• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

Supposed left-wing bias

john831

New member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
Hotlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I read part of a book by P.W. Singer called Corporate Warriors, it was about the rise of the military-industrial complex in recent years. The book had a lot of examples of interventions of corporations in the civil wars and international wars of countries like Sierra Leone, Saudi Arabia, Papua New Guinea, and even the United States. If the media is supposedly so left-wing, wouldn't they be all over this story since Singer manages to cite many examples of this growing phenomenon; liberals in theory should be opposed to this since they favor more government intervention, less privatization, etc. Can anyone explain why this has not had virtually any coverage?
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
john831 said:
I read part of a book by P.W. Singer called Corporate Warriors, it was about the rise of the military-industrial complex in recent years. The book had a lot of examples of interventions of corporations in the civil wars and international wars of countries like Sierra Leone, Saudi Arabia, Papua New Guinea, and even the United States. If the media is supposedly so left-wing, wouldn't they be all over this story since Singer manages to cite many examples of this growing phenomenon; liberals in theory should be opposed to this since they favor more government intervention, less privatization, etc. Can anyone explain why this has not had virtually any coverage?

1) The media is utterly left wing, as you might imagine, since nearly every single person we see on the news use to work for a Democrat in office before they were trusted to be an "objective" reporter. See the thread, "Left Wing Lie..." for examples.

2) It is true that liberals have cornered the market on anti-corporate sentiment, and it looks like your book is definitely left wing, possibly even a conspiracy theory book. But just because the media isn't making perpetual front page news out of DeBeers artificially keeping the value of diamonds inflated and promoting slavery in Africa doesn't mean they don't promote anti-corporate sentiment.

They do cover these kinds of stories all the time as well as related WTO protests and such.
 

john831

New member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
Hotlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
1) The media is utterly left wing, as you might imagine, since nearly every single person we see on the news use to work for a Democrat in office before they were trusted to be an "objective" reporter. See the thread, "Left Wing Lie..." for examples.
I'm not really sure how this pertains to my question, explain

2) It is true that liberals have cornered the market on anti-corporate sentiment, and it looks like your book is definitely left wing, possibly even a conspiracy theory book. But just because the media isn't making perpetual front page news out of DeBeers artificially keeping the value of diamonds inflated and promoting slavery in Africa doesn't mean they don't promote anti-corporate sentiment.
They do cover these kinds of stories all the time as well as related WTO protests and such.
Its definitely not a conspiracy theory book, it explains this rise in corporate intervention not because of rich evil geniuses in Washington planning the demise of the poor man, but rather explains how changes in society may lead to this outsourcing of military jobs. Furthermore, this is much more than just diamond inflation, this deals with corporations making a profit off of people dying. It seems like the Democrats, who, I'll admit, lack a centralized point right now, and often accuse the Republicans of serving the rich, would want to milk this story for all it's worth, it could be a big selling point for 2006and 8
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
john831 said:
1 I'm not really sure how this pertains to my question, explain


2 Its definitely not a conspiracy theory book, it explains this rise in corporate intervention not because of rich evil geniuses in Washington planning the demise of the poor man, but rather explains how changes in society may lead to this outsourcing of military jobs. Furthermore, this is much more than just diamond inflation, this deals with corporations making a profit off of people dying. It seems like the Democrats, who, I'll admit, lack a centralized point right now, and often accuse the Republicans of serving the rich, would want to milk this story for all it's worth, it could be a big selling point for 2006and 8

1 You questioned the validity of a liberal media bias.

2 "Democrats are for the rich" is a thread you should check out on this site. According to Election 2004 data and other information recently released, Democrats are probably just as much knee deep in corporate atrocities.
 

john831

New member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
Hotlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I've read that thread; just because Democrats may have more donations from large corporations doesn't mean that accusing Republicans of being the rich party isn't a big selling point. One of the main Democratic points is that Republicans only care about the rich. If the media was really so liberal, then wouldn't they use as many stories as possible to convince the public that Republicans only care about big business?
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
john831 said:
I've read that thread; just because Democrats may have more donations from large corporations doesn't mean that accusing Republicans of being the rich party isn't a big selling point. One of the main Democratic points is that Republicans only care about the rich. If the media was really so liberal, then wouldn't they use as many stories as possible to convince the public that Republicans only care about big business?
They already do, john. Take the mining accidents in WV. I've heard it recently said on a program that the only reason these accidents ever occurred is because the governor of WV, and the President were too busy enjoying drinks and campaign contributions from the owners of the mining companies, and the mines. While I don't believe THAT, I do believe both people failed to enforce safety laws to the best of their abilities.

Why does it matter whether the democrats exploit this "point" or not? and Secondly, even if they didn't exploit this point, would that make them better or worse for the wear when it came to the elections? It sounds to me like you're trying to trump up support on an issue that both parties are guilty of. ohh what's that phrase... people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?
 

Mikkel

Pragmatist
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
489
Reaction score
0
Location
Cleveland, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
aquapub said:
1) The media is utterly left wing, as you might imagine, since nearly every single person we see on the news use to work for a Democrat in office before they were trusted to be an "objective" reporter. See the thread, "Left Wing Lie..." for examples.

2) It is true that liberals have cornered the market on anti-corporate sentiment, and it looks like your book is definitely left wing, possibly even a conspiracy theory book. But just because the media isn't making perpetual front page news out of DeBeers artificially keeping the value of diamonds inflated and promoting slavery in Africa doesn't mean they don't promote anti-corporate sentiment.

They do cover these kinds of stories all the time as well as related WTO protests and such.
You preach this every time this issue comes up.
1) It may be true that most of the TV personalities on the air lean slightly left-of-center than the american public. HOWEVER, you seem to be forgetting that the Media IS A BUSINESS. They ARE corporations. To say they are anti-corporate is an oxymoron. It isn't the personalities who choose what to report, it's the people paying their checks. This claim you're making is utterly fallacious, which leads to:

2)P.W. Singer, while he may lean to the left as well, is an expert in, "Contemporary warfare, foreign policy, national security, peacekeeping, terrorism, [and] U.S. policy towards the Islamic world." I highly doubt his thesis would be considered 'conspiracy theory' by anyone in the rational world. Perhaps you should actually READ his book before you start making wild accusations.
 
Top Bottom