Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
#But how often is the Catholic League taken seriously by the MSM, and has the Catholic League ever gotten someone suspended as quick as GLAAD did?
The anti-Harry Potter people are mostly laughed at and ignored. How many of thier boycotts and ban calls have been successful?
Most of the Catholic League stuff was centered around the fringe modern art world, and most Catholics could give a rats ass about it. Donohue would whine and seethe, and 2 days later it was forgotten. The DD crap is still going on, although the MSM is trying to keep it under the rug now, because they didnt expect the backlash that happened.
Oh, that's easy to answer:
if the Catholic League or anti-Harry Potter people aren't as well organized as GLAAD, then it's their own fault. You know, personal initiative, bootstraps and hard-work. That kind of stuff.
I find it a cheap cop-out to blame the "MSM" everytime something doesn't go the way people want.
It has nothing to do with organization, and everything to do with, that according to our political elites, its OK to ignore the Catholic League but once GLAAD says JUMP!! the only acceptable response is to say "how high, and how long do you want to stay in the air for?"
It isnt hard to issue a press release, its harder to make people care about it. How "boots on the ground is GLAAD anyway" And how much do they have to work at convinving people that already agree with them?
The MSM has a liberal bias, because it is mostly comprised of Liberals. That is a fact, and not some opinion.
Everyone is out for blood these days. Thats what you get when everything becomes about winning for your side.Just because the DD people can afford to weather the storm doesnt make the situation any better. The fact still remains that GLAAD was looking for blood, and A&E caved in a heartbeat.
I also don't see how lawsuits would apply here. We are talking about the court of public opinion, the worst that could happen to A&E would be pulling of sponsors and loss of revenue. If that happened I would be more understanding of them pulling the plug on phil or the entire show, because at that point "the people would have spoken" not just a small part of the people (i.e. GLAAD).
What is happening is people have lost the ability to tell certain groups to "go to hell" when they jump on to the offended bandwagon. And at this point the media favors whiners on the left side of the Aisle.
__________________
Lawsuits s why we have gotten to this point was my point. People suing over everything so the companies just cut that out be removing the problem totally.
But you are correct about the sponsors, Glaad would pressure them and they would remove themselves from the bad press. Its a very simple tactic they all use.
No you are wrong about it just being on the left. Sigh...the problem is larger than that and the fact you made it partisan like that doesnt make things better. Really you can't see groups like the catholic league who call for boycotts as well as a problem? they are not on the left. How about people who called for the banning of harry potter because its witchcraft? those are not leftists either.
But how often is the Catholic League taken seriously by the MSM, and has the Catholic League ever gotten someone suspended as quick as GLAAD did?
The anti-Harry Potter people are mostly laughed at and ignored. How many of thier boycotts and ban calls have been successful?
Most of the Catholic League stuff was centered around the fringe modern art world, and most Catholics could give a rats ass about it. Donohue would whine and seethe, and 2 days later it was forgotten. The DD crap is still going on, although the MSM is trying to keep it under the rug now, because they didnt expect the backlash that happened.
The problem is that too many people confuse Tolerance with Acceptance.
Just sayin'.
#But how often is the Catholic League taken seriously by the MSM, and has the Catholic League ever gotten someone suspended as quick as GLAAD did?
The anti-Harry Potter people are mostly laughed at and ignored. How many of thier boycotts and ban calls have been successful?
Most of the Catholic League stuff was centered around the fringe modern art world, and most Catholics could give a rats ass about it. Donohue would whine and seethe, and 2 days later it was forgotten. The DD crap is still going on, although the MSM is trying to keep it under the rug now, because they didnt expect the backlash that happened.
Oh, that's easy to answer:
if the Catholic League or anti-Harry Potter people aren't as well organized as GLAAD, then it's their own fault. You know, personal initiative, bootstraps and hard-work. That kind of stuff.
I find it a cheap cop-out to blame the "MSM" everytime something doesn't go the way people want.
It has nothing to do with organization, and everything to do with, that according to our political elites, its OK to ignore the Catholic League but once GLAAD says JUMP!! the only acceptable response is to say "how high, and how long do you want to stay in the air for?"
It isnt hard to issue a press release, its harder to make people care about it. How "boots on the ground is GLAAD anyway" And how much do they have to work at convinving people that already agree with them?
The MSM has a liberal bias, because it is mostly comprised of Liberals. That is a fact, and not some opinion.
#
Oh, that's easy to answer:
if the Catholic League or anti-Harry Potter people aren't as well organized as GLAAD, then it's their own fault. You know, personal initiative, bootstraps and hard-work. That kind of stuff.
I find it a cheap cop-out to blame the "MSM" everytime something doesn't go the way people want.
It has nothing to do with organization, and everything to do with, that according to our political elites, its OK to ignore the Catholic League but once GLAAD says JUMP!! the only acceptable response is to say "how high, and how long do you want to stay in the air for?"
It isnt hard to issue a press release, its harder to make people care about it. How "boots on the ground is GLAAD anyway" And how much do they have to work at convinving people that already agree with them?
The MSM has a liberal bias, because it is mostly comprised of Liberals. That is a fact, and not some opinion.
the reason there is a difference is because DD brings in 11 million viewers per show where the catholic league does not. So the media covering DD means Ratings for the media. Ratings equal money. Media bias is something youve been spoon fed. They are about money and will rape whatever story they need to in order to make money.
Everyone is out for blood these days. Thats what you get when everything becomes about winning for your side.
Lawsuits s why we have gotten to this point was my point. People suing over everything so the companies just cut that out be removing the problem totally.
But you are correct about the sponsors, Glaad would pressure them and they would remove themselves from the bad press. Its a very simple tactic they all use.
No you are wrong about it just being on the left. Sigh...the problem is larger than that and the fact you made it partisan like that doesnt make things better. Really you can't see groups like the catholic league who call for boycotts as well as a problem? they are not on the left. How about people who called for the banning of harry potter because its witchcraft? those are not leftists either.
But how often is the Catholic League taken seriously by the MSM, and has the Catholic League ever gotten someone suspended as quick as GLAAD did?
The anti-Harry Potter people are mostly laughed at and ignored. How many of thier boycotts and ban calls have been successful?
Most of the Catholic League stuff was centered around the fringe modern art world, and most Catholics could give a rats ass about it. Donohue would whine and seethe, and 2 days later it was forgotten. The DD crap is still going on, although the MSM is trying to keep it under the rug now, because they didnt expect the backlash that happened.
it doesnt matter the size, nor intent. They are the samething. you are making excuses so you can blame the left more because of partisanship.
sigh things where going so well too.
It has nothing to do with organization, and everything to do with, that according to our political elites, its OK to ignore the Catholic League but once GLAAD says JUMP!! the only acceptable response is to say "how high, and how long do you want to stay in the air for?"
It isnt hard to issue a press release, its harder to make people care about it. How "boots on the ground is GLAAD anyway" And how much do they have to work at convinving people that already agree with them?
The MSM has a liberal bias, because it is mostly comprised of Liberals. That is a fact, and not some opinion.
the reason there is a difference is because DD brings in 11 million viewers per show where the catholic league does not. So the media covering DD means Ratings for the media. Ratings equal money. Media bias is something youve been spoon fed. They are about money and will rape whatever story they need to in order to make money.
its about money at the top levels. At the reporting levels, what party do you think a majority of reporters back? If the advertisers continue to pony up, do you really think the owners will care which positions are taken, as long as they don't piss off the advertisers. the key position in any media organization is the equivalent of the lead editor in the old newspaper organization. Whatver politics that person has is the way the news organization shifts, and most of them shift left, either in sympathy, or overt action.
I believe they have become whites to money and their own hype.But how often is the Catholic League taken seriously by the MSM, and has the Catholic League ever gotten someone suspended as quick as GLAAD did?
The anti-Harry Potter people are mostly laughed at and ignored. How many of thier boycotts and ban calls have been successful?
Most of the Catholic League stuff was centered around the fringe modern art world, and most Catholics could give a rats ass about it. Donohue would whine and seethe, and 2 days later it was forgotten. The DD crap is still going on, although the MSM is trying to keep it under the rug now, because they didnt expect the backlash that happened.
it doesnt matter the size, nor intent. They are the samething. you are making excuses so you can blame the left more because of partisanship.
sigh things where going so well too.
So you are saying most media organizations and most media people do not have a left leaning bias?
Even if they could obtain the impartiality you are implying, what are their personal politics? Do you not agree that most journalists tend to skew left?
the reason there is a difference is because DD brings in 11 million viewers per show where the catholic league does not. So the media covering DD means Ratings for the media. Ratings equal money. Media bias is something youve been spoon fed. They are about money and will rape whatever story they need to in order to make money.
its about money at the top levels. At the reporting levels, what party do you think a majority of reporters back? If the advertisers continue to pony up, do you really think the owners will care which positions are taken, as long as they don't piss off the advertisers. the key position in any media organization is the equivalent of the lead editor in the old newspaper organization. Whatver politics that person has is the way the news organization shifts, and most of them shift left, either in sympathy, or overt action.
We are basically saying the samething. You just believe there is bias
I believe they have become whites to money and their own hype.it doesnt matter the size, nor intent. They are the samething. you are making excuses so you can blame the left more because of partisanship.
sigh things where going so well too.
So you are saying most media organizations and most media people do not have a left leaning bias?
Even if they could obtain the impartiality you are implying, what are their personal politics? Do you not agree that most journalists tend to skew left?
But this doesn't matter in today's media. .they want you to think it matters.its about money at the top levels. At the reporting levels, what party do you think a majority of reporters back? If the advertisers continue to pony up, do you really think the owners will care which positions are taken, as long as they don't piss off the advertisers. the key position in any media organization is the equivalent of the lead editor in the old newspaper organization. Whatver politics that person has is the way the news organization shifts, and most of them shift left, either in sympathy, or overt action.
We are basically saying the samething. You just believe there is bias
There is always bias. It is far better to recognize it then to pretend that it doesnt exist.
Most journalists support left leaning ideologies, even if they try to pretend they don't.
I believe they have become whites to money and their own hype.So you are saying most media organizations and most media people do not have a left leaning bias?
Even if they could obtain the impartiality you are implying, what are their personal politics? Do you not agree that most journalists tend to skew left?
But which way do they skew politically? Even if they strive to achive "balance," for most reporters, where do you think thier sympathies lie?
I believe they have become whites to money and their own hype.
But which way do they skew politically? Even if they strive to achive "balance," for most reporters, where do you think thier sympathies lie?
Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
I believe they have become whites to money and their own hype.
But which way do they skew politically? Even if they strive to achive "balance," for most reporters, where do you think thier sympathies lie?
Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
Unless it's a huge event cable is never on. Mainly get my stuff from here and other sites. .But which way do they skew politically? Even if they strive to achive "balance," for most reporters, where do you think thier sympathies lie?
Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
Which is why I get all of my news online. I don't think I've watched a TV news program except for a few minutes of local news in years.
When you go to opinion sites, and follow thier links, at least you know where the Bias is coming from.
But which way do they skew politically? Even if they strive to achive "balance," for most reporters, where do you think thier sympathies lie?
Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
It's marketed, but thier bias is rightward, as compared to most of the main networks and the left-est of the bunch MSNBC.
What! They are not a problem. Rather they are solutions. According to your OP, this is EXACTLY what they should be doing:Everyone is out for blood these days. Thats what you get when everything becomes about winning for your side.Just because the DD people can afford to weather the storm doesnt make the situation any better. The fact still remains that GLAAD was looking for blood, and A&E caved in a heartbeat.
I also don't see how lawsuits would apply here. We are talking about the court of public opinion, the worst that could happen to A&E would be pulling of sponsors and loss of revenue. If that happened I would be more understanding of them pulling the plug on phil or the entire show, because at that point "the people would have spoken" not just a small part of the people (i.e. GLAAD).
What is happening is people have lost the ability to tell certain groups to "go to hell" when they jump on to the offended bandwagon. And at this point the media favors whiners on the left side of the Aisle.
__________________
Lawsuits s why we have gotten to this point was my point. People suing over everything so the companies just cut that out be removing the problem totally.
But you are correct about the sponsors, Glaad would pressure them and they would remove themselves from the bad press. Its a very simple tactic they all use.
No you are wrong about it just being on the left. Sigh...the problem is larger than that and the fact you made it partisan like that doesnt make things better. Really you can't see groups like the catholic league who call for boycotts as well as a problem? they are not on the left. How about people who called for the banning of harry potter because its witchcraft? those are not leftists either.
In the OP, you claim that they are NOT the problem but that the ones calling for LEGAL action are. You are, in fact, quite correct. I find it rather funny thought that you make such a claim because it completely destroys most of the arguments that you and others have placed on this very board against a host of other issues. Even more telling is the example you brought up. In the Duck Dynasty example we have a group demanding the removal of an employee because of statements made (perfectly legal) and A&E capitulating (also perfectly legal). What THEN occurred was the exact same reaction from the other side many magnitudes larger. A LOT of other people demanding that the decision be reversed. Almost no one called for legal action. What they threatened was to stop watching the show. A&E got the message of course and Phil Robertson is back missing not a single beat at all. There was literally zero impact from the original decision other than A&E looking like morons. That is all perfectly legal and, more importantly, exactly how things should work. The DD incident was not a case of there being a problem. It was a beautiful example of how freedom of speech actually works.The company ( we will use Phil from ducks as the leading example.) has the right to ignore such demands from the public. They also have the right to watch their bottom line and if they feel such words will result in them loosing money. They can remove said person from their business.
Now some think ( well one really) that such ACTIONS as calling for a firing should be made criminal. Now to any logical person that should be a red flag. You can not claim someone has the unalienable right to voice their opinion, and then in the next breath say that a group voicing there opinion/actions as a criminal offense.
Speaking out against the crown at one point was also illegal, and yet i highly doubt that would be seen as "evil" by some people. In fact i assume those types would have supported such Evil actions.
Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing and you need to take the good with the bad. Sometimes that bad has consequences such as boycotts and the call to fire someone.
Unless it's a huge event cable is never on. Mainly get my stuff from here and other sites. .Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
Which is why I get all of my news online. I don't think I've watched a TV news program except for a few minutes of local news in years.
When you go to opinion sites, and follow thier links, at least you know where the Bias is coming from.
Otherwise I think we are in agreement for the most part?
Oh I assume left but again this tangent doesn't really matter.even fox news wants you to think they are bias but I'm reality it's all marketed.
It's marketed, but thier bias is rightward, as compared to most of the main networks and the left-est of the bunch MSNBC.
Yeah but look at the ratings....for the most part it's about money,and any bias is mostly self perceived in my opinion.
With Phil that was all about stealing viewers who watch the show because that's 11 million people.
