Should we shut down left-wing media?

[Questioner]

Lately the Democratic party and "left" wing media has been used for the purposes of rabble rousing, inciting violence, and perpetuating misinformation to the uneducated Demographic.

This could give as a good case for repealing the First Amendment, or using the state's power to shut down Democratic media, including social media which incites violence and anarchy.

In practice, I don't think it would be too easy to do - the government could simply shut down TV and radio such as the Colbert Report, NPR, as well as social media outlets such as YouTube channels which incite violence, hatred, and immorality in the lowest common denominator.

In practice, most of their "rights" are imaginary anyway, and are merely fed to them via their misinformation outlets by rabble rousers - simply shut them all down, and remind the Democratic party and it's mouth-breading demographic of their rightful place under the state's hierarchy.

As an example, anyone who uses the term "white supremacist", "Nazi", or "fascist" could be profiled by the FBI and the CIA, given that anarchist groups have abused this term. (Much as how actual white supremacy groups may be being monitored as well).

NPR isn’t ‘left wing.’

In fact, ‘the media’ in general aren’t ‘left wing.’

Indeed, that news entities report facts and the truth that conflict with rightwing dogma, exposing the lies and dishonesty of the right, doesn’t make them ‘left wing.’

Most of the "news" is geared toward those of a 6th grade education.

Anyone, "left" or "right" who's so much as read a book by a single political philosopher, such as John Stuart Mill for the left, Russel Kirk for the right, or someone else entirely would laugh at it. It's designed to keep the immoral satiated.

Currently, it seems to be the radical left wing media - inciting hatred and violence, which is why I support banning it.

This is a guide to what "Media Bias Fact Check" considers left or right-wing, it's the closest to a "neutral" source I've been able to find.

And yes, CNN and MSNBC are considered heavy "left bias"; NPR is considered "center left" bias - anyone who gets most of their news or information from them, or believes the world began when their favorite network aired a generation ago is and will be seriously misinformed.

Media Bias/Fact Check - Search and Learn the Bias of News Media

 

[Pogo]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

Minuscule Microscule compared to how much the Lush Rimjobs and the Fox Noises generate from their advertising.

When your income is dependent on advertising, the more your ratings go up the more you make. That's when "SLUT! SLUT! SLUT!" hits the air, because that makes ratings go up.

That what you want?

I'm not really big on "frees peach" lately - since we technically have the right to Amend the Constitution, as the Founders' designed it, then this means that nothing, including the 1st Amendment is sacred except in people's imagination.

We could just remove it, then unilaterally shut down all "far-left" propaganda which incites violence, no one would miss it or lose any sleep over it.

I don't care about Rush Limbaugh.

Such is the authoritarian right’s contempt for the Constitution – the First Amendment in particular.

Our government is and always was "authoritarian" in the absurdist sense you describe, as is the Common Law system which the states are governed by - we don't allow degenerates to directly participate in government, but use elected representatives and electoral colleges as a bastion against their immorality, fictitious "rights", and lack of education - and for good reason - they were well fed, well bred, well read - as is any serious participant in society, whether an entrepreneur like Bill Gates, a scientist such as Steven Pinker, or a philosopher such as Russel Kirk.

The American framers allowed the potential for any amendment, including the 1st to be removed as the circumstances allow. If they repealed it, and shut down all radical and left wing media, and reminded the slave class of who they actually are by virture of their own immorality and vice, I would lose no sleep over it. Lately, I'm even tempted to sympathize more with Hamilton than with the other framers.

As a failed entrepreneur, I can attest to this, many of the popular 'mob' are unambitious, dependent, ignorant, and spoiled, and would barely have any right not to be enslaved in governments of recent past, let alone a pretense of participating in politics.

And this is a classic tactic of authoritarians: demonize ‘the media’ using lies and misinformation in an effort to ‘justify’ government censorship and the destruction of a free press.

More like a "freak" press. I'd recommend putting them back in PT Barnum's circus where they belong.

Funny you should mention P.T. Barnum. That's literally what Rump's sister calls him.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Lately the Democratic party and "left" wing media has been used for the purposes of rabble rousing, inciting violence, and perpetuating misinformation to the uneducated Demographic.

This could give as a good case for repealing the First Amendment, or using the state's power to shut down Democratic media, including social media which incites violence and anarchy.

In practice, I don't think it would be too easy to do - the government could simply shut down TV and radio such as the Colbert Report, NPR, as well as social media outlets such as YouTube channels which incite violence, hatred, and immorality in the lowest common denominator.

In practice, most of their "rights" are imaginary anyway, and are merely fed to them via their misinformation outlets by rabble rousers - simply shut them all down, and remind the Democratic party and it's mouth-breading demographic of their rightful place under the state's hierarchy.

As an example, anyone who uses the term "white supremacist", "Nazi", or "fascist" could be profiled by the FBI and the CIA, given that anarchist groups have abused this term. (Much as how actual white supremacy groups may be being monitored as well).

Using their own rhetoric they are prime candidates for banning

 

[Questioner]

Lately the Democratic party and "left" wing media has been used for the purposes of rabble rousing, inciting violence, and perpetuating misinformation to the uneducated Demographic.

This could give as a good case for repealing the First Amendment, or using the state's power to shut down Democratic media, including social media which incites violence and anarchy.

In practice, I don't think it would be too easy to do - the government could simply shut down TV and radio such as the Colbert Report, NPR, as well as social media outlets such as YouTube channels which incite violence, hatred, and immorality in the lowest common denominator.

In practice, most of their "rights" are imaginary anyway, and are merely fed to them via their misinformation outlets by rabble rousers - simply shut them all down, and remind the Democratic party and it's mouth-breading demographic of their rightful place under the state's hierarchy.

As an example, anyone who uses the term "white supremacist", "Nazi", or "fascist" could be profiled by the FBI and the CIA, given that anarchist groups have abused this term. (Much as how actual white supremacy groups may be being monitored as well).

Using their own rhetoric they are prime candidates for banning

it's all lies and rhetoric, even most "scientific" information is outdated 19th century information geared to the 6th grade level, and shows no understanding or appreciation for Francis' Bacon's method, or it's actual relevance historically and presently outside of its specific industries.

Most "science" information in mass media is intended to sell consumer products to the ill-informed, or promote political philosophies such as Secular Humanism or Utilitarianianism, falsely conflating them with actual science to the ignorance of the average individual who doesn't know the difference.

Hell, the average media voyeur doesn't even know their state or county's own Common Law system in theory or in practice - and the philosophies and axioms it is based on, despite it affecting them in day-to-day life more than the federal.

 

[MisterBeale]

Bullshit.

They are mouth piece for the CFR, the Anglo-American alliance, and global capitalists everywhere.

Apparently you don't pay attention to the foundations that support their work.

I can't believe you are utterly this dumb.

They serve the interests of the richest of the one percent.

So you posted "Bullshit" and followed it with four lines that in no way contradict or even address what I posted.

Did you even read it?

But they don't.

News isn't just reporting SOME facts, it is about reporting ALL facts, and not lying about some of the facts either.

PBS and NPR LIE.

Once AGAIN, that's not what my post is about. READ it. Is that asking so much?

I did, and I am saying, what you are getting at IS wrong. One thing does not necessarily equate to the other.

The only incentive for hyping propaganda is not just ratings. That is your logical error. I am sorry if you do not get that fault in your thinking. This is not my problem and it is the reason you are deluded. Go back to basics dear friend.

The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany used propaganda all the damn time, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the profit motive. We are so beyond the profit motive here. We are talking about things that are much more serious.

Indeed one (my post) does not equate to your rambling diatribe. They're NOT RELATED. Ironic, since my point was about the motivations of psychology --- and then you have the cheek to give ME a link on Bernays? Poster please.

I get that you're looking for any opportunity to run this particular rant and show off your Bernays, but you jumped your cue. The point was not about "propaganda" --- it was about milking the emotions for ratings, REGARDLESS what the content is. That certainly and emphatically includes the freaking Weather Channel running scare stories about historic tornadoes, it certainly included Fox Noise running ''fear the scary black man" stories, it certainly includes the hunt for the next missing white girl, on and on and on and on and on. NOTHING in that is about the content of propaganda.

But you have this erroneous belief that somehow NPR or PBS is more trustworthy because they don't care about "ratings," or that they don't use emotional content, which is, just a load of crap. I hear emotion laden programing on there all the time. And they do it, just as much for their agenda as the other outlets do it for theirs.

What the hell is this, Stories – StoryCorps if not one emotional appeal after another? WTF, get real already. You are so partisan with your supposed, "logic," you do not even see the propaganda.

They are more subtle, sure, but it is none the less there.

It is laughable in the extreme.

 

[Erinwltr]

Lately the Democratic party and "left" wing media has been used for the purposes of rabble rousing, inciting violence, and perpetuating misinformation to the uneducated Demographic.

This could give as a good case for repealing the First Amendment, or using the state's power to shut down Democratic media, including social media which incites violence and anarchy.

In practice, I don't think it would be too easy to do - the government could simply shut down TV and radio such as the Colbert Report, NPR, as well as social media outlets such as YouTube channels which incite violence, hatred, and immorality in the lowest common denominator.

In practice, most of their "rights" are imaginary anyway, and are merely fed to them via their misinformation outlets by rabble rousers - simply shut them all down, and remind the Democratic party and it's mouth-breading demographic of their rightful place under the state's hierarchy.

As an example, anyone who uses the term "white supremacist", "Nazi", or "fascist" could be profiled by the FBI and the CIA, given that anarchist groups have abused this term. (Much as how actual white supremacy groups may be being monitored as well).

Why don't we just tear up the whole constitution, declare martial law and make Trump president for life.

The Orange Idiot in the WH is a Yellow Belly.

 

[regent]

The second president of the United States, John Adams, had his conservative congress pass the Alien and Sedition Act making it against the law to criticize government. The act violated the Bill of Rights and when Jefferson became president it was removed.

 

[MisterBeale]

Lately the Democratic party and "left" wing media has been used for the purposes of rabble rousing, inciting violence, and perpetuating misinformation to the uneducated Demographic.

This could give as a good case for repealing the First Amendment, or using the state's power to shut down Democratic media, including social media which incites violence and anarchy.

In practice, I don't think it would be too easy to do - the government could simply shut down TV and radio such as the Colbert Report, NPR, as well as social media outlets such as YouTube channels which incite violence, hatred, and immorality in the lowest common denominator.

In practice, most of their "rights" are imaginary anyway, and are merely fed to them via their misinformation outlets by rabble rousers - simply shut them all down, and remind the Democratic party and it's mouth-breading demographic of their rightful place under the state's hierarchy.

As an example, anyone who uses the term "white supremacist", "Nazi", or "fascist" could be profiled by the FBI and the CIA, given that anarchist groups have abused this term. (Much as how actual white supremacy groups may be being monitored as well).

NPR isn’t ‘left wing.’

In fact, ‘the media’ in general aren’t ‘left wing.’

Indeed, that news entities report facts and the truth that conflict with rightwing dogma, exposing the lies and dishonesty of the right, doesn’t make them ‘left wing.’

Most of the "news" is geared toward those of a 6th grade education.

Anyone, "left" or "right" who's so much as read a book by a single political philosopher, such as John Stuart Mill for the left, Russel Kirk for the right, or someone else entirely would laugh at it. It's designed to keep the immoral satiated.

Currently, it seems to be the radical left wing media - inciting hatred and violence, which is why I support banning it.

This is a guide to what "Media Bias Fact Check" considers left or right-wing, it's the closest to a "neutral" source I've been able to find.

And yes, CNN and MSNBC are considered heavy "left bias"; NPR is considered "center left" bias - anyone who gets most of their news or information from them, or believes the world began when their favorite network aired a generation ago is and will be seriously misinformed.

Media Bias/Fact Check - Search and Learn the Bias of News Media

Although that looks it pretty good, the guy that runs it cannot always be trusted to make the best judgement.

Sometimes he gives a "mostly factual" to a source if he doesn't like the stories conclusions, but cannot find anything at all amiss with the sources or facts.

He'll just say something like, "Mostly Factual in reporting due to a lack of transparency despite a clean fact check record."

Well? If you have a clean fact check record, then they should be factual.
It's mostly b/c this knuckle heads epistomology has been challenged and has a hard time with cognitive dissonance. . .


As stated in this piece;

We can probably measure media bias. But do we want to?
We can probably measure media bias. But do we want to?

". . . The armchair academics

Amateur attempts at such tools already exist, and have found plenty of fans. Google “media bias,” and you’ll find Media Bias/Fact Check, run by armchair media analyst Dave Van Zandt. The site’s methodology is simple: Van Zandt and his team rate each outlet from 0 to 10 on the categories of biased wording and headlines, factuality and sourcing, story choices (“does the source report news from both sides”), and political affiliation.

A similar effort is “The Media Bias Chart,” or simply, “The Chart.” Created by Colorado patent attorney Vanessa Otero, the chart has gone through several methodological iterations, but currently is based on her evaluation of outlets’ stories on dimensions of veracity, fairness, and expression.

Both efforts suffer from the very problem they’re trying to address: Their subjective assessments leave room for human biases, or even simple inconsistencies, to creep in. Compared to Gentzkow and Shapiro, the five to 20 stories typically judged on these sites represent but a drop of mainstream news outlets’ production. . . . . "

 

[regent]

Why not have the political party in power put out the news? If that were done people would not have to think. That seems to be the goal of the Republican Party and Trump?

 

[OldLady]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

They USED to.

The other day, they repeated the DNC and CFR myth that it was Ukrainian conspiracy theory that their government colluded with the DNC to brainwash their listeners on NPR, I HEARD THEM.

wtf? Hell, it was in Politico. . .

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire
Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire


. . . .and Ukraine's OWN politicians ADMITTED it?

It's not really a debunked theory just b/c ruling class journalists and CFR bureaucrats and spooks say it is. NPR and PBS meet with politicians at the CFR. These are the same folks that let Hillary off with a warning for doing clearly illegal shit, why should he listen to them?



The FBI’s Outside Contractors, DNC Servers & Crowdstrike
The FBI’s Outside Contractors, DNC Servers & Crowdstrike

CrowdStrike: Five Things Everyone Is Ignoring About The Russia-DNC Story
CrowdStrike: Five Things Everyone Is Ignoring About The Russia-DNC Story

US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims

A Demand for Russian 'Hacking' Proof

Intel Vets Challenge 'Russia Hack' Evidence

VIPS Tells Media: Support for Brennan is Not Unanimous

VIPS: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

From what it appears, the PBS and NPR are doing everything they can to deflect attention from the very real established facts of election meddling by the Ukrainian political establishment.

It seems to me, a real national and bureaucratic hypocrisy to focus on "Russian" meddling, while just giving a pass on Ukraine meddling that is an open secret.

No one seems to care.

Ukraine admitted to interfering in the 2016 US election on Clinton’s side
Ukraine admitted to interfering in the 2016 US election on Clinton’s side

". . . Thus, the audio recording made public in the Ukrainian media was one piece of evidence of Ukraine’s interference. According to it, a person with a voice similar to the voice of the head of Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), Artem Sytnyk, admitted that he had supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US election.


His office was responsible for publicly disclosing the contents of the Ukrainian «black ledger», which implicated Paul Manafort, to the media. The document contained a list of secret payments made by Ukraine’s Party of Regions to Manafort.


Earlier, the county administrative court of Kyiv had pledged the director of the NABU Artem Sytnyk, and a member of the Ukrainian Parliament Sergey Leshchenko guilty of publicizing the pre-trial investigation materials concerning Paul Manafort and election interference. The information was spread illegally and inflicted damage on the foreign policy of Ukraine.. . . . "

Translation:


Admit unlawful acts of the director of the NABU A. Sytnyk and the Ukrainian MP S. Leshchenko concerning the disclosure and distribution of the information about D. Trump’s campaign chairman P. Manafort and the presence of P.Manafort’s name and signatures in the lists of “The Party of Regions’ black ledgers” in the materials of the pre-trial investigation, which was the result of interference in the electoral processes of the United States of America in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine.

Translation:


“The Party of Regions’ black ledgers” saved the world. Manafort, who was fed from Yanukovich’s hands, leaves with dishonor. Guess, after such a blow Trump will not recover.

P.S. We can clearly see the reaction of the Ukrainian politicians involved in “Yanukovich’s black ledgers”. Political culture – you’ve either got it or you haven’t”.

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire


As far as I'm concerned? Yeah, NPR and PBS need to have their funding cut at this point for spreading the propaganda and lies of the Atlantic Council which is profiting off of deal made in Ukraine.

Telling people that Trump is looking into crap that is not there? How dishonest. It's awful.

Yes, I've heard of what you bring up here. It has NOTHING to do, however, with what the President was asking for. It may be the reason the President is so slow to warm to the Ukrainians, but Trump asked specifically for an investigation into Crowdstrike, which is a debunked conspiracy theory, and the Bidens, which is similarly unable to hold factual water.

As an aside, I'm not sure what was going on when the Black Ledger was released, whether that was a good or a bad thing, but I think from the viewpoint of decent people everywhere, it was a good thing to put a crook like Manafort in prison. I could be wrong.

The longest the PBS Newshour uses on any piece is 15 minutes. They can't cover all your details in fifteen minutes. They might do a documentary on it, though. You can't tell.

 

[OldLady]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

They're noncommercial media, which means they have no incentive to milk ratings for ad revenues, which in turn means they don't need to hype stories with emotional booga-booga. That's the difference between one outlet laying out simple facts and another one going "SLUT! SLUT! SLUT!".

Bullshit.

They are mouth piece for the CFR, the Anglo-American alliance, and global capitalists everywhere.

Apparently you don't pay attention to the foundations that support their work.

I can't believe you are utterly this dumb.

They serve the interests of the richest of the one percent.

What's the "CFR," Mr. Beale?

Oh, I forgot, I booked marked this.

lol.

Here is the answer right from one of their own journalists. NYT and WaPo are two of their main propaganda organs from brainwashing folks. Never trust anything from those papers.

Except when they admit they are brainwashing you!

Click on the link below, I still can't believe they told the truth for once. lol


Ruling Class Journalists
by Richard Harwood

That isn't what the article said, Mr. Beale. If I were you, I'd read it again.

 

[anynameyouwish]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

They're noncommercial media, which means they have no incentive to milk ratings for ad revenues, which in turn means they don't need to hype stories with emotional booga-booga. That's the difference between one outlet laying out simple facts and another one going "SLUT! SLUT! SLUT!".

Bullshit.

They are mouth piece for the CFR, the Anglo-American alliance, and global capitalists everywhere.

Apparently you don't pay attention to the foundations that support their work.

I can't believe you are utterly this dumb.

They serve the interests of the richest of the one percent.

What's the "CFR," Mr. Beale?

Oh, I forgot, I booked marked this.

lol.

Here is the answer right from one of their own journalists. NYT and WaPo are two of their main propaganda organs from brainwashing folks. Never trust anything from those papers.

Except when they admit they are brainwashing you!

Click on the link below, I still can't believe they told the truth for once. lol


Ruling Class Journalists
by Richard Harwood

is it sad and pathetic or just knee slappingly funny that low information, brainwashed and indoctrinated conservatives believe that everyone ELSE is a "low information, brainwashed moron"?

 

[my2¢]

I feel very comfortable with control I have over my choice of media. The idea of restricting that choice strikes as the way it's done in China and I want no part of that here.

 

[OldLady]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

No they don't give anything closely resembling even handed.
The only reason you believe that is because they are in the pockets of the democrat party.
here's something to think about when one side of the political spectrum says the media is partisan and all they report is what you agree with is the time you should question what they are reporting.

Good point. The news isn't to be "agreed with" or not, it simply is. The analysis is what you meant.

 

[anynameyouwish]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

No they don't give anything closely resembling even handed.
The only reason you believe that is because they are in the pockets of the democrat party.
here's something to think about when one side of the political spectrum says the media is partisan and all they report is what you agree with is the time you should question what they are reporting.

Good point. The news isn't to be "agreed with" or not, it simply is. The analysis is what you meant.

of course.....
how news is PRESENTED can contain biases.....

where CNN might say "LBGT activists achieved a landmark victory with marital rights"

fox news might say "IMMORAL God hating perverts continue to attack the constitution and attack our rights"

 

[LeftofLeft]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

No they don't give anything closely resembling even handed.
The only reason you believe that is because they are in the pockets of the democrat party.
here's something to think about when one side of the political spectrum says the media is partisan and all they report is what you agree with is the time you should question what they are reporting.

Good point. The news isn't to be "agreed with" or not, it simply is. The analysis is what you meant.

of course.....
how news is PRESENTED can contain biases.....

where CNN might say "LBGT activists achieved a landmark victory with marital rights"

fox news might say "IMMORAL God hating perverts continue to attack the constitution and attack our rights"

CNN is more likely to do a headline like this: “Portland advocacy group encounters violence during peaceful protest” FOX: ANTIFA assaults pedestrians for crossing the street”.

 

[lennypartiv]

Our Founding Fathers would be shocked at the explosion of fake news in America. If they had known this was going to happen, they surely would have made drastic changes to the First Amendment.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

No they don't give anything closely resembling even handed.
The only reason you believe that is because they are in the pockets of the democrat party.
here's something to think about when one side of the political spectrum says the media is partisan and all they report is what you agree with is the time you should question what they are reporting.

Good point. The news isn't to be "agreed with" or not, it simply is. The analysis is what you meant.

If you ever get a chance watch individual new sources pay close attention

 

[anynameyouwish]

NPR and PBS, at a minimum, need to have their funding from taxpayers ceased. These entities generate millions from donations. Taking taxpayer money for Left Wing propaganda is an insult.

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

No they don't give anything closely resembling even handed.
The only reason you believe that is because they are in the pockets of the democrat party.
here's something to think about when one side of the political spectrum says the media is partisan and all they report is what you agree with is the time you should question what they are reporting.

Good point. The news isn't to be "agreed with" or not, it simply is. The analysis is what you meant.

of course.....
how news is PRESENTED can contain biases.....

where CNN might say "LBGT activists achieved a landmark victory with marital rights"

fox news might say "IMMORAL God hating perverts continue to attack the constitution and attack our rights"

CNN is more likely to do a headline like this: “Portland advocacy group encounters violence during peaceful protest” FOX: ANTIFA assaults pedestrians for crossing the street”.

"CNN is more likely to do a headline like this: “Portland advocacy group encounters violence during peaceful protest” FOX: ANTIFA assaults pedestrians for crossing the street”.

exactly!

If a conservative tried to run over a peaceful liberal protestor FOX news would say "ANTIFA ATTACKS peaceful conservative demonstrators car! Does severe damage to car!"

 

[Questioner]

They give the most even handed reporting of the news, with the least disrespect of the President, of any of the major news outlets. They have a left leaning slant in the issues they choose to cover, but I have never heard a single one of them foaming at the mouth about the President or Republicans, not even their guests.
You would be shooting the wrong folks here.

They're noncommercial media, which means they have no incentive to milk ratings for ad revenues, which in turn means they don't need to hype stories with emotional booga-booga. That's the difference between one outlet laying out simple facts and another one going "SLUT! SLUT! SLUT!".

Bullshit.

They are mouth piece for the CFR, the Anglo-American alliance, and global capitalists everywhere.

Apparently you don't pay attention to the foundations that support their work.

I can't believe you are utterly this dumb.

They serve the interests of the richest of the one percent.

What's the "CFR," Mr. Beale?

Oh, I forgot, I booked marked this.

lol.

Here is the answer right from one of their own journalists. NYT and WaPo are two of their main propaganda organs from brainwashing folks. Never trust anything from those papers.

Except when they admit they are brainwashing you!

Click on the link below, I still can't believe they told the truth for once. lol


Ruling Class Journalists
by Richard Harwood

is it sad and pathetic or just knee slappingly funny that low information, brainwashed and indoctrinated conservatives believe that everyone ELSE is a "low information, brainwashed moron"?

That's what mass media is, for a large part, without exception. It's primarily about branding and marketing to a demographic, per Davild Olgilvy, who is considered the founder of modern advertising.

The average so-called "progressive" whose only source of information comes from a propaganda news network likely has no education above the 6th grade level, it's simply about branding or appealing to a demographic or cliché.

Conservatives in the vein of Russell Kirk, Ron Paul and so on are much more educated and intelligent, and I'm tempted to believe have a natural right to rule over immoral and uneducated progressives.