Is the American media more liberal or conservative oriented?

[pismoe]

sure I listen to other ideas Pogo , I just listened to 'corkys' joke info and I reject his thinking . He , she or it probably thinks that Maddow or Leland Vitter or ed Schultz are media and journalists .

 

[pismoe]

I also listen to your prez Pogo , I know his ideas and thoughts , I just reject his ideas , thinking and solutions !!

 

[whitehall]

Al Gore is a Nobel Prize winner for his work in global warming science even if Mr. Gore had no background in science. It's no secret that Mr Gore lived in elite luxury facilities in his private compound with armed security guards far removed from the subsistence existence he recommended for the common folks. Mr. Gore also dabbled in communications until his warming credits empire collapsed and he sold his American media shares to a freaking propaganda source for the enemies of the United States. Today the former Al Gore media renamed "Al Jazzera" "legal 1st Amendment" propaganda source for the enemies of the United States. Strangely enough most of the liberal media seems more concerned about what Fox has to say than Al Gore's Al Jazeera and the rest of the liberal media is fine with the concept. What does that say about the political lean of the American media?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Is the American media more liberal or conservative oriented?"

Neither.

As already correctly noted: it's profit oriented.

Otherwise, the myth of the 'liberal media' is just that, a myth – a contrivance of the right in response to Vietnam and Watergate*, and in response to the media reporting facts and the truth that conflict with errant conservative dogma; that the media report facts and the truth conservatives don't like or agree with doesn't make the media 'liberal.'






*Yes, it goes back further than that – but these were the two defining events that created today's unwarranted hostility toward the press common to most conservatives.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Socially very leftist but fiscally moderate.

 

[Abishai100]

American Plaid


Liberals have been gaining in resources and funds, so corporate influence no longer offers a clear indicator of managerial biases for the media.

Media is more or less a reflection of modern-era traffic-consciousness (i.e., Bloomberg TV on your smartphone).

Hollywood (USA) makes experience-economics movies such as "American Psycho" (2000) and "The Aviator" (2004).

When the media investigates or re-presents modern social perspectives on network management (i.e., FDA, Facebook, etc.), we get a clearer picture of what the media is trying to do.






FDA

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Al Gore is a Nobel Prize winner for his work in global warming science even if Mr. Gore had no background in science. It's no secret that Mr Gore lived in elite luxury facilities in his private compound with armed security guards far removed from the subsistence existence he recommended for the common folks. Mr. Gore also dabbled in communications until his warming credits empire collapsed and he sold his American media shares to a freaking propaganda source for the enemies of the United States. Today the former Al Gore media renamed "Al Jazzera" "legal 1st Amendment" propaganda source for the enemies of the United States. Strangely enough most of the liberal media seems more concerned about what Fox has to say than Al Gore's Al Jazeera and the rest of the liberal media is fine with the concept. What does that say about the political lean of the American media?

Gore won the Peace Prize, not a science prize - and I'm not sure I've ever heard him recommending a "subsistence existence" to anyone at all.

The rest of this post is just nonsense. Al Jazeera isn't "Al Gore's".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

As for the OP, we live in the era of fractured news. People are able to find exactly the slant that they prefer.

 

[Abishai100]

Iconography Agnosticism

When Hollywood (USA) makes incendiary films such as "Fight Club" (1999) and "Syriana" (2005), Americans get a clearer picture of what the people want on their radios and airing on their TVs.

The flavor of the moment in American media seems to be populism-fervor. Vigilantism-themed comic book adapted television series, pulic access court TV, multi-news network listings, lifestyle reality programs (etc.) reveal a new age social demand for 'integrative media' catering to a multi-cultural audience.

It's no surprise that one of the most popular TV shows right now is the comic book adapted series "The Flash" (The CW) which is based on the beloved American comic book superhero who represents 'speedy solutions.'

While both liberals (i.e., Democrats) and conservatives (i.e., Republicans) appreciate efficient problem-solving in their diet, moderates (i.e., Independents) are invited to comment on this new populist bulletin board.





The Flash (TV Series)

 

[blastoff]

Anyone who has to ask about the predominant lean of US media isn't going to like the answer.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

When the vast majority of the mainstream media vote dem ....?
Stupid question.

 

[peach174]

I see your question as change of the original question that I answered Pogo .

It is indeed a changing of the original (OP) question. Because that question is built on a false premise. The proper answer to it is "neither" -- as my and several other post have articulated in detail. I suggest you read them and start listening to other views. That is after all the purpose of a message board.

The purpose of my question "how do you sell ideology" is that it proves that premise is false. Because that question has no answer. Which is why you can't come up with one.

The Natzi's did very well at selling their ideology to their youth.
It spread and got everyone saying "collective need ahead of individual greed"
Yes you can sell ideology, the Dems knew this psychological trick very well and that is why they took over the mainstream media and Hollywood.

 

[Pogo]

I see your question as change of the original question that I answered Pogo .

It is indeed a changing of the original (OP) question. Because that question is built on a false premise. The proper answer to it is "neither" -- as my and several other post have articulated in detail. I suggest you read them and start listening to other views. That is after all the purpose of a message board.

The purpose of my question "how do you sell ideology" is that it proves that premise is false. Because that question has no answer. Which is why you can't come up with one.

The Natzi's did very well at selling their ideology to their youth.
It spread and got everyone saying "collective need ahead of individual greed"
Yes you can sell ideology, the Dems knew this psychological trick very well and that is why they took over the mainstream media and Hollywood.

Commercial media doesn't work on ideology, period. It works on money. And ideology makes zero money.

The Hitler analogy is absurd. Commercial broadcast media (which is what we're talking about here) didn't even exist in 1930s Germany. State-run mass media does work with propaganda, since money is not its objective.

We here don't have a state-run domestic media -- only an external one, which is comprised of Voice of America and related operations. Those run on ideology. But commercial media, owned and operated by commercial profit-oriented businesses -- they simply run on whatever will make them money. And you don't do that running ideology, because that divides people, which means you attract Group A while repelling Group B. Specialized audience is not in any way what they're after -- they want it ALL.

That's exactly why they bend over backward to avoid controversy, deep thought, fine arts, nuance, anything complex --- because as soon as you do that, you start limiting your own audience. That's exactly why they aspire to no higher bar than the lowest common denominator vast wasteland sitcom mentality -- because it won't push anybody away with controversy yet it will serve as a vapid hypnotizing mind-numbing machine.... which means they score a viewer. And scoring viewers is ALL they care about. Trust me, that silly flap over Janet Jackson's nipple had nothing to do with worry about children -- it had to do with worry about losing viewers who THINK it'll somehow harm children.

You ever want to see the lowest form of bottom-dweller shyster whores you've ever seen who will sell their own mother for a buck, walk into a National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) convention. Bring your slime boots.

This cockamamie idea that giant media megalopolies care a whit about politics as a message is a lame pipe dream of butthurt armchair conspiracy theorists who don't know a damn thing about the broadcast profession. They sure as hell didn't get to BE giant media megalopolies by selling ideologies.

 

[Missourian]

From somewhat liberal to extremely liberal.

The national news is very New York/Washington D.C. Centric.

 

[my2¢]

I saw a study on occupations that showed journalists generally aren't paid all that well and so I think it's just natural tendency that they're more liberal.

 

[warf]

I saw a study on occupations that showed journalists generally aren't paid all that well and so I think it's just natural tendency that they're more liberal.

Most journalists may be liberal. But the editors and people who own the media outlets are not. And it is those corporatists who control media content.

Pogo spelled it out a few posts above.

 

[Abishai100]

Design on a Dime: Media Matzo

The design of media-friendly devices/gadgets/technologies such as HDMI cables, HD-cameras, etc., indicates a market demand for consumer-targeted (even toy-like) products.

The Internet invites everyone to jump on, and our new age products reflect this user-based traffic.

The LaserDisc, for example, was the first optical media storage disc widely-distributed. It was big and therefore not intimidating intellectually as the first groundbreaking user-savvy good of its type.

We know that Rush Limbaugh has his own radio show, website, etc. So does Imus.

Who has access to the media ironically illuminates the 'language of capitalism.'





LaserDisc

 

[Empress Octavia Obama]

This includes websites, newspapers, news stations, and everything else that reports the news to Americans.
It would be preferable if people would provide sources and reasoning to go along with their claims.
So what will we choose: liberalism or conservatism?

Conservative

 

[ninja007]

I saw a study on occupations that showed journalists generally aren't paid all that well and so I think it's just natural tendency that they're more liberal.

Most journalists may be liberal. But the editors and people who own the media outlets are not. And it is those corporatists who control media content.

Pogo spelled it out a few posts above.

yeah, thats why except for fox 90% of all other msm leans heavily lib.... lol

 

[warf]

yeah, thats why except for fox 90% of all other msm leans heavily lib.... lol

Can you give me examples of the "msm leans heavilly lib?

Do you mean when the media was calling Bill Clinton a draft dodger and national Guard deserter George W. Bush a fighter pilot?

Or was that heavy left lean when the NYT reporter Judith Miller was reporting the administrations lies about Iraq's WMD?

Or is the left lean all the media gushing and wall to wall coverage of the totally unsuitable candidate Donald Trump?

Except for Fox, the Republican channel and MSNBC, the Demo channel, the media is mostly corporate friendly.