De-pressed

[Papageorgio]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

Agreed.

 

[percysunshine]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something.QUOTE]

.
So NYcarbineer is a real estate agent...like Donald Trump.

Now everything is making sense..

.

.

 

[percysunshine]

i

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

Sooo ... NYcarbineer is a real estate agent...like Donald Trump.

This is starting to make sense.

.

 

[Auld Phart]

Seems his family is of Greek and German descent.
Possibly named after an ancestor

.
Why are the Greeks and the Germans running the Republican party?

Don't these guys have enough to worry about with insolvent banks and immigrants?

.

.

Why are the Greeks and the Germans running the Republican party

They aren't.

Priebus was born in Dover, New Jersey.

Well, that is good to know.

That means Chris Christi is running the Republican party.

Wait.. hold on a second...

.

non sequitur alert!

I am sure this will be explained in short order...

.

Odd...

I figured that to be a common sight for you

 

[Tehon]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

No, the Fairness Doctrine, like most liberal policies, was the exact opposite of its' name sake. It required political views to have the same time as opposite views. It was like making a rap station play country music half the time. That isn't the same as objective reporting.

Today there are few reporters on the higher end. They exist in small locales but they become journalists to get bigger. Reporters report the news, journalists make the news.

So you concede that the press has no obligation to be politically unbiased.

Do you celebrate the lack of journalistic integrity found in the media? You are defending it, no?

 

[percysunshine]

.
Why are the Greeks and the Germans running the Republican party?

Don't these guys have enough to worry about with insolvent banks and immigrants?

.

.

Why are the Greeks and the Germans running the Republican party

They aren't.

Priebus was born in Dover, New Jersey.

Well, that is good to know.

That means Chris Christi is running the Republican party.

Wait.. hold on a second...

.

non sequitur alert!

I am sure this will be explained in short order...

.

Odd...

I figured that to be a common sight for you

You have an allusion..

Well spit it out...don't keep us waiting in anticipation...chuckle..

.

 

[Unkotare]

How can you have a free press when institutions like NPR receive federal funds.... Bought and paid for. I believe 6% of their revenues are tax payer funded, if you took that away what would they cut???

The right never had a problem with NPR until they documented some of Fox's lies. Fox went into attack mode, and the right wing followed their marching orders.

That post is a perfect example of utterly empty partisan nonsense.

 

[Unkotare]

A lot of talk about how we need a free press for a democracy to function. That is all well and good but the pathetically biased media we have to day is not because of some vaunted agenda that the secrete masters in the media want to push - it is because the people WANT biased media. They gobble that shit up as though it is pure gold. Actual news gets ignored and any company trying to stay as objective as possible is plowed out of business or dropped into obscurity.

What a functioning democracy requires is an interested electorate. No amount of media coverage or honesty will make up for the fact that Americans simply do not care or pay attention to their government and willfully abuse the shit out of the responsibility that comes with voting. It is rather despicable.

In contrast to what people think, the media is not there as a social obligation to us. Media is there for the same reason any company exists--to make profit.

Some have found profit by leaning left while the more successful outlets found profit by leaning to the right. They don't cover stories that we really need to know about such as these local police shootings or Trayvon Martin, they cover these stories because they mostly involve race and race stories sell.

The more people that tune into your channel, the more people that write e-mail, the more people buy your paper, the more people that visit your news site, the more profit your company makes.

Doctors, lawyers, and teachers work for money too, but they also perform an essential function in society and we depend on their integrity.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

No, the Fairness Doctrine, like most liberal policies, was the exact opposite of its' name sake. It required political views to have the same time as opposite views. It was like making a rap station play country music half the time. That isn't the same as objective reporting.

Today there are few reporters on the higher end. They exist in small locales but they become journalists to get bigger. Reporters report the news, journalists make the news.

So you concede that the press has no obligation to be politically unbiased.

Do you celebrate the lack of journalistic integrity found in the media? You are defending it, no?

Advocacy journalism is not a lack of integrity. Slanting the news to attract a certain audience is simply a business practice.

 

[Iceweasel]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

No, the Fairness Doctrine, like most liberal policies, was the exact opposite of its' name sake. It required political views to have the same time as opposite views. It was like making a rap station play country music half the time. That isn't the same as objective reporting.

Today there are few reporters on the higher end. They exist in small locales but they become journalists to get bigger. Reporters report the news, journalists make the news.

So you concede that the press has no obligation to be politically unbiased.

How can I concede a point I never made? How about reading the actual posts?

 

[Unkotare]

How can you have a free press when institutions like NPR receive federal funds.... Bought and paid for. I believe 6% of their revenues are tax payer funded, if you took that away what would they cut???

The right never had a problem with NPR until they documented some of Fox's lies. Fox went into attack mode, and the right wing followed their marching orders.

Sure, they had no problem until then.

I would love to see the outrage by the left if we ended up with an all Republican government and they funded Fox or AM radio with Rush and a host of others. We would never hear the and of it from day one.

Fox and AM radio exist to further the GOP line and attack all their enemies. NPR might lean one direction or the other at times, but their credibility is intact. Fox never had any integrity.

You don't want to be taken seriously, and you don't deserve to be.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

So you people are crying about a biased media and defending it at the same time.

That's a good one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

Agreed.

So

1. you think there's a vast liberal biased media out there working against conservatives, and it angers you.

2. you concede that this co-called liberal media you think is there is a product of a free press.

3. you're a champion of a free press

?

then stop crying.

 

[Unkotare]

A free, impartial press is essential to democracy. Does anyone think we still have one? NBC 'moderates' a Republican debate with questions essentially of the sort "tell us why you suck so bad that no one should vote for you or anyone in your party." The obama administration is shamelessly going full-on Vietnam with a creeping, hypocritical "boots on the ground" mission in Syria despite all their bloviating to the contrary some months ago, and the 'press' is only hugging his nuts and saying what they are damn well told to say - yet again. A very important piece of the democracy puzzle has been missing for some time, and the potential consequences could be dire indeed.

No, an impartial press is not essential to democracy.

In fact, to say that the press needs to be 'free' and 'impartial' is an oxymoron,

because a free press has the freedom to be as biased as it chooses.

Your mistake stems from your limited capacity to reason.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

No, the Fairness Doctrine, like most liberal policies, was the exact opposite of its' name sake. It required political views to have the same time as opposite views. It was like making a rap station play country music half the time. That isn't the same as objective reporting.

Today there are few reporters on the higher end. They exist in small locales but they become journalists to get bigger. Reporters report the news, journalists make the news.

So you concede that the press has no obligation to be politically unbiased.

How can I concede a point I never made? How about reading the actual posts?

Tell us in your words what you think the Fairness Doctrine was designed to do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A free, impartial press is essential to democracy. Does anyone think we still have one? NBC 'moderates' a Republican debate with questions essentially of the sort "tell us why you suck so bad that no one should vote for you or anyone in your party." The obama administration is shamelessly going full-on Vietnam with a creeping, hypocritical "boots on the ground" mission in Syria despite all their bloviating to the contrary some months ago, and the 'press' is only hugging his nuts and saying what they are damn well told to say - yet again. A very important piece of the democracy puzzle has been missing for some time, and the potential consequences could be dire indeed.

No, an impartial press is not essential to democracy.

In fact, to say that the press needs to be 'free' and 'impartial' is an oxymoron,

because a free press has the freedom to be as biased as it chooses.

Your mistake stems from your limited capacity to reason.

You're free to attack me personally, or you're free to actually refute the substance of what I posted.

Which would be on-topic?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A lot of talk about how we need a free press for a democracy to function. That is all well and good but the pathetically biased media we have to day is not because of some vaunted agenda that the secrete masters in the media want to push - it is because the people WANT biased media. They gobble that shit up as though it is pure gold. Actual news gets ignored and any company trying to stay as objective as possible is plowed out of business or dropped into obscurity.

What a functioning democracy requires is an interested electorate. No amount of media coverage or honesty will make up for the fact that Americans simply do not care or pay attention to their government and willfully abuse the shit out of the responsibility that comes with voting. It is rather despicable.

In contrast to what people think, the media is not there as a social obligation to us. Media is there for the same reason any company exists--to make profit.

Some have found profit by leaning left while the more successful outlets found profit by leaning to the right. They don't cover stories that we really need to know about such as these local police shootings or Trayvon Martin, they cover these stories because they mostly involve race and race stories sell.

The more people that tune into your channel, the more people that write e-mail, the more people buy your paper, the more people that visit your news site, the more profit your company makes.

Doctors, lawyers, and teachers work for money too, but they also perform an essential function in society and we depend on their integrity.

This is the media we're talking about here. They have no integrity.

 

[Tehon]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

No, the Fairness Doctrine, like most liberal policies, was the exact opposite of its' name sake. It required political views to have the same time as opposite views. It was like making a rap station play country music half the time. That isn't the same as objective reporting.

Today there are few reporters on the higher end. They exist in small locales but they become journalists to get bigger. Reporters report the news, journalists make the news.

So you concede that the press has no obligation to be politically unbiased.

Do you celebrate the lack of journalistic integrity found in the media? You are defending it, no?

Advocacy journalism is not a lack of integrity. Slanting the news to attract a certain audience is simply a business practice.

I would disagree unless the "advocate" openly and honestly stated his lack of objectivity. I did not even realize there was such a thing. To me that type of journalism is just propaganda. Now I see that it is being legitimized. How depressing.

 

[Papageorgio]

Sounds like we have the RWnuts here arguing for a Fairness Doctrine. How ironic.

Maybe that's because you always take our words and misconstrue them to mean something entirely different.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
Simon and Garfunkel
The Boxer

I will give NY credit in that respect, he is a master of distorting and turning nothing into something. If you stick just to facts and don't let him sidetrack the issue, you got him beat, easily.

So you people are crying about a biased media and defending it at the same time.

That's a good one.

Where did I say anything close to what you just said? Wait, I didn't more deflection.