Bias In The Media?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Annie, Jun 27, 2004.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Shocking:

    http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cach...gmu.edu/~atabarro/MediaBias.doc+drudge?&hl=en

    Long, very long, but well documented:

     
  2. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    based on your political beliefs, you'll see bias in many places.

    its a fact.

    i don't really care, that's why i read the wall street journal, weekly standard, economist, newsweek and the nation, all in one shot, so i can get the breadth from the right to the left and make sense of it myself. if only others could do this and not take what they hear on TV or in one magazine to be the gospel.

    now i have noticed this, the media has turned against bush. he's gotten a fairly free ride from them from the moment he started running for prez until about june 2003. they gave him a break after 9/11 especially. they helped pummel al gore into looking like a flip-flop idiot. they made the dems seem inept and foolish. nobody in a mainstream format even questioned the patriot act until weeks after the fact (i have a few problems with it, but i think its all in all good).

    but the free ride is over... the very same media that got bush his presidency (along with nader's spoiler campaign) has now turned against him and may cost him his reelection. republicans, be wary. much of the media is at war with our president and he better step his game up if he wants to stay in office 4 years.
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I didn't write the working paper, did you read it? When was the media on Bush's side? Site something from say 99 or 2000?
     
  4. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    i miswrote that

    i didn't mean YOU, i meant like YOU as in each person, each person will find bias wherever they go.

    like i said, reading/listening to a variety from different political spectrums is much better than depending on one or two sources. i'd much prefer if these networks were honest about their leanings (fox is blatant) (cnn should be as well)

    now as far as the 2000 election, this is just widespread belief. i find it to be true. gore screwed up his election, he ran a crappy campaign, he was a crappy candidate until about 3 days before the election, and the media did not like him at all. respectfully, if you actually think the media liked gore, why did they recycle these endless diatribes from the RNC about "inventing the internet" and all that other stuff... i mean c'mon, they had him looking pathetic in front of the American people for months. it finally came together in their head on election day, and bush won it because of that.

    gore was a sorry candidate most of the way. bush was horribly inexperienced running for president in 2000. he had a caretaker governorship and no real experience before either. he's done good under horrific circumstances as president. he's my president. he's done well considering his limited experience. i'm not bashing him, i'm just saying that's how bad gore screwed up and that's how much the media despised him. and also look at the way bush was with reporters... bush was warm and charming, gore was wooden and often abrasive or annoying. as a reporter, c'mon, who are you gonna favor under those circumstances? bush of course.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Nato Air, see other post. Not playing this game anymore. Pick a position and go from there.
     
  6. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    that's the problem right now, you can't be balanced, people won't let you. they want to pigeonhole you, right or left, anti-bush or pro-bush, pro-war, anti-war, blah blazzy blah.

    i won't do it.

    i stand for sanity. my party has jumped to the far right, the opposition has crept to the center but still gets bashed for being liberal because of some of their more outspoken members. i'm a common sense centrist. i don't like abortion, gun control, faulty intelligence that's massaged, tax cuts that benefit the wealthy who don't need the extra money, dumb laws that cost us millions and waste our time (half the environmental laws on the books), doomsday speakers, racism and corruption. there's lots more. i think pakistan is a worse judas than saudi arabia, i believe north korea was and is a far bigger threat than iraq could ever be and that israel is dooming itself, just as the palestinians have for decades. the french are treacherous but their military is good to us, the germans are misled and misinformed. russia is not acting in our best interests, china is not our friend and won't be for god knows how long. on any one of these issues though i try to find common ground with people so we can build and reach an understanding or a better idea. i don't believe in rigid idealogy, that's why iraq is such a mess right now and the liberal dems are so pathetic.

    now this bias business, my position is staked. CNN is for the left of centre, Fox for the right of centre, god knows who is in the middle. that's why you watch a little bit of everything and try to pick out the best reporters. the media is full of crap too much of the time anyway.

    the soros business is heinous, they called the man a nazi collaborator. wtf is that? is there any ounce of proof behind that?

    they called john ashcroft a slavery loving racist. wtf is that? is there one ounce of proof behind that?

    i'm in the center, and god help me, a lot of people are left or right of me, and it seems many of them do not like that i am in the middle. i guess i'm screwing myself. i got a new name because i poisoned the old one with my emotions. i like debate, i don't want to be pegged as the temper losing fellow the whole time i'm here, but i also refuse to be forced to pick sides when there's good in both of em.

    forgive me for the damn long explanation.
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Nato

    If you look at my posts you'll see I'm not far right, nor left, nor center on all issues. I'm basically conservative.

    You talk of 'your party' moving to far right, while 'the other party' moves center. That is not unbiased, that is twisting. If I wasn't moderating I would put you on ignore, but I am, so I can't.

    IF you choose to come out with where you stand, fine. Otherwise I will not directly engage with you.

    BTW, you had best start linking to your 'pronouncements' pronto.

    Have a good day.
     
  8. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Liberals never want to play the "game" of being honest about what they believe. Every layer of spin you peel off of them, just reveals a new set of lies, from a differenct direction.

    Example:

    Lib says: " This war was conducted poorly from the beginning, we have achieved nothing."

    con says: "Actually, no military has ever taken so much ground with so few casualties on both sides in so little time."

    Lib says: "well, who are we to enforce our way of life on them anyway."

    con says: "Oh so THAT's your REAL problem. Why didn't you say so? Oh yeah cuz you're a liberal liar"


    Nothing can be built on the shifting sands of demented liberal thinking.
     
  9. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533

    That's because liberalism is a lie at it's very root. It rejects reason in favor of such vapors as the perfectibility of man, and a loving, one-world utopia, where all will work together for the betterment of humankind. It can only lead to the centralization of power ( i.e., tyranny ), and the death of individual rights. The only hard, immutable truth in liberalism is that whatever advances the agenda is good - in short, " situation ethics " as a blueprint for the acquisition of power. President Reagan stamped out this evil in the Soviet Union, but it's still going strong here at home.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    This morning in WSJ:

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110005278



    :rolleyes: :mad:
     

Share This Page