Should there be an American bias to the news?

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:
2)You [billo] have mislead & misinformed in the past and have been called on it, so your level of trust in this forum is so low a cockroach couldn't limbo under it.

I challenge you to show proof that I "mislead & misinformed" in previous posts. Back up what you say. As far as this comment:

Originally posted by cnredd:
...your level of trust in this forum is so low...

What gives you the right to speak for the entire forum?

One last thing, when have you ever done this:

Forum Rules updated [09/01/05]

1. Freedom of Speech - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

At Debate Politics we see freedom of speech as the right to communicate ideas. With this right comes the responsibility to choose your words carefully and respect the rights of others. Common sense dictates the difference between one expressing themselves and one who is disruptive. If you are focused on contributing to the community, you will not have to be concerned with being a disruption. Disruptive behavior, such as personal attacks, can lead to temporary or permanent revocation of posting privileges.

I've never started a thread that was directed at you personally. How have you shown me any respect whatsoever. From your first post on, you have disrespected me without ever posting anything different. If you have, post it, and I will retract my statement and apologize. But the post must be prior to this one. I've already looked at your responses to mine and found nothing that even hints of respect. They are more like your "This thread whips butt" thread, Post #1, where you try to paint a picture of me through innuendo and inference that you might think is funny but I find offensive.

The only reason you get away with it is because I don't rat on people. But I have every right to respond to your derrogatory comments directed at me. So prove it, dude, prove it. Show just one post that cannot be construed as derrogatory or sarcastic. Just one.

JUST ONE GOD-DAMN ONE!

 

[ALiberalModerate]

---snip----
JUST ONE GOD-DAMN ONE!

I really hate it when people use that term. Don't get me wrong, I swear. Thats just a really bad one to use. I never could understand why people can't use the F word on the radio, but they can say that right and left.

Anyway, just my 2 cents, back to the topic at hand.

 

[TJS0110]

I find that term insulting, please do not use it. I respect your beliefs and I would appreciate it if you respected mine. Thank You.

 

[cnredd]

I challenge you to show proof that I "mislead & misinformed" in previous posts. Back up what you say.

Your wish is my fun-filled action to do so...This was the FIRST one, since, at the time, I was only here for about a week, so I knew how you (chuckle)"debate" pretty quickly"

From the thread "Today's News - Are These Memo’s Legitimate?"

Post #460...The beginning of a wonderful 3 page assessment on how you "misled" the forum members by using doctored pictures of Bush...

Here we go...

The photo at the bottom of posts 441 and 442. You know the one -- the photo of the President which was doctored to show the book he was holding upside down.

You were right to remove it. Did you know it was faked before being so advised in this forum?

The point I was making had nothing to do with the book. And that part wasn't faked!

Post #463 was your defense of this...

How do you know it wasn't faked?

Because I saw it with my own two eyes.

But THEN came the source that proved your pictures were INDEED faked...Post #465

At the link below you will find the original photo together with an explanation that should satisfy even you.

Do you wish to be thought of as an honest person who was simply duped? Or else someone who knowingly spreads a hoax? Your choice.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/bushbook.asp

Sorry.

Instead of ADMITTING your mistake, you attemped to change the "point" of the picture...even AFTER you said that weren't "faked" because you saw it with your "own two eyes"...Post #466...

Do you know what my point was? If you can't answer that question, why reply to something you know nothing about?

When asked what the point is, and the response given by you, you just threw any credibility into the crapper...Post #470

If you go back to my post #359 in this thread, I explain what the point [relevence] of image.

Your point is he just sat there reading a book? And as an example of this you post a doctored picture of Bush reading a different book. And when questioned about the picture and the fact it was doctored you originally said it wasn't faked. Then when I asked how you knew it wasn't faked you said "Because I saw it with my own two eyes." And now you're saying the whole point was he sat there reading a book?

Sorry that makes no sense to me what so ever.

The funnier part was when the OTHER picture you posted was found out to be doctored...furthering your misleading tactics...Post #481...

Or see without taking the cover off.

Caught in your own web once more. Don't you find this tiresome?

http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp

I emplore everyone on this forum to read the whole thing starting from Post #459, which was a response to the picture right before Billo responded to it...it gets funnier & funnier after that.:2wave:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=1938&page=46&highlight=Memo

Now that's just ONE misinforming thing you've done...

Another? This one's funny as heck, too...

Found in the thread "US Politics - Questions for the preisident"...Posts #2 through #12...This was my question...

Why aren't you closing off the southwestern borders to illigal immigrants and possible terrorists?

You responded with a chart showing TENNESSEE with the largest percentage increase of immigration in a 5 year period...When I explained in post #3 how the percentages are different from the ACTUAL NUMBER of immigrants...This is how you responded....(This is funny!)...Post #4...

This whole border crisis is just a phoney, made up, bullshit issue you guys keep creating as a distraction from the real problems facing this country, which is.......you guys! The biggest threat to the safety of the United States is neo-conservatives.

At least liberals welcome, maybe grudgingly, alternative points of view. You guys cannot except any other point of view that doesn't fall in line with your fundamentalist doctrine. Which is something you have in common with the Islamists.

You need to realize you are the extreme radicals of this society. And you are ever increasing into the minority. More and more people are starting to see you guys for what you really are.....illogical, irrational phsycho's! And every day is a reminder of just how much you have fuucked up this country for the rest of us with your anti-American prose.

I'd like to dedicate a song to you.
"The ballad of Mr. Smith" by Bob Dylan

Ya, that fits you like a glove.

I once again urge the members of this forum to read the thread and make their own judgements...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=3078

I could go on about how you attempted to show that there were more deaths than reported in the Iraq war(War on Terror - 1800+ casulties? Try 9000!") where your FIRST SENTENCE is this...

What the government doesn't want you to know is this war is taking a far greater toll on us than the media is letting on.

And THEN you tried to backstep by saying it is ONLY a possibility...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=3388

Or I could mention your constant use of a source that stated there 100,000 deaths in Iraq until it was found to be bogus...You even started your own thread admitting it!..."War on Terror - Billo Off by 75,000 Deaths!"...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=2442

Heck!...I could even mention how GPS_Flex discovered that your signature line wasn't said at the Nuremburg trials and how you split hairs to convince yourself it was...Notwithstanding that you STILL haven't corrected the spelling of Goerring's name:roll:...

From the thread "War on Terror - Hussein Did Not Gas Kurds!"...which is misleading in and of itself...create by you, Billo...Posts #18,19,22, and then the coup de grat...Post #29...where you comically state this...

I guess your definition of the Nuremburg Trials is different than mine.

Post #104 sums everything up nicely later on...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=2950&page=2

These are JUST the ones that are currently in my mind...You asked for ONE...I provided MORE than one...The only reason I stop is because my point has been proven, and I want everyone who reads this to go to the sources for some fine entertainment..:2wave:

 

[Billo_Really]

Taking things out of context does not prove your point. The picture was not, and never was the issue. It was not my intent to use the picture in the manner that you were alleging. I was making the point that Bush did nothing for several minutes after being informed of the plane hitting the second tower. Also, the link Fantasea provided that you are using as evidence was directed at the book, which again, was not the subject of my point. In addition, your comments on the immigration picture do not show what I posted as being false. And if you have a problem with my opinion of this border issue, that's your problem, not mine. Furthermore, don't use as your evidence something that you cannot prove as false. Until you can prove how many deaths there are in Iraq, you cannot say that the evidence I posted was misleading.

Your comments regarding Nuremburg are out of context. And I don't give a rats ass how his name is spelled. Your splitting hairs.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by cnredd:
Your wish is my fun-filled action to do so...This was the FIRST one, since, at the time, I was only here for about a week, so I knew how you (chuckle)"debate" pretty quickly"

From the thread "Today's News - Are These Memo’s Legitimate?"

Post #460...The beginning of a wonderful 3 page assessment on how you "misled" the forum members by using doctored pictures of Bush...

Here we go...

You cannot mislead anyone when they take what your saying out of context. You have to look at what was said in the context it was presented. The point I was making was in reference to Michael Moore's film Farenheit 911. In the movie, he showed film footage of Bush in the classroom. Are you telling me that was faked? Going off on that picture is pretty lame. My point in that whole thing was the following:

FAHRENHEIT 9/11: “As the attack took place, Mr. Bush was on his way to an elementary school in Florida . When informed of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center, where terrorists had struck just eight years prior, Bush just decided to go ahead with his photo opportunity.”

NOTE: It should be emphasized that at the time Bush was notified of the first plane attack, he (unlike the rest of America) was already aware that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes, per the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB). He was also aware, of course, that the World Trade Center had been historically a target for terrorist attacks. He nonetheless went ahead with this photo opportunity in a school full of children.

“Mr. Bush arrived at the school, just before 9 am, expecting to be met by its motherly principal, Gwen Rigell. Instead he was pulled sharply aside by the familiar, bulky figure of 51-year-old Karl Rove, a veteran political fixer and trusted aide of both Mr. Bush and his father, George Sr. Mr. Rove, a fellow Texan with an expansive manner and a colorful turn of phrase, told the President that a large commercial airliner (American Flight 11) had crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Centre . Mr. Bush clenched his teeth, lowered his bottom lip and said something inaudible. Then he went into the school.” William Langley, “Revealed: What Really Went on During Bush’s ‘Missing Hours,’” The Telegraph, December 16, 2001.

“The airborne attack on the World Trade Center was at least the second terrorist attempt to topple the landmarks. In 1993, terrorists sought to bomb one building so that it would explode and fall into the other. The plot did not succeed, but six people were killed and more than 1,000 injured.” Cragg Hines, “Terrorists Strike from Air; Jetliners Slam into Pentagon, Trade Center” The Houston Chronicle, September 11, 2001.

August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike Inside US”: “Al-Qa'ida members -- including some who are US citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks… FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.” August 6, 2001, Bin Ladin Determined to Strike Inside US, http://www.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf

FAHRENHEIT 9/11: “When the second plane hit the tower, his chief of staff entered the classroom and told Mr. Bush the nation is under attack.”

“At 9:05 a.m., the White House chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., stepped into the classroom and whispered into the president's right ear, ‘A second plane hit the other tower, and America's under attack.’” David E. Sanger and Don Van Natta Jr., “After The Attacks: The Events; In Four Days, A National Crisis Changes Bush's Presidency,” The New York Times, September 16, 2001

FAHRENHEIT 9/11: “Mr. Bush just sat there and continued to read My Pet Goat.”

“It was while attending a second-grade reading class at Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla., to promote his education reforms that President Bush learned America was under attack. In the presence of her VIP guest, teacher Sandra Kay Daniels, 45, conducted the day's lesson, which centered on a story about a pet goat.” “9/11: A Year After,” Los Angeles Times, September 11, 2002.

President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-graders read a story about a girl's pet goat Tuesday before he spoke briefly and somberly about the terrorist attacks. “Bush hears of attack while visiting Booker,” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, September 12, 2001.
See also film footage.

FAHRENHEIT 9/11: “Nearly seven minutes passed with nobody doing anything.”

“[H]e lingered in the room for another six minutes [after being informed of the second plane]… [At] 9:12, he abruptly retreated, speaking to Mr. Cheney and New York officials.” David E. Sanger and Don Van Natta Jr., “After The Attacks: The Events;In Four Days, A National Crisis Changes Bush's Presidency,” The New York Times, September 16, 2001 .
“Mr. Bush remained in the elementary school for nearly a half an hour after Andy Card whispered in his ear.” Michael Kranish, “Bush: US To Hunt Down Attackers,” Boston Globe, September 11, 2001.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/f911reader/index.php?id=16

When Pacridge asked me the question, my answer was in reference to the movie, not the picture.

Originally posted by cnredd:
Instead of ADMITTING your mistake, you attemped to change the "point" of the picture...even AFTER you said that weren't "faked" because you saw it with your "own two eyes"...Post #466...

I wasn't trying to "...change the point..." because the "point" was never the picture.

Originally posted by cnredd:
When asked what the point is, and the response given by you, you just threw any credibility into the crapper...Post #470

If you notice, Pacridge's comments were in reference to the picture. Which I have already stated several times (then and now) that wasn't the point.

If you want to talk about misleading the viewer, how about your little post #1 on "This Thread Whips Butt" thread that you tried to mask as a hypothetical. I didn't appreciate the inference.

Taking things out of context and presenting them as facts is misleading.

 

[Billo_Really]

Let's talk a little more on the subject of "misleading".

Originally posted by cnredd:
Heck!...I could even mention how GPS_Flex discovered that your signature line wasn't said at the Nuremburg trials and how you split hairs to convince yourself it was...Notwithstanding that you STILL haven't corrected the spelling of Goerring's name

I might not care how it is spelled, but you should if your going to make it a talking point. I think you got one too many "r's" there. And the source below confirms that it was said at the Nuremburg trials (not "during" the trials as you and GPS_Flex were trying to make it seem).

The quote cited above does not appear in transcripts of the Nuremberg trials because although Goering spoke these words during the course of the proceedings, he did not offer them at his trial.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm

 

[cnredd]

Do me a big favor, Billo...Keep posting....

You're a reminder of those Renaissance days gone past where the little person dressed in motley would do somersaults and fall to amuse the court.

Only after you log off does legitimate debating continue....

You're a TV timeout...

The next time I feel depressed and could use a good laugh, I'll come to this forum and read your last few posts...Then I walk away knowing that ignorance is truly bliss...

Keep posting!:2wave:

 

[Billo_Really]

http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp
And another photograph of President Bush taken from the same sequence as the one above demonstrates that even if his binoculars did initially have their lens caps in place, they weren't there for long:

If Snopes official postition on this is "Undetermined", then it can be neither proven nor disproven.

In spite of how you feel about me, and you know who you are, I still respect your posts and welcome every word.

 

[teacher]

In spite of how you feel about me, and you know who you are, I still respect your posts and welcome every word.

But will you respect me in the morning? It's me, teacher, remember? Party hats, monkeys, Bourbon, K. Bailey, ring a bell?



You said you loved me!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by teacher:
But will you respect me in the morning? It's me, teacher, remember? Party hats, monkeys, Bourbon, K. Bailey, ring a bell?

Do you believe everything you hear? Now, get out before my wife gets home!

 

[Tashah]

Should American reporters "check their citizenship at the door" when reporting the news?

All news reporting should be fair, balanced, impartial, and unbiased. Anything else is merely commentary.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

First of all, the FCC cannot do whatever it wants. I have some personal experience working under FCC regulations, and we're allowed to make any political statement we want, even if its anti-government or hate-speech. I have a strong dislike for the FCC because of their regulations. Their treatment of Howard Stern is a threat to free-speech. However, if they want to get you they have to bring you to court and cite a specific law that you broke. So there goes your "no questions asked" theory.

There are no real instances of political censorship. A few months back, air America got in trouble for running a spot where they shoot the president. They were investigated, but NO ACTION was taken.

As for not having leftist/socialist media, I think you assume that if only the American people were exposed to it, they'd like it. There are plenty of alternative sources in newspapers and on the internet that take a far left point of view. But to most Americans, you guys have been discredited just like the Fascists, so we just don't want to hear it. That's why it doesn't make it big time. You guys have your chance to compete in the market of ideas just like everyone else.

I think that its more true to say that liberals would rather read a book then listen to a shouting match. Liberal books sell very well.

 

[128shot]

All news reporting should be fair, balanced, impartial, and unbiased. Anything else is merely commentary.

agreed.



BTW, is that you in the avatar?

 

[Tashah]

BTW, is that you in the avatar?

Indeed it is.

 

[128shot]

you're a beautiful lady.


Anyhow.


I think American media needs to globalize a bit and start doing real researched storys, there are too many columnists who just speak their opinion, and thats not really good media.

 

[Stinger]

All news reporting should be fair, balanced, impartial, and unbiased. Anything else is merely commentary.

And there is nothing wrong with news commentary as long as it doesn't pretend to be something else. Commentary on news and politics and given us some of the most brillant writing in the country. It is when commentary trys to present itself as hard news that I have a problem.

 

[TJS0110]

The only problem is that people pay attention to bias, people think that all the opinions that are injected into the news is fact.

 

[JOHNYJ]

WE should create a version of the BBC world service.Broadcast the Truth,but.Also support American interests with the Truth ! Why we don't defend ourselfs more on International New outlets I don't understand.

 

[DeeJayH]

And there is nothing wrong with news commentary as long as it doesn't pretend to be something else. Commentary on news and politics and given us some of the most brillant writing in the country. It is when commentary trys to present itself as hard news that I have a problem.

and yet, if one cannot tell the difference between a News Report and a Commentary, that person probably couldnt figure out bias or lies from the truth

 

[DeeJayH]

You couldn't be more wrong Fonzi

First...I have an obligation to my Lord & Savior

Second...I have an obligation to my family

Third...I have an obligation to my country

Fourth...I have an obligation to my employer

& yes...those obligations are in the order of importance

it is actually

UNIT
CORPS
GOD
COUNTRY

A Few Good Men what a great flick

 

[DeeJayH]

Here we go...
:2wave:

doh-boy
you just had to ask didnt you Billo, LOL

 

[Rhadamanthus]

You couldn't be more wrong Fonzi


it is actually

UNIT
CORPS
GOD
COUNTRY

A Few Good Men what a great flick

It's all a matter of preference but personaly I go for,

Self
Family
Country

 

[epr64]

You are certainly correct in saying that the main stream media seems to be portraying only a verry narrow view of current events. But this wouldn't really be such a problem if it wasn't for the fact that most people never look past the evening news. So...is the ignorance of the American people the fault of the mainstream media or their own laziness? Personaly I feel that if someone goes out of their way in search of the truth then they will be able to uncover it.

Well, I'm not in the US, but let me tell you a short story. It happens in Belgium, where the press is supposed to be less implicated in big media ... because we're a small country :lol:

I was a pro photographer, and still cover demos. I publish the pics on the local Indymedias, and have of course no more press card. The last time I covered a small event, I was told by the cops that I couldn't take pictures and had to leave. They even threatened to seize my material. The event was totally peacefull, legal and authorized, I may add. The cops were just there to check the authorisation.
My stepbrother is a policeman. Last time I saw him, I asked him on what basis the cops could request me to leave, but let the crews of the official media operate.
He answered me that "the official press can have its press card removed by the politics, so they care about what they say. Someone without a press card cannot be controlled, and as such, is systematically targeted by the police." The guy is quite cynical, so I pushed him a bit further. The final quote was something like "if you think that the press is free and democratic, think about something else. If you think you can report the truth when it hurts (or can hurt) someone in the police, justice or political field, you'll find out what jail means quite fast".

This is the situation here. I don't know how it happens in the US. The ties between money and power and politics are the same everywhere.

Just to add some food for thoughts.

CU
Y

 

[Deegan]

Well, I'm not in the US, but let me tell you a short story. It happens in Belgium, where the press is supposed to be less implicated in big media ... because we're a small country :lol:

I was a pro photographer, and still cover demos. I publish the pics on the local Indymedias, and have of course no more press card. The last time I covered a small event, I was told by the cops that I couldn't take pictures and had to leave. They even threatened to seize my material. The event was totally peacefull, legal and authorized, I may add. The cops were just there to check the authorisation.
My stepbrother is a policeman. Last time I saw him, I asked him on what basis the cops could request me to leave, but let the crews of the official media operate.
He answered me that "the official press can have its press card removed by the politics, so they care about what they say. Someone without a press card cannot be controlled, and as such, is systematically targeted by the police." The guy is quite cynical, so I pushed him a bit further. The final quote was something like "if you think that the press is free and democratic, think about something else. If you think you can report the truth when it hurts (or can hurt) someone in the police, justice or political field, you'll find out what jail means quite fast".

This is the situation here. I don't know how it happens in the US. The ties between money and power and politics are the same everywhere.

Just to add some food for thoughts.

CU
Y

Fortunately, we have more freedoms then any other nation, that's why so many here complain all the time, they are spoiled with freedoms. That sounds like a terrible situation where you live, I had not heard that about Belgium, that's unfortunate. As for this topic, of course there will always be an American bias to our media, it's pride in ones country, and that will always show through.