Due to bias, the following sites should not be used when discussing political issues

Pretty funny - in posts #14 and #15 we see the media blamed for liberal shortcomings and for conservative shortcomings.

Hmmmmmmm
 
1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

Can I get a Breitbart and Drudge Report?



Drudge? Really? All Drudge is, is a site with links to other sources. Rarely does it do any of it's own reporting. Very rarely. Furthermore, most of the links are to sources you would readily use, CBS, NBC, ABC HuffPo, AP...


Now if you want to talk about the way they write the headlines to the links, that's a horse of a different color...
 
1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

You forgot some of the worst offenders:

ThinkProgress, Media Matters, Salon.com, Mother Jones, Fact check.org, USA Today, The New York Times. The L.A. Times, Washington Post, Wikipedia.......

... WND, Newsmax, Washington Times...
 
So we see that there is no news source that everyone trusts. That's fine - be a smart consumer when it comes to news also.

But if you refuse to listen to a point of view that you don't agree with, you really don't have a good feel for what is really going on in the world.
 
I am looking for some intelligent response to the FACT the MSM bias is fully documented by this fact:
85% of Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
 
1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

You forgot some of the worst offenders:

ThinkProgress, Media Matters, Salon.com, Mother Jones, Fact check.org, USA Today, The New York Times. The L.A. Times, Washington Post, Wikipedia.......

... WND, Newsmax, Washington Times...

Jax Times Union, Gainesville Sun.....................:lol:
 
It seems just about every source has been put on the list.

Now what are you going to do ?
 
It seems just about every source has been put on the list.

Now what are you going to do ?

Exactly.

Are people afraid of listening to an opposing point of view because they don't trust themselves to listen to ALL the opinions and them make up their own mind?

Maybe it's easier just to get your marching orders from someone else?
 
This is the problem with the (dis)Information Age.
It is all to easy to cocoon yourself into an echo chamber where you never give a hearing to people who don't share your biases.

Don't rule out ANY sources of information. Learn to listen to all sources, from all different angels. Just learn to listen critically.

THINK critically.



 
1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

You forgot some of the worst offenders:

ThinkProgress, Media Matters, Salon.com, Mother Jones, Fact check.org, USA Today, The New York Times. The L.A. Times, Washington Post, Wikipedia.......

... WND, Newsmax, Washington Times...

I actually concur with this bed wetter's assessment of WND at least. They're the equivalent of the republicrat HuffPo.

Facts mixed with bullshit, is still bullshit. I hate when "right wing news" sources publish bullshit. It discredits the rest of us.

Bed wetters don't usually care about truth or credibility. We ought to.




 
Media in general caters to their target audience. They know who they want to attract and know what to print to massage their particular interests and stereotypes. The trick is for the consumer to weed out any speculative editorial nonsense from the facts.

Democrats play on our stereotypes. That's all they do. It's easier than playing on our rationality. No small wonder their target audience is highly opinionated and highly biased, not to mention easily convinced. Democrats also need a cause or a crisis. If one doesn't exist they invent one. You could have the best healthcare in the world and they will convince you it's broken. The best economy in years and it's terrible. Global Warming where none exists. Racism is rampant when it fact it's never been this good.

Democrats live off of hardship and hatred. It gives them something to bitch about. Perfect description of the media BTW. If it bleeds it leads. Only now we only hear what the left wants us to hear. Opposing viewpoints not accepted.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top