• 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.

The Search for Unbiased News is Futile

liminal

New member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
The search for unbiased news is futile. I have given up. Instead, I try to expose myself to a wide variety of sources, in the hope of gaining as balanced a view of the story as possible.

I trust most of you have seen Google’s news feature, located at http://news.google.com. For any given news story, there will be anywhere from a dozen to a thousand different articles from various publications worldwide.

So if I'm reading about the wall being built by Israel, Google will give me an article by Ha'aretz, al-Jazeera, the BBC, the Washington Post, Reuters, the International Herald Tribune, and even Xinhua.

Same goes for Karl Rove's apparent indiscretions: all the TV news and newspapers, but also the white house press releases, whywehatebush.com, rushlimbaugh.com, and everything in between.

Clearly there is still bias: Google picks which sources I see, those sources must be on the internet, etc. Still, some improvement is better than nothing.

I wonder how long it will take for people to realize that FOX, CNN, and MSNBC are to news what wrestling is to boxing. I, for one, refuse to be misled.

CNN's Inside Politics (mercifully sans Judy Woodruff) now airs a segment discussing the most popular political blogs. It's got atrocious hosts and a painfully obvious name, and it goes through the same filter as everything else on CNN, but it's a start.

I am fascinated by FOX News. Brit Hume had a guest on yesterday who outlined several connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda, including the Africa claim and the terrorist cell that existed in Iraq during Saddam's reign. Brit Hume nodded the entire time, neglecting to even mention that the Africa claim is widely discredited and that the terror cell was in northern Iraq, within the US no fly zone. I watched Brit Hume's face every time he was on screen and he was inscrutable. Fair and balanced is such a great slogan. Why don't they just get it over with and call it the Ministry of Truth?

I do not mean for this example to be partisan: there are some legitimate reasons for the War in Iraq and those should be the basis for the argument to support it, not cynical deception. It is the same for Michael Moore: he devalues a legitimate cause by making a misleading, and in some ways down-right untruthful, movie.

Did anybody catch the White House press corps grilling McClellan about his previously voiced flat-out denial of Karl Rove's involvement in the leak and subsequent refusal to comment on an 'ongoing investigation,' even though he felt perfectly justified doing so when it suited him? NBC's correspondent was visibly angry and shouted, 'this is ridiculous!' Maybe the jailing of the NYTimes reporter was just what the mainstream needed to prod it into some semblance of real journalism.

Do people think that the popularity of online news and blogs will force the mainstream news to become more responsible? Is it hopeless? I'm tired of yelling at my television!
 
liminal said:
Do people think that the popularity of online news and blogs will force the mainstream news to become more responsible? Is it hopeless? I'm tired of yelling at my television!

Welcome to Debate Politics!

I sure hope so. But, there are folks that simply refuse to think for themselves or even watch the news muchless read a blog or news page.

news.google.com is one of my hottest hit sites - I actually keep a tab in firefox open and it auto-refreshes all day long.
 
Welcome Limi!

A lot of times, and I include myself here, a statement of fact automatically gets discounted because of the source. This IS the media's fault...If they throw out trash 10 days in a row, the "gem" they throw out on the 11th day will be accused of being trash...It's a total "cry-wolf" syndrome....

If you say to a Liberal, "Today I was watching FoxNews and they said.....", the rest of the story has just become irrelevant. They heard "FoxNews" and the brain went into "whatever comes next is bullshit" mode....The same with conservatives and the NY Times. They've lost credibility to anyone who's not in the choir.
 
I still like C-span as my unbiased source. Many of their show's are straight from meetings, councils, house/congress debates on bills, etc... I believe they do the best coverage because they will read off news reports from two biases and then people can call in and debate on the issue. I also like the fact they don't have that many hosts thus, and there is very little or no spin done by the host. Either way they can be debated without them yelling at each other like they do on most shows. :mrgreen:
 
Originally posted by stsburns
I still like C-span as my unbiased source. Many of their show's are straight from meetings, councils, house/congress debates on bills, etc... I believe they do the best coverage because they will read off news reports from two biases and then people can call in and debate on the issue.
C-span is alright. That's a good source.

Originally posted by stsburns
I also like the fact they don't have that many hosts thus, and there is very little or no spin done by the host. Either way they can be debated without them yelling at each other like they do on most shows.
And as you yourself did on that other thread. Walk your talk junior!
 
Billo_Really said:
And as you yourself did on that other thread. Walk your talk junior!
Was that suppose to affend me? If that was its purpose, then I've heard better comebacks! :lol: :2wave:
 
Originally posted by stsburns:
Was that suppose to affend me? If that was its purpose, then I've heard better comebacks!
I don't mean to offend anyone. I just think your FOS. Your all over the map on that other thread.
 
Billo_Really said:
C-span is alright. That's a good source.

You wouldn't know a good source if his smacked you in the head...which I fully endorse....

This is from someone who repeatedly uses truthout.org....
 
Billo_Really said:
I don't mean to offend anyone. I just think your FOS. Your all over the map on that other thread.
Saying that you think i'm FOS isn't offense! Please, you love personal attacks! It was your intentions were to be offensive! So stop lieing and saying your not! :hitsfan:
 
Last edited:
stsburns said:
Saying that you think i'm FOS isn't offense! Please, you love personal attacks! It was your intentions were to be offensive! So stop lieing and saying your not! :hitsfan:

Take what Billo Really said as a compliment...

If he said that he agrees with with you, THAT would be more offensive than anything.
 
cnredd said:
Take what Billo Really said as a compliment...

If he said that he agrees with with you, THAT would be more offensive than anything.
Haha! :lol: I wasn't worried about his reaction but more of the intentions of his post! But if he did agree with me :wow: that would be a shocker! :rofl Thanks cnredd!
 
Originally posted by stsburns:
Saying that you think i'm FOS isn't offense! Please, you love personal attacks! It was your intentions were to be offensive! So stop lieing and saying your not!
Hey don't take it personal. I think that about anyone that jacks me around. And when it is obvious you do not care to see another point of view before you respond you are playing games. Little word games. Only yours don't make a whole lotta sense. Like when you list all the sources of someone I used as a reference and then almost in the same breath say he hardley gave any sources. When there was a source after every comment. That doesn't make sense!
 
Originally posted by stsburns:
Haha! I wasn't worried about his reaction but more of the intentions of his post! But if he did agree with me that would be a shocker! Thanks cnredd!
Well I guess you got shocked and maybe awed. Because I agreed with you on C-span being a good source. Now that makes sense!

How long does it take you to shave in the morning?
 
Billo_Really said:
Hey don't take it personal. I think that about anyone that jacks me around. And when it is obvious you do not care to see another point of view before you respond you are playing games. Little word games. Only yours don't make a whole lotta sense. Like when you list all the sources of someone I used as a reference and then almost in the same breath say he hardley gave any sources. When there was a source after every comment. That doesn't make sense!
Here let me explain it to you like this! Though he did use many sources, very few were actually linked to his comments on his website! Thats were he may have listed his sources but they were not used consistantly throughout his statements!
 
Billo_Really said:
Well I guess you got shocked and maybe awed. Because I agreed with you on C-span being a good source. Now that makes sense!

How long does it take you to shave in the morning?
Just keep posting you'll eventually get a response! At least we agree on C-span but atleast I don't have to hide behind the "Green Party". Where did hair get into this conversation? If your dieing to know "Classified Information" about me, I like growing my gote! Since I just revealed classified information about myself now I have to :nukeum: you, oh well I got a good laugh! :mrgreen:
 
Originally posted by cnredd:
You wouldn't know a good source if his smacked you in the head...which I fully endorse....

This is from someone who repeatedly uses truthout.org....
For someone who watches the Fox follies and don't think you even know what sources are. Is it the reading that throws you? Are you just used to getting info from a loud mouthed idiot like Hannity or Reilly. As far as Truthout what are you afraid of. Do you really think that just because it comes from a liberal source that automatically you should'nt treat anything from that source as valid or true? Just automatically blow it off as liberal biased and we all know what that means. Ya it means you didn't graduate from fourth grade.
 
Orignally posted by stsburns:
Just keep posting you'll eventually get a response! At least we agree on C-span but atleast I don't have to hide behind the "Green Party". Where did hair get into this conversation? If your dieing to know "Classified Information" about me, I like growing my gote! Since I just revealed classified information about myself now I have to you, oh well I got a good laugh
I was just wondering how long it took you to shave both of those faces.
 
Originally posted by stsburns:
Here let me explain it to you like this! Though he did use many sources, very few were actually linked to his comments on his website! Thats were he may have listed his sources but they were not used consistantly throughout his statements!
Ok if that is your take on it then I don't have an issue with that. What ever is your truth is your business. And I will respect that.
 
Billo_Really said:
I was just wondering how long it took you to shave both of those faces.
The same amount of time it takes for you to shave your head in the morning! :lol:
 
Billo_Really said:
Ok if that is your take on it then I don't have an issue with that. What ever is your truth is your business. And I will respect that.
Thank you for understanding! :2wave:
 
Billo_Really said:
Hey don't take it personal. I think that about anyone that jacks me around. And when it is obvious you do not care to see another point of view before you respond you are playing games. Little word games. Only yours don't make a whole lotta sense. Like when you list all the sources of someone I used as a reference and then almost in the same breath say he hardley gave any sources. When there was a source after every comment. That doesn't make sense!

Here's are some of Billo's recent threads...

How Bush-leage can go from Surplus to Deficit Boggles the Mind!

Outside looking in: The "Not Fox News" News

If a Conservative Reaches High Court, say goodbye to Bill of Rights

PROOF Bush LIED about Iraq!

Al Quaida Man of The Year: GEORGE BUSH!

Notice how he puts out his point of view in the thread topic...BEFORE anyone has a chance to respond...

Instead of saying "Do YOU think this?...Let's Debate"...
He says "I think this...Now defend my accusations".
 
cnredd said:
Here's are some of Billo's recent threads...

How Bush-leage can go from Surplus to Deficit Boggles the Mind!

Outside looking in: The "Not Fox News" News

If a Conservative Reaches High Court, say goodbye to Bill of Rights

PROOF Bush LIED about Iraq!

Al Quaida Man of The Year: GEORGE BUSH!

Notice how he puts out his point of view in the thread topic...BEFORE anyone has a chance to respond...

Instead of saying "Do YOU think this?...Let's Debate"...
He says "I think this...Now defend my accusations".
Good point! He's being hypicritical!
 
Originally posted by cnredd:
You ...[Billo Really]...wouldn't know a good source if his smacked you in the head...which I fully endorse....[Are you saying you endorse...I can't do it, I just can't do it!]...

This is from someone ...[Billo Really]...who repeatedly uses...[an organization as biased as]...truthout.org ...[as a source!]...
Originally posted by stsburns:
Notice how he...[Billo]...puts out his point of view in the thread topic ...[of cancer]... BEFORE anyone...[stsburns, cnredd, etc]... has a chance to respond...[No way?...Way!]...
Instead of saying "Do YOU...[not Billo]... think this? ...[Think what? Don't leave me hanging!]...Let's Debate" ...[About what?]...
He says "I think this ...[In the words of Ronald Reagan, "There you go again!"]... Now defend my ...[Billo's?]... accusations". ...[Defend Billo! Are you nuts?]...

www.dailynexus.com
http://www.dailynexus.com/opinion/2004/6665.html

Freedom of Speech Isn't Reserved for the Left
Patrick Callahan
Wednesday, February 11, 2004


Over and over we hear the same hypocrisy from the campus liberals and it's getting quite sickening: Republicans are closed-minded; conservatives don't know how to listen to alternative beliefs. Throughout my short-lived time here at UCSB, it has become blatantly clear to me that the exact opposite is true; never have I encountered a harsher one-way-only environment than this university. Gaining national recognition, the university has been profiled in leading magazines as one of the most liberal and anti-conservative campuses in the United States.

Take, for example, the Michael Moore lecture. Obviously it's supposed to be pro-liberal philosophy - that's not a problem. However, the level of pure hatred and bitterness towards conservatives during that event was appalling. Having just returned from a Republican convention across town that failed to even mention Democrats, the juxtaposition revealed the absolute immaturity of parts of the left wing.

Then there was the Phyllis Schlafly debate: An event sponsored by the UCSB College Republicans, it was the first political event I'd seen where both sides had a fair chance. Schlafly and her counterpart were both given equal time and equal opportunity to present their views. As soon as I left the debate, the liberal feminists began whining about how unfair and pro-conservative the setup was. Considering that the event could not possibly have been any more balanced, it shows the liberal demands for a biased environment.

A warning to all conservatives who wish to express their political views: watch out for the ice cream. I placed a George W. Bush re-election sign in my window to show my support for his campaign. It immediately sparked a great deal of conversation and tension throughout the entire Manzanita Village. The conversation was good - I like the political fervor and discussion. However, when the John Buttny and Howard Dean signs and the non-removable stickers began popping up on my window, along with the recent addition of someone's chocolate soft-serve ice cream, I got a little angry. What right do people have to place their signs on my window? Is it not my freedom of speech and expression to place what signs I want on my property, or is that speech only reserved for the liberal causes? According to my memory of history, people fought and died so that everyone could possess the opportunity to express their political beliefs. In order for this guaranteed right to mean anything, it requires respect; it requires maturity. You don't have to agree with me; you don't have to listen to me; you don't have to read my signs. You do, however, have to respect my rights.

The one-track mind of this campus is increasingly ridiculous. A university is an institution for, alongside academics, absorbing knowledge of one's self and one's surroundings. Open your mind, leftists, and accept those who are different. Grow up and have some political maturity.

Patrick Callahan is a sophomore political science and music major


jconservative9ma.jpg
 
Yes colleges are like that. I'd had a Writing teacher who intentionally failed me because I was more conservative than he was. The other kid in the class had OK writing skills and repeatedly showed his hatred for bush and SUV's he Aced the class, now you tell me what's wrong with that! The boy drove a truck that gets less MPG than my car, he can't even practice what he preaches, and he got an A in the class! Oh yea did I mention the professor drove a Corvette! :mrgreen: Thank You for your article Billo_Really!
 
Last edited:
See, I have had several college classes already and in three of them, there was a conservative teaching. I repeatedly was the only liberal in my class at USC and/or UCLA that spoke up and provided rational and I wasn't failed, in fact I got two A's and a B.
 
Back
Top Bottom