Some Guy
Deregulated User
- Jan 19, 2010
- 2,437
- 426
- 130
If its something that will get ratings, they run with it. Round the clock coverage of celebrity deaths? Yup. Kid gets gunned down on the street? Lucky if the local press cover it.
It's about ratings over everything else. The people have as much if not more of an influence on the media than the media does on us.
That has always been the case. Stuff of more interest or with more emotional connection to more people--Elivis dying for instance--will get huge coverage while a relatively unknown person will ger relatively little - UNLESS it can possibly be a rightwing motivated 'hate crime', then it doesn't matter who it is. It will get tremendous coverage. Not so much if it is a leftwinger committing a crime against a rightwing group or person. And therein is the bias and dishonesty in the treatment.
Let Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney commit a major gaffe on the campaign trail, and it will be front page news for a day or two along with as many negative comments about it as they can find people to say. And if it is Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin or any of the other lightning rod figures, it will be on the Review and merit intense scrutiny and attention by all the MSM.
Let Joe Biden accuse the Republicans of wanting to put a predominantly black audience in shackles, and it is laughed and shrugged off as, "Oh well, that's just Joe. He didn't mean it like that.
And THAT is how the MSM gives Obama/Biden a huge advantage by quickly skimming over their gaffes, issues, and missteps while giving glaring intention to anything their opponents say that can any way be made negative.
You will not get an honest or accurate account of most controversial sociopolitical issues by using only the MSM as your primary course. Add in Fox News or conservative talk radio, however, and you will get both sides of the issue and and will be able to then form an informed opinion.
Definitely. Look at different outlets and the same stories are often presented, just in what type of manner.
Covering the whole "you didn't build that" speech from Obama could easily be presented as just another speech if the reporter comes out saying "President Obama came out today stressing the importance of infrastructure in today's economy and noting how important it is that we work together as a country to help each other succeed." Maybe that's what they heard, maybe that's just how they wanted to present it. Whatever the reason, you simply can't deny that, in general, the mainstream media will present a story in a way that favors liberals. You can not mention something important, lessen it's impact, explain it away or just plain distort.
There was a time when reporters acted on behalf of their consumers, basically reporting news, asking tough questions, being inquisitive and cynical. Now, it's basically most people getting whatever they want out of something and presenting it as fact in a way that supports their viewpoint. Relying solely on one source or a host of like minded sources leads to being a robot in the tank for one side or another. As much as lefties hate Fox News and righties hate MSNBC, they're both needed, really.