didn't exist either.

That's different, thats a translation and the German government refers to itself as "Germany" in English translations.

Whats your point?

 

[rocket88]

That's different, thats a translation and the German government refers to itself as "Germany" in English translations.

Whats your point?

I don't have one. I was trying to back you up.

 

[justabubba]

That's different, thats a translation and the German government refers to itself as "Germany" in English translations.

Whats your point?

i think, like this thread topic, there was no genuine point

 

[SMTA]

I'm just saying there's more to it than whos the de facto ruler of a certain piece of land, de facto (by the fact) doesn't have to mean de jure (by the law) as well. De facto isn't dependent on a perspective, by the very nature of what facts are, de jure can change depending on who's laws you use. Diplomacy for all nations use both and just because the Untied States didn't recognize the junta as being de jure rulers of Burma, doesn't mean they simply ignored them.

Nice job in debunking the OP's slanted view of the situation - just as slanted and slimy as the news organizations that he references.

Bwaahaahaa!

 

[mr4anarchy]

Actually that's done for a very specific reason. The United States and several other countries still refer to it as Burma despite what their domestic government would like you to call them, this goes back a election in the 1990s where the party that won the election favored the term "Burma" but was prevented from taking power by the military, who liked the term "Myanmar." And unlike you Obama knows all of this

Great post.

I can't believe the new wave of petty and unfounded attacks on our duly elected President. Respect the process and respect the office.

 

[Mycroft]

I think you all are wrong.

I think Obama just didn't know what the hell he was talking about when he went to that country. Much like with his other blunders there, I think his staff of idiots didn't tell him the difference between...or the ramifications of...the different names. What we have here is the incompetence of our foreign relations lightweight, Obama, and, as the OP says, the attempts of the MSM...like our own resident Obama apologists and minimizers...to give Obama a pass.

So it goes.

 

[notquiteright]

I think some hyperpartisans are showing their true colors. President Obama used both terms during his visit. It has been a long standing policy of our country to call that nation Burma.

Seems petty, shallow and lacking in character to try and make non-issues so important. Rather than accept the results some fling poo in all directions.

 

[Wiggen]

So are you angry at Obama's diplomacy, which is a continuation of the Bush and Clinton policy regarding the name of Burma, or at the "media bias?" I fail to see how when the United States officially recognizing the nation as Burma and not Myanmar, that the American media is somehow biased for using Burma instead of Myanmar? Was Rambo 4 also bias towards Obama because they refereed to the country as Burma and not once by Myanmar?

You can say its incorrect to use Burma when the de facto government wants to call it Myanmar, but if you don't recognize that government than you don't have to refer to them as they want to. Heck even if you did recognize them you wouldn't have to refer to them as they wanted to be referred to but of course you typically do out of respect if there's no other reason why you wouldn't want to refer to them by their chosen name.

So depending on who you recognize and who you believe has the authority to name Burma/Myanmar would change your perspective on which name is right and which is wrong

Mostly he's just angry that Obama won the election.