Wondering about the "bias" (1 Viewer)

[Willoughby]

JUst wondering if there are any other non-americans on here and what their opinions are regarding the media bias. FRom a british point of view it would appear that the bias in the US is leaning towards conservative. Maybe that is due to the connection that is made between over-the-top patriotism and conservatives?

 

[talloulou]

The thing is 9 times out of 10 a conservative will see liberal bias everywhere just as 9 times out of 10 a liberal will see conservative bias everywhere. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle...it all depends on what source you are talking about and what issue you are talking about. For example there is probably more conservative talk radio however there's also Air America and Howard Stern which are both far from conservative.

To say the media "as one entity" leans one way or the other is kind of absurd in my opinion. Though you could argue that the media as a whole in the US doesn't cover world events nearly as much as it should while simultaneously giving ridiculous amounts of time to inane stories and thus many Americans who work all day but make sure to watch the 11 o'clock news are still mostly ignorant to much that's happening in the world.

 

[beyondtherim55008@yahoo.c]

I kinda like the stories the media gives, like a guy who has collected over 500 baseball type hats, or a grandma who actually eats her home grown pumpkins raw; I live for these stories:shock:

 

[alphieb]

I kinda like the stories the media gives, like a guy who has collected over 500 baseball type hats, or a grandma who actually eats her home grown pumpkins raw; I live for these stories:shock:

I could care less about those stories. They are simply of no importance to me. I don't care what everyone is doing in Hollywood either. I care more about important world events. Depending on the particular news media, such as the all known biased FOX and FRIENDS, you are going to get distorted stories. Trust me, the media mixes truths with lies.

 

[Billo_Really]

The media is 100% conservatively biased. Mr. O, Beltway Boys, Joe Scarborough, etc. are all part of the smoke screen to deflect attention away from the real issues and problems facing our country. And if there is anyone that chooses to question this, then why wasn't DSM more prominant in the news. It is totally authentic. It is an atom bomb of information from the inner workings of the Administration. But hardly a mention. All over the world it was the biggest story for weeks. Then the story was "how come it ain't a big story in the US?" Because the media is biased towards conservatives and most American's are too narcissistic to care.

 

[Deegan]

The media is 100% conservatively biased. Mr. O, Beltway Boys, Joe Scarborough, etc. are all part of the smoke screen to deflect attention away from the real issues and problems facing our country. And if there is anyone that chooses to question this, then why wasn't DSM more prominant in the news. It is totally authentic. It is an atom bomb of information from the inner workings of the Administration. But hardly a mention. All over the world it was the biggest story for weeks. Then the story was "how come it ain't a big story in the US?" Because the media is biased towards conservatives and most American's are too narcissistic to care.

:rofl

I am sure if CBS would falsify documents, they would ceertainly run with your "totally authentic" story about the DSM. It was not all there, not even close, that is why it was not discussed further, there is no conspiracy Billo!:doh

 

[talloulou]

The media is 100% conservatively biased. Mr. O, Beltway Boys, Joe Scarborough, etc. are all part of the smoke screen to deflect attention away from the real issues and problems facing our country. And if there is anyone that chooses to question this, then why wasn't DSM more prominant in the news. It is totally authentic. It is an atom bomb of information from the inner workings of the Administration. But hardly a mention. All over the world it was the biggest story for weeks. Then the story was "how come it ain't a big story in the US?" Because the media is biased towards conservatives and most American's are too narcissistic to care.

I hardly believe the news is 100% conservatively biased. However I do agree the news is dumbed down and I'm inclined to believe that's done on purpose. It's almost like they want us to fight dems vs republicans when both parties have grown so close together its hard to really identify what a conservative is vs a liberal. It's like they want us to fight over Bush vs Kerry two guys who belonged to the same Skull n Bones college club. They want us to fight so we believe we have a real choice when really the two party system is very limiting.

I sometimes think there's someone else really controlling things.

I think journalists are doing a lousy job across the board.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by talloulou
I hardly believe the news is 100% conservatively biased. However I do agree the news is dumbed down and I'm inclined to believe that's done on purpose. It's almost like they want us to fight dems vs republicans when both parties have grown so close together its hard to really identify what a conservative is vs a liberal. It's like they want us to fight over Bush vs Kerry two guys who belonged to the same Skull n Bones college club. They want us to fight so we believe we have a real choice when really the two party system is very limiting.

I sometimes think there's someone else really controlling things.

I think journalists are doing a lousy job across the board.

Maybe 100% is too much the other way. But your right, the media has let us down. And there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. They both answer to the same class of people. All the hoop and hollering about the Patriot Act was a smoke screen. I new they were going to renew it. When they voted on whether to go on with the war, I think only 4 people in all of Congress voted "no." They talk a lot of s.h.i.t, but their not fooling anybody. Their just lucky we don't care enough to do something about it in in our elections. But we better start doing something soon. Because if they get electronic voting machines with no paper trail going on throughout the country, we would lose the last thing we have to take back our country and force our government to be more representative (and accountable) to the citizens of this country. Right now, they could care less about us. They care about "corporate Americans."

When you think about it, with this latest scandal about the "ports" and Dubai, maybe they don't care about American's at all. Just the corporations that fill their coffers.

 

[PeteEU]

Is US media conservative or left leaning? I would say conservative all the way, but then again...The european branch of conservatives look like "pinko commies" when compared to thier American counterparts. So hence most American media looks regardless of which, very conservative in thier views and news reporting.. from my european point of view...

The question for me is not if the media is right or left leaning, but if the media is as independant as possible from politician and goverment influence. Call it bias or call it whatever you want, but that is often the main problem. The news media is suppose to be the watchdog of the goverment and politicans and not the mouth piece of said groups and this goes even for state owned and funded media in a democratic society.

US media clearly leaned towards Bush and his policies after 9/11 and were basicly no better than soviet style party newspapers during the cold war. No hard questions were asked, politicans motives never examined and so on. Opposing views were silenced or brutally attacked as unpatriotic or worse.. basicly the media had lost its independent aura.

This has stuck around for a long time but many media outlets are slowly digging themselfs out of this selfinflicted haze.. some better than others.

I would rate Fox News as RNC/White House mouth piece as thier bias is very clear cut, regardless of thier missleading mottos. The are right wing and will spin any fact or figure in such a way to prove thier political point of view or at least put doubt on the "oppositions" policies.

ABC, NBC/MSNBC, CBS and CNN all have conservative traits as well as left leaning but on average they are far more balanced than Fox News and similar outlets. This of course puts them in the "liberal" area by many conservatives as basicly anyone not agreeing with the "party line" is a "liberal" .. or so it seems from over here anyways and its getting used more and more in European politics too, although the impact on the electorate is questionable.

Hence when ABC does a negative story about Bush or his policies then its from a liberal biased media story, but when its a positive story about Bush and his policies.. is it still a liberal biased media outlet?

 

[aquapub]

JUst wondering if there are any other non-americans on here and what their opinions are regarding the media bias. FRom a british point of view it would appear that the bias in the US is leaning towards conservative. Maybe that is due to the connection that is made between over-the-top patriotism and conservatives?

:roll:

Yeah, you're right. We're just paranoid......



[Copied from the last post I saw where somebody tried to deny such an overwhelmingly obvious reality]:

Just to give you an idea of how many holes there are in the liberal lie that the media is anything but liberal, the following is a short list of some household name-media people and which Democrats in office they worked for before being trusted to disseminate "objective" news:

NBC Tim Russert-Governor Mario Cuomo (D), Senator Pat Moynihan (D).

CNN Jeff Greenfield-Senator Bobby Kennedy (D), Mayor John Lindsay (D).

MSNBC Chris Matthews-President Jimmy Carter (D), House Speaker Tip O'Neil (D).

NBC Ken Bode-Presidential candidate Morris Udall (D).

PBS Bill Moyers-President L.B. Johnson (D).

NBC Brian Williams-President Jimmy Carter (D).

ABC Rick Underforth-President Carter (D), President Clinton (D), and a handful of Senators, all (D).

PBS Elizabeth Brackett-Mayoral candidate Bill Singer (D), Brackett was also HERSELF a candidate (D).

NBC Jane Pauley worked on the state Democratic Committee of Indiana (D).

ABC Pierre Salinger-President Kennedy (D), he also WAS a senator from California (D).

CBS Lesley Stahl-Mayor John Lindsay (D)

New Yorker Ken Auletta-Mayor John Lindsay (D)

New York Times David Shipley-President Bill Clinton (D).

New York Times Leslie Gelb-Presidents Johnson (D) and Clinton (D).

New York Times Magazine, Atlantic Monthly, New Yorker, American Prospect James Fallows-President Jimmy Carter (D).

CNN, Los Angeles Times Tom Johnson-President Johnson (D).

Washington Post, CBS, NBC, Walter Pincus-Senator J.W. Fulbright (D), Pincus’s wife was also a Clinton appointee.

New York Times Jack Rosenthal-Presidents Kennedy (D) and Johnson (D).

USA Today John Seigenthaler-President Kennedy (D).

New Yorker Sidney Blumenthal-President Clinton (D).

U.S. News and World Report Donald Baer-President Clinton (D).

Nightline, New York Times Carolyn Curiel-President Clinton (D).

NBC Thomas Ross-President Clinton (D).

Nightline Tara Sonenshine-President Clinton (D).

TIME Strobe Talbott-President Clinton (D).


And one of my personal favorites, Dee Dee Myers, worked for Bill Clinton (D) and then got hired by Roger Ailes (the evil genius credited with Fox’s “conservative bias”-what a laugh!)

THEN, there are the media figures who are sons, daughters and spouses of prominent Democrats:

ABC-Chris Cuomo

E!-Eleanor Mondale

ABC-Cokie Roberts

Newsweek-Evan Thomas, who is the grandson of one of America’s most notorious Communists. Comrade Evan has been caught manipulating the news to protect Senator Bob Kerrey (D), and President Clinton (D)-he buried the Monica Lewinsky story for weeks until Matt Drudge finally forced it into the spotlight.

All of this, and he is still the editor of Newsweek.

And Maria Shriver, of NBC, is the niece of ultra-liberal, Teddy Kennedy, but, in all fairness, THIS one is also married to a pseudo-Republican, Governor Swarzenneger.


-Not the New York Times, not the Washington Post, NONE of the major papers have endorsed a single Republican presidential candidate since Eisenhower.

-Have you not noticed that incredibly long list I posted (on this thread) of all the Democrat operatives (and which Democrats in office they worked for before being trusted to disseminate objective news) who run the media?

-What about all the studies done by respectable, non-partisan groups proving a huge liberal tilt among reporters, anchors, news directors and producers?

-What about the multitude of unexplainable examples I have provided like: Dan Rather calling a leak about Bill Clinton's indictment "well-orchestrated" and "Republican backed," only to find out the next day that a liberal judge appointed by Jimmy Carter ADMITTEDLY, ACCIDENTALLY leaked the information? Where do you suppose Dan got his bad information? It sure as hell wasn't from research. He made it up....because he is a liberal.

 

[Deegan]

Is US media conservative or left leaning? I would say conservative all the way, but then again...The european branch of conservatives look like "pinko commies" when compared to thier American counterparts. So hence most American media looks regardless of which, very conservative in thier views and news reporting.. from my european point of view...

The question for me is not if the media is right or left leaning, but if the media is as independant as possible from politician and goverment influence. Call it bias or call it whatever you want, but that is often the main problem. The news media is suppose to be the watchdog of the goverment and politicans and not the mouth piece of said groups and this goes even for state owned and funded media in a democratic society.

US media clearly leaned towards Bush and his policies after 9/11 and were basicly no better than soviet style party newspapers during the cold war. No hard questions were asked, politicans motives never examined and so on. Opposing views were silenced or brutally attacked as unpatriotic or worse.. basicly the media had lost its independent aura.

This has stuck around for a long time but many media outlets are slowly digging themselfs out of this selfinflicted haze.. some better than others.

I would rate Fox News as RNC/White House mouth piece as thier bias is very clear cut, regardless of thier missleading mottos. The are right wing and will spin any fact or figure in such a way to prove thier political point of view or at least put doubt on the "oppositions" policies.

ABC, NBC/MSNBC, CBS and CNN all have conservative traits as well as left leaning but on average they are far more balanced than Fox News and similar outlets. This of course puts them in the "liberal" area by many conservatives as basicly anyone not agreeing with the "party line" is a "liberal" .. or so it seems from over here anyways and its getting used more and more in European politics too, although the impact on the electorate is questionable.

Hence when ABC does a negative story about Bush or his policies then its from a liberal biased media story, but when its a positive story about Bush and his policies.. is it still a liberal biased media outlet?

You have obviously not watched our news, only read about it. It's called responsible journalism, you just can't go in half cocked, with wild accusations, and hope those pan out, that is irresponsible. If you do this, you will end up looking like CBS did, desperate, uninformed, biased, and ultimately.....untrustworthy.

The news business should not be some free for all, just as it should not represent one side or the other, it should be responsible, accountable, and fair, this has been a problem. But this problem is hardly one that can be labled an American one, as many news agencies across the globe get it wrong everyday, we are actually the best, the most reserved, and the most responsible, and some confuse this as biased. It's a good system folks, it's served us well, and damn anyone who thinks they can do it better!:roll:

 

[PeteEU]

You have obviously not watched our news, only read about it.

I watch US based news channels over here on a daily basis.. its kinda impossible not too. We get both CNN, Fox, CBS, ABC and NBC news shows/channels over here. Its only MSNBC we so far dont have, but we do have its sister channel, CNBC. Fox News is however a pay channel here, and the reason is most likely that it would not be able to comply with EU rules on false advertisement :lol:

It's called responsible journalism, you just can't go in half cocked, with wild accusations, and hope those pan out, that is irresponsible. If you do this, you will end up looking like CBS did, desperate, uninformed, biased, and ultimately.....untrustworthy.

Then how come Fox News is never called on its reporting in the same way? When Bill O'Rielly uses a bogus report with false and bogus statistics to "prove" his homophobic views to his viewers, why is there no uproar over such an event? Its the same principle.

And yes he has used such a report (that had been debunked long before the show aired) that happened to try to prove a link between the scandinavia gay couple registration laws and children concived outside of wedlock.. or that was at least his angle and 10 mins on the web could prove his facts and figures wrong.. if there is are any nations on the planet with massive amounts of free accessiable long term statistics over almost anything in society, then its the scandinavian countries.

Did CBS or a few CBS reporters make a mistake... sure but was it bias or just trying to get the story out first? Remember the story in question has a lot of questions that have never been answered fully and probally never will be because of this event.

Fact checking has been hit big time by the sensationalism and trying to get the story out first. And blogs are not helping in any way and in fact often have the opposite effect as they are doing everything to muddy the news even more with bias.. but hey at least we can discuss it freely.

 

[talloulou]

Then how come Fox News is never called on its reporting in the same way? When Bill O'Rielly uses a bogus report with false and bogus statistics to "prove" his homophobic views to his viewers, why is there no uproar over such an event? Its the same principle.

One thing people have to recognize with the 24 hrs news channels is that they are not providing 24 hr NEWS. Anotherwards Bill O'Rielly's show (he's the O'Rielly Factor Guy right?) is an opinion show. His show is all about SPIN.....his spin. The educated viewer is supposed to understand that and expect that his show is full of opinion. Wheras someone like Peter Jennings represented as an actual news reporter. A reporter reporting NEWS on the nightly news is expected to be held to a higher standard! A news reporter is NOT supposed to SPIN anything he is supposed to report the facts. O'Rielly is not a news reporter. Anyone who mistakes the views on his show with the idea that they are viewing NEWS is a feeble minded idiot. He gives his opinion of whats currently in the news!

However I will agree in many instances the lines between REPORTER an EDITORIALIST have become shady and Americans must demand journalists do better.

 

[PeteEU]

One thing people have to recognize with the 24 hrs news channels is that they are not providing 24 hr NEWS.

I see, so a 24 hour news channel is not a news channel.....What is it then when its not reporting the News as you say? Documentary station, weather station....

Anotherwards Bill O'Rielly's show (he's the O'Rielly Factor Guy right?) is an opinion show. His show is all about SPIN.....his spin.

Not according to himself.. its a spin free zone :roll:

Wheras someone like Peter Jennings represented as an actual news reporter. A reporter reporting NEWS on the nightly news is expected to be held to a higher standard! A news reporter is NOT supposed to SPIN anything he is supposed to report the facts.

I agree fully.. a news reporter is not suppose to spin anything as is a news channel or news show. And yet Fox News throw thier opinions in more often than any other channel. There was a study last year that showed this. But I guess its the future of news reporting. If you hold Peter Jennings to such a high standard then why not reporters on Fox News?

O'Rielly is not a news reporter. Anyone who mistakes the views on his show with the idea that they are viewing NEWS is a feeble minded idiot. He gives his opinion of whats currently in the news!

And that makes it okay to spin, lie and provide false information to prove a point? Hey he is a commentator on a news channel.. so he can say anything!!! and it does not reflect on the news channel, its attitude towards subjects or views on the news it reports. I see... :roll:

 

[talloulou]

I see, so a 24 hour news channel is not a news channel.....What is it then when its not reporting the News as you say? Documentary station, weather station....

There are tons of editorial shows on most ofl the 24hr news channels. Take a show like MSNBC's Hardball. The whole point of the show is for Chris to bring on people with opposing views and let them go at it.

Not according to himself.. its a spin free zone

Yeah that's tongue in cheek, don't you get that? What legit news reporter claims they're gonna give the news in the "free spin zone" and then proceeds to bash away at others left and right?

You're not seriously misunderstanding my points are you?

I agree fully.. a news reporter is not suppose to spin anything as is a news channel or news show. And yet Fox News throw thier opinions in more often than any other channel. There was a study last year that showed this. But I guess its the future of news reporting. If you hold Peter Jennings to such a high standard then why not reporters on Fox News?

Well I don't watch fox news too much so I'm not all that familiar with their newsmen. I watch alot of MSNBC. They have tons of shows that are all debate and spin shows. In between those shows they have breaks where a news reporter comes on and actually gives you the NEWS. They also have a tape that runs across the bottem of the screen and I think that is always NEWS. But to assume that any of their "SHOWS" are NEWS is full on retarded at worst and misguided at best.

And that makes it okay to spin, lie and provide false information to prove a point? Hey he is a commentator on a news channel.. so he can say anything!!! and it does not reflect on the news channel, its attitude towards subjects or views on the news it reports. I see... :roll:

It's kind of like how MTV is the music video channel but you rarely see music videos.

 

[mpg]

"Hence when ABC does a negative story about Bush or his policies then its from a liberal biased media story"

They have a responsibility to be objective. That means being neither for nor against anything. Any pro-Bush reporting is biased and any anti-Bush reporting is biased. The question is; which is more common?

 

[talloulou]

"Hence when ABC does a negative story about Bush or his policies then its from a liberal biased media story"

Well if ABC does an editorial story I guess they can use as much bias as they want. But if its a news report there should be facts without bias.

They have a responsibility to be objective. That means being neither for nor against anything. Any pro-Bush reporting is biased and any anti-Bush reporting is biased. The question is; which is more common?

When reporting the news they have a responsibility to report facts. If they report on facts that hurt Bush its still not bias, as long as they are facts minus opinion and over interpretation of what the facts mean.

As for which is more common....I think it depends on what channel you are watching.

 

[mpg]

Apparently you're considered a conservative in the UK if you're anti-capital punishment, pro-abortion rights, anti-gun rights, pro-affirmative action, anti-military, pro-expanding government, anti-Republicans, and pro-Democrats.

 

[mpg]

Well if ABC does an editorial story I guess they can use as much bias as they want. But if its a news report there should be facts without bias.



When reporting the news they have a responsibility to report facts. If they report on facts that hurt Bush its still not bias, as long as they are facts minus opinion and over interpretation of what the facts mean.

As for which is more common....I think it depends on what channel you are watching.

I agree 100%. Regarding your last sentence, you have Fox vs everyone else.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Deegan;
If you do this, you will end up looking like CBS did, desperate, uninformed, biased, and ultimately.....untrustworthy.

I don't know why anyone would consider CBS any of those things. Bush never proved where he was for that year and a half in the Guard. As far as I'm concerned, if he can't show what he was doing then, he deserted.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Deegan:
I am sure if CBS would falsify documents, they would ceertainly run with your "totally authentic" story about the DSM. It was not all there, not even close, that is why it was not discussed further, there is no conspiracy Billo

I don't know why you would juxtapose CBS with DSM. They're two completely different issues. No one is questioning the authenticity of the memo's. And they show Bush was going to fit the intel around his determination to attack Iraq. Looking back on it, it's obvious. Nothing he said about Iraq was true. He made them out to be some big threat, and they weren't. It's a joke. But I don't find it funny.

 

[KCConservative]

Looking back on it, it's obvious. Nothing he said about Iraq was true. He made them out to be some big threat, and they weren't. It's a joke. But I don't find it funny.

Wow. If you or someone...anyone...could prove that, you could have his head on a stick.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by KCConservative:
Wow. If you or someone...anyone...could prove that, you could have his head on a stick.

It'a already proven. Name one thing he said that turned out to be true. Or would you rather just sit around a make up excuses to torture people?