Newsweek shows Obama as Hindu god.

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

Hindus outraged at Newsweek Obama cover | Video | abc7news.com

Maybe if I keep repeating it I can believe it the same way the lefties do.

 

[DiveCon]

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

Hindus outraged at Newsweek Obama cover | Video | abc7news.com

Maybe if I keep repeating it I can believe it the same way the lefties do.

meh, i dont see this as media bias

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

Hindus outraged at Newsweek Obama cover | Video | abc7news.com

Maybe if I keep repeating it I can believe it the same way the lefties do.

meh, i dont see this as media bias

Imagine the same magazine doing essentially the same story about Bush and tell me what they would have used as the cover photo and the title. I would be willing to bet serious money that it would not include the word god being used positively.

 

[DiveCon]

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

There is no media bias.

Hindus outraged at Newsweek Obama cover | Video | abc7news.com

Maybe if I keep repeating it I can believe it the same way the lefties do.

meh, i dont see this as media bias

Imagine the same magazine doing essentially the same story about Bush and tell me what they would have used as the cover photo and the title. I would be willing to bet serious money that it would not include the word god being used positively.

actually, given the reactions, i chalk it up to media stupidity

 

[syrenn]

Shiva, the destroyer of the world. Works for me.

 

[Missourian]

Newsweak.

 

[liebuster]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

meh, i dont see this as media bias

Imagine the same magazine doing essentially the same story about Bush and tell me what they would have used as the cover photo and the title. I would be willing to bet serious money that it would not include the word god being used positively.

actually, given the reactions, i chalk it up to media stupidity

It was incredibly stupid and also insensitive. That does not negate bias, and can be used as an argument to support it.

 

[Madeline]

WTF?

 

[Tank]

He does make a better Hindu, then American

 

[fyrenza]

I'm sorry, but I see SIX arms...

Kali has 8;

Shiva has 5.

Not sure WHAT god he's supposed to be looking like, but it's a fail, on pretty much EVERYONE's part!



On the left, it's Finance/Economy, the Military, and Foreign Policy;

on the right, it's housing, peace and some weird-assed button, with a tube, leading to his ass...

WTF is THAT about?!?

 

[edthecynic]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

 

[edthecynic]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

AHHHH yes, once again the sniveling little coward DumbCon snipes in hiding without comment from his spider hole.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

The fairness doctrine would not alleviate media bias.

From Fox or MSNBC. You should look up what it actually does

 

[DiveCon]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

AHHHH yes, once again the sniveling little coward DumbCon snipes in hiding without comment from his spider hole.

thanks for proving me right
i KNEW you would WHINE about it

and dipshit, the reason conservatives are against the "fairness doctrine" is we believe in FREEDOM OF SPEECH
and no one WHINES about the bias, we just point it out when YOU dipshits whine about Conservative media

 

[edthecynic]

Of couse there is no media bias. Thats why its unfair for Fox News to slant right when ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Newsweek, most of all major Newspapers, most of all major magazines, and all of Hollywood are totally and unequivocally HONEST, unbiased and completely fair in their reporting and portrayal of conservative ideas and politics.

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

The fairness doctrine would not alleviate media bias.

From Fox or MSNBC. You should look up what it actually does

Of course it would, if it didn't CON$ wouldn't be against it!

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE - The Museum of Broadcast Communications
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

U.S. Broadcasting Policy

The policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission that became known as the "Fairness Doctrine" is an attempt to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair. The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues. With the deregulation sweep of the Reagan Administration during the 1980s, the Commission dissolved the fairness doctrine.

This doctrine grew out of concern that because of the large number of applications for radio station being submitted and the limited number of frequencies available, broadcasters should make sure they did not use their stations simply as advocates with a singular perspective. Rather, they must allow all points of view. That requirement was to be enforced by FCC mandate.

From the early 1940s, the FCC had established the "Mayflower Doctrine," which prohibited editorializing by stations. But that absolute ban softened somewhat by the end of the decade, allowing editorializing only if other points of view were aired, balancing that of the station's. During these years, the FCC had established dicta and case law guiding the operation of the doctrine.

 

[DiveCon]

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

The fairness doctrine would not alleviate media bias.

From Fox or MSNBC. You should look up what it actually does

Of course it would, if it didn't CON$ wouldn't be against it!

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE - The Museum of Broadcast Communications
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

U.S. Broadcasting Policy

The policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission that became known as the "Fairness Doctrine" is an attempt to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair. The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues. With the deregulation sweep of the Reagan Administration during the 1980s, the Commission dissolved the fairness doctrine.

This doctrine grew out of concern that because of the large number of applications for radio station being submitted and the limited number of frequencies available, broadcasters should make sure they did not use their stations simply as advocates with a singular perspective. Rather, they must allow all points of view. That requirement was to be enforced by FCC mandate.

From the early 1940s, the FCC had established the "Mayflower Doctrine," which prohibited editorializing by stations. But that absolute ban softened somewhat by the end of the decade, allowing editorializing only if other points of view were aired, balancing that of the station's. During these years, the FCC had established dicta and case law guiding the operation of the doctrine.

the point you dipshits miss is there is already contrasting points in the media

 

[edthecynic]

Gee, wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine require them all to give you CON$ equal time?
Why yes, yes it would.
And aren't CON$ against the fairness Doctrine?
Why yes, yes they are.
Then wouldn't that mean CON$ are full of shit when they whine like little children about media bias?
Why yes, yes it would.

AHHHH yes, once again the sniveling little coward DumbCon snipes in hiding without comment from his spider hole.

thanks for proving me right
i KNEW you would WHINE about it

and dipshit, the reason conservatives are against the "fairness doctrine" is we believe in FREEDOM OF SPEECH
and no one WHINES about the bias, we just point it out when YOU dipshits whine about Conservative media

How could you be proven Right when you posted nothing??? In your neg rep comment you did nothing but name calling, "moron," as you always do. You need to learn a new word. You made no prediction.
I merely proved I could draw you out of hiding into the light of day.

 

[DiveCon]

AHHHH yes, once again the sniveling little coward DumbCon snipes in hiding without comment from his spider hole.

thanks for proving me right
i KNEW you would WHINE about it

and dipshit, the reason conservatives are against the "fairness doctrine" is we believe in FREEDOM OF SPEECH
and no one WHINES about the bias, we just point it out when YOU dipshits whine about Conservative media

How could you be proven Right when you posted nothing??? In your neg rep comment you did nothing but name calling, "moron," as you always do. You need to learn a new word. You made no prediction.
I merely proved I could draw you out of hiding into the light of day.

i said it as i typed, you fucking moron
you do it all the time
you whine worse than my 6 year old niece
LOL
'

and btw, dipshit, i posted in this thread BEFORE you did
so fuck off moron

 

[RadiomanATL]

Of course it would, if it didn't CON$ wouldn't be against it!

Wrong-o.

False logic.

The fairness doctrine would do absolutely nothing to the cherry-picking and slanting of facts that goes on in news-shows. It would just effect opinion shows by forcing an alternate view.

Opinion shows and news shows are not the same thing sparky. News would still be biased. Fox and MSNBC would still have their smarmy news that skews one way or the other. OReilly and Maddow would have some competition inside their respective networks, but Shep and his counterpart over at MSNBC wouldn't.