CBS half right AGAIN!!!!

[healthmyths]

CBS Anchor: 'We Are Getting Big Stories Wrong, Over and Over Again'
Our house is on fire," said Pelley.

"These have been a bad few months for journalism," he added. "We're getting the big stories wrong, over and over again."
And Pelley said the republic relies on the quality of the news business. "Democracies succeed or fail based on their journalism," said Pelley. "America is strong because its journalism is strong. That's how democracies work. They're only as good as the quality of the information that the public possesses. And that is where we come in."
CBS Anchor: 'We Are Getting Big Stories Wrong, Over and Over Again' | The Weekly Standard

PELLEY!!!! YOU are also HALF WRONG when you also don't admit THIS FACT!!!

Specifically when it comes in this form:

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees (85% of the employees!!!) of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.
The average Republican contribution was $744.
$1,020,816 Democrats
$142,863 Republicans.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller

Now you don't think these employees are dummies.. Stupid do you?

If 1,160 (85%) of 1,353 employees of ABC,CBS & NBC gave $1.02 million (88%) to Democrats that means they WANTED Democrats to WIN. They believe in Democrat ideology!

So If they want them to win would they put news favorable or unfavorable to democrats i.e. Obama?
Only 29 percent of the narrative on Governor Romney was positive while 71 percent was negative.
Study Finds Widespread Bias in Mainstream Media Coverage of Election | Women of Grace

This means 70% of the stories were negative which far outweighs the 29% positive stories.

In other words with 85% of the MSM giving to Democrats AND having the ability to influence readers/viewers this MSM showed 70% bad stories about Romney..
which was all that was needed to influence voters.

 

[kyzr]

The only other factors you might want to include are viewership and sponsorship, i.e. are the voters eating the dog food?

 

[Mac1958]

.

The political leanings of the media are certainly important, but they're not the only issue that reduces its credibility. Imagine, with the zillions of "news" operations out there, how intense the pressure is to come up with a scoop, an original angle, an original story. Holy crap, and we wonder why so much shit comes out wrong.

Hopefully more people are finally realizing that they can't believe what they hear or read or see from just one source. The partisan ideologues are happy getting most of their "news" from sources on "their side", but those who want the whole story have to make the effort to dig through a lot of crap.

Then they have to wonder what's even accurate.

Doesn't seem like it should be that way.

.

 

[Avorysuds]

Republicans and Democrats are the problem, no accountability unless you are 100% sure it could score you more points than you would lose. It's politics and not because it's politics" but because the voter base of both parties are stunted by partisanship and economically inferior.

 

[healthmyths]

.

The political leanings of the media are certainly important, but they're not the only issue that reduces its credibility. Imagine, with the zillions of "news" operations out there, how intense the pressure is to come up with a scoop, an original angle, an original story. Holy crap, and we wonder why so much shit comes out wrong.

Hopefully more people are finally realizing that they can't believe what they hear or read or see from just one source. The partisan ideologues are happy getting most of their "news" from sources on "their side", but those who want the whole story have to make the effort to dig through a lot of crap.

Then they have to wonder what's even accurate.

Doesn't seem like it should be that way.

.

Do you think the majority of these people are dummies???

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the
Center for Responsive Politics.
The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees (85% of the employees!!!) of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.
The average Republican contribution was $744.
$1,020,816 Democrats
$142,863 Republicans.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller

Now you don't think these employees are dummies right so
If 1,160 (85%) of 1,353 employees of ABC,CBS & NBC gave $1.02 million (88%) to Democrats that means they WANTED Democrats to WIN. They believe in Democrat ideology!

Now you made totally subjective personal observation without ANY substantiation.
HERE read this FACT as to what happened during the 2012 election campaign.

Only 29 percent of the narrative on Governor Romney was positive
while 71 percent was negative.
Study Finds Widespread Bias in Mainstream Media Coverage of Election | Women of Grace
Let me fill in the blank look on your face:.... If 7 out of 10 stories about Romney that were run by the above networks were NEGATIVE... DUH..
do you think that had any influence on voters???

Do you understand there are serious MSM bias that got Obama elected... MY god... 85% of these network employees,executives gave to Obama!

Seriously don't you think if a MSM publication like NewsWeek would have a tendency to write MORE positive stories about Obama and MORE NEGATIVE about Romney if their
EDITOR has this opinion of Obama???
Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters

But this weathered journalism veteran when observing Obama???
I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Evan Thomas on Hardball, June 5, 2009.
Newsweek?s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ?Sort of God? | NewsBusters

Everything you wrote was subjective. NO documentation and therefore unbelievable!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Dud the CBS is doing job to make Muslim Kenyan luk good. Is not fare ta me who hates dat black guy.

Medea is unfair makes it more fare plz

 

[healthmyths]

I watched ABC/CBS/NBC talking heads and they all seem to be chattering about the same thing:
Why did the WH change the talking points? Political????

It was a truly hard pill for these "journalists" to swallow that they've been so late in coming to the conclusion that the WH wrote 12 different talking point versions ALL except the first one from a political consideration point of view!
And this is why most Americans still don't understand, but is best summed up by this bumper sticker that was widely distributed by the Obama campaign!


And why was this picture released at the death of Osama if it wasn't "politically" motivated..i.e. shows Obama as the IN CHARGE CIC!



By the way, where was the CIC after the 5:00 briefing on 9/11/12...? Why aren't there pictures of that???


So the MSM IS NOW coming to grips that it was more important to have a President that was competent FIRST for ALL Americans and not just one for Democrats/blacks because of skin color!

But as most idiots on this forum will do they will take MY comment as being racist for pointing out the ONLY reason most people voted for Obama was because they didn't want to be even in their own MIND thought of as "racist" i.e. they say to themselves in the voting booth.." I don't really know that much about Obama, his character his skills, I do know he is black and I don't want to be considered" racist" so I'll vote for him!).

 

[Toronado3800]

In 08 who owned NBC?

What was the fox thing in the rest of the adticle again?

Oh, and I think any whiteys in my favorite bar who did vote Obama quietly voted for Obama because of the horrors of the Bush W and Reagan bailout systems, the lip service to small government and McCain first wunning points running on experience then being handled so strongly he ended up with a space cadet VP with no experience.

Republicans lost that election in 08 more than Obama won it.

 

[Toronado3800]

Oh, 6 out of 10 things Romney said had issues. Another odd choice.

Is the Rush revolution in journalism school over? In the 90's everyone wanted to be him or a sports opionist. I have not stalked any classes since then.

 

[Katzndogz]

The broadcast stations are going down.

U.S. broadcast TV ratings slide pressures ad rates at 'upfronts' | Reuters

(Reuters) - U.S. broadcast networks head into their biggest ad-selling season this week, competing with streaming services like Netflix, battling online players for ad dollars, and fending off hits starring zombies and duck hunters on cable.

The increased competition will force ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC to settle for their lowest average rate hikes in three years during the "upfront" selling season, Wall Street analysts say.

A lot of it might be their choice of programming. The competition shows have reached the end of their run.

 

[cereal_killer]

Mainstream media is nothing more than a propaganda machine. I don't even care to tune in anymore. Flipping the channel is like dialing in your drug of choice. What you WANT to hear can be found on the channel of your choice. Its not about the truth, its about serving you up your "drug" which is left or right talking points. Majority of Americans think they have an opinion, which is the furthest thing from the truth. They have been programmed.

 

[healthmyths]

In 08 who owned NBC?

What was the fox thing in the rest of the adticle again?

Oh, and I think any whiteys in my favorite bar who did vote Obama quietly voted for Obama because of the horrors of the Bush W and Reagan bailout systems, the lip service to small government and McCain first wunning points running on experience then being handled so strongly he ended up with a space cadet VP with no experience.

Republicans lost that election in 08 more than Obama won it.

OK.. your "whiteys" then depended obviously on what for their information about the "horrors" of Bush..?
MSM unless your "whiteys" had inside information.. (which I seriously doubt hanging out in a favorite bar!!!)!

SO assume then you and YOUR whiteys' friends got all your information from local tv, network news, local paper, I doubt national news..

Would you agree with this statement?
Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington,
February 2, 2007.Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters

If you and "whiteys" get your "horrors" of Bush information from the likes of the above.. (I imagine you have read Time magazine or NewsWeek..)
Would you say based on the above you were getting POSITIVE or NEGATIVE stories if the job is to 'bash the 'president"????

NOW if it is THEIR JOB to bash the President... YET these same news people for a FACT BASHED Bush constantly all the while they

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the
Center for Responsive Politics.
The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees (85% of the employees!!!) of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880. By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.
The average Republican contribution was $744.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller

So wouldn't logic tell you if the JOB is to Bash Bush and 85% of the people YOU and whiteys got your information donated $1 million to Democrats/Obama TO WIN??
Doesn't it make a lot of sense there has been a lot of the "horror" stories totally EXAGGERATED? BLOWN out of proportion?

So if you and your whiteys were SO informed about the HORRORS of Bush why weren't you informed about Obama's background by the above BIASED donors ?

Why were you not informed that Obama's first campaign was launched in the home of a terrorist couple that were on the FBI wanted list?
Why were you not informed that for 20 years Obama was influenced by a minister who was happy that 9/11 occurred as America's "chickens have come home to roost"?
Why were you not informed that when Obama piously speaks about being his "brother's keeper" you obviously weren't aware of his own brother living in a $12/year hut..to this DAY!
Were you not informed by this MSM that Obama smoked dope as he said in his 1995 memoir, he mentioned smoking “reefer” in “the dorm room of some brother” and talked about “getting high.” Before Occidental, he indulged in marijuana, alcohol and sometimes cocaine as a high school student in Hawaii, according to the book. He made “some bad decisions” as a teenager involving drugs and drinking, Senator Obama, now a presidential candidate, told high school students in New Hampshire last November.
But obviously THAT'S OK for you and your whitey friends cause is that what you expect of "black" people.

So with all your "information" about the "horrors" of Bush... where were the above donor/MSM writing the above stories? NONE of that I'm sure you were aware of!

But the real proof of YOUR American credentials should be what Obama said in 2007 about our military.
Again taking in considerations the MSM LOVED the stories of the "horrors" of Bush/Iraq... and so appealing to you and other would be ignorant whiteys.. Obama said this about our
military...
Our military methodically and systematically ALL THE TIME "air raids villages and killing civilians"....
NOW I added "Our military methodically and systematically ALL THE TIME " because THAT's the impression left with the terrorists who used these and other comments by our
supposed leaders to encourage more terrorists! More terrorism in Iraq killed more troops and as a result more "horrors" promulgated by the donors/democrat/MSM bashing Bush.
But again.. you don't obviously see how those words and others like them could motivate terrorists to prolong!
Well here is a Harvard study that shows the proof!

A Harvard study found here
THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT"

"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The short answer is YES!!!
according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.

STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity?
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent
attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent.

The results suggest that insurgent groups respond rationally to expected probability of US withdrawal.
On a related note, the New York Times reports that the media aren't paying as much attention to Iraq as they used to:
Media attention on Iraq began to wane after the first months of fighting, but as recently as the middle of last year, it was still the most-covered topic.
Since then, Iraq coverage by major American news sources has plummeted to about one-fifth of what it was last summer, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
If the Harvard study is right, we may be looking at a virtuous circle: Less violence means less media coverage, which in turn means less violence, says the Wall Street Journal.
Perhaps one day we'll wake up to discover that America won the war in Iraq months earlier, but no one noticed because the reporters were all busy with other things.
Victory in Iraq Day, November 22, 2008

So expecting YOU might be a little more intelligent then your comments reveal... THINK!!!
If the MSM's job was to Bash Bush and
that 85% of MSM donated MONEY to Obama/Democrats in 2008
and that Obama's past was never discussed by the MSM/Donor/Democrats
wouldn't you kind of come to the conclusion that the "horrors" you described were exaggerated, blown out of proportion constantly replayed.. as part of the Bash Bush and let's
protect our investment in Obama MSM/Donor/Democrats???

But of course this information will in all likelihood make it through your biased POV!