I keep telling you ... the BIASED MSM is the major problem in America..and 94% of this

[healthmyths]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

 

[Pogo]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

 

[hadit]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

 

[OldLady]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

How was the media biased about the Boston Marathan bombing?

 

[healthmyths]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

How was the media biased about the Boston Marathan bombing?

Simple Google search on "Media's blunder in the Boston Marathon bombing" had over About 316,000 results so I took the first one! Pretty simple.
Internet is so helpful.
Boston Bombings Reveal Media Full Of Mistakes, False Reports (VIDEO)

 

[BuckToothMoron]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

They are all biased, MSN, FOX, CNN, et al. Maybe one should consider all points of view and draw your on conclusion.

 

[healthmyths]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

Pretty obvious!
AGAIN read the studies I quoted above... 85% of 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

That sound like "cherry picking" if they also are proven to write/produce..130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

AGAIN where is there "cherry picking in those 130,2213 news articles?????

Also more proof on MSM bias... Exhibit 1-1: The Media Elite

• More than four-fifths of the journalists interviewed voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election between 1964 and 1976.
  
  
• 'Fifty-four percent placed themselves to the left of center, compared to only 19 percent who chose the right side of the spectrum,' Lichter and Rothman's survey of journalists discovered"
  
  
• 'Fifty-six percent said the people they worked with were mostly on the left, and only 8 percent on the right — a margin of seven-to-one.'
  
  
• Nearly half of the journalists surveyed agreed that 'the very structure of our society causes people to feel alienated,' while the authors found 'five out of six believe our legal system mainly favors the wealthy.'
  
  
• 30 percent disagreed that 'private enterprise is fair to workers;' 28 percent agreed that 'all political systems are repressive.'
  
  
• 54 percent did not regard adultery as wrong, compared to only 15 percent who regarded it as wrong.
  
  
• 'Ninety percent agree that a woman has the right to decide for herself whether to have an abortion; 79 percent agree strongly with this pro-choice position.'
  
  
• Majorities of journalists agreed with the statements: 'U.S. exploits Third World, causes poverty' (56 percent); and 'U.S. use of resources immoral' (57 percent). Three-fourths disagreed that the 'West had helped Third World.'
  
  WANT MORE PROOF!!!!

 

[Pogo]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

I'll give you one right now.

Who freed the Iran hostages? Ask around, even on this board with the availability of Google to look it up, and you'll be astounded how many think Reagan did, or had something to do with it.

That's because mass media found it much more saleable to depict a plane taking off from Iran at the same time Reagan was taking the oath of office, which presents that implication. It's much more dry and tedious and boring to pore over the relentless work of Carter and Christopher, who actually did it, to hammer out the Algiers accords.

That's because a drawn out treaty haggle that goes on for weeks simply doesn't contain the drama that can sell deodorant, while a profile of a stern new-President face juxtaposed against the action of flying jets sells a ton of it. That image is of course inaccurate, but accuracy is not what mass commercial media is about.

Selling eyeballs is what it's about. Soap opera. Much like you were doing when you started that thread about which hand O'bama wipes his ass with on the toilet.

Television sells the same thing Donald Rump does ---- raw emotion. Ideological "bias" is irrelevant to that.

 

[healthmyths]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

They are all biased, MSN, FOX, CNN, et al. Maybe one should consider all points of view and draw your on conclusion.

I never said Fox was not BIASED! They in fact are more conservatively biased then the OTHER network/cable news. YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
But again... look at the facts not attack the messenger!
Tell me if a hack newsperson donates money to a political party as 85% of the MSM did to democrats they certainly want to protect their donation by writing/showing positive stories about GOP and negative about Dems! Are you that naive?

 

[healthmyths]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

I'll give you one right now.

Who freed the Iran hostages? Ask around, even on this board with the availability of Google to look it up, and you'll be astounded how many think Reagan did, or had something to do with it.

That's because mass media found it much more saleable to depict a plane taking off from Iran at the same time Reagan was taking the oath of office, which presents that implication. It's much more dry and tedious and boring to pore over the relentless work of Carter and Christopher, who actually did it, to hammer out the Algiers accords.

That's because a drawn out treaty haggle that goes on for weeks simply oesn't contain the drama that can sell deodorant, while a profile of a stern new-President face juxtaposed against the action of flying jets sells a ton of it. That image is of course inaccurate, but accuracy is not what mass commercial media is about. Selling eyeballs is what it's about. Soap opera.

Television sells the same thing Donald Rump does ---- raw emotion. Ideological "bias" is irrelevant to that.

FACTS sir... Maybe you don't comprehend the notion that power generally overcomes weakness more often then NOT!
READ and learn!!!!

The President-elect's top aide, Edwin Meese, indicated that the new administration's strategy might well incorporate elements of all three of these options.

Asserting that Reagan ''would want to build'' on the negotiations initiated by Carter, he went on: ''What new ideas, new thoughts, new actions that might be added to that will depend on the circumstances at the time. But I don't think you ever go back to ground zero.''

There was a clear consensus among Reagan's advisers that his administration must, above all, prevent the hostage issue from overshadowing vital American foreign-policy interests. To quote one strategist on the President-elect's team: ''The administration should conduct quiet negotiations but get the hostage issue off the front page, which Carter couldn't do.''

Reagan's strategy in the final days of the transition was to encourage the Iranians to come to terms quickly with Carter rather than look for a better deal from him. By alluding to Iranian leaders as ''barbarians'' guilty of kidnapping, his aides said he was deliberately signaling his intention to switch from Carter's conciliatory approach to Teheran to a much tougher line.

The message was spelled out by Meese: ''I think the Iranians ought to think over very carefully the fact that it would certainly be to their advantage in every way to get our hostages back now.''

Out of all the uncertainty that surrounded the immediate fate of the hostages and the practical options open to a Reagan administration, two clear points emerged:

First: The President-elect had no ready-made new strategy that would end the deadlock and insure quick release of the imprisoned Americans.

Second: It was inconceivable that Reagan could offer more-generous terms to Teheran than those proposed by Carter to win freedom for the prisoners. To do so, political observers pointed out, would compromise from the outset the new President's avowed intention to pursue a foreign policy based on a more muscular American posture around the world.
Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

 

[Pogo]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

I'll give you one right now.

Who freed the Iran hostages? Ask around, even on this board with the availability of Google to look it up, and you'll be astounded how many think Reagan did, or had something to do with it.

That's because mass media found it much more saleable to depict a plane taking off from Iran at the same time Reagan was taking the oath of office, which presents that implication. It's much more dry and tedious and boring to pore over the relentless work of Carter and Christopher, who actually did it, to hammer out the Algiers accords.

That's because a drawn out treaty haggle that goes on for weeks simply oesn't contain the drama that can sell deodorant, while a profile of a stern new-President face juxtaposed against the action of flying jets sells a ton of it. That image is of course inaccurate, but accuracy is not what mass commercial media is about. Selling eyeballs is what it's about. Soap opera.

Television sells the same thing Donald Rump does ---- raw emotion. Ideological "bias" is irrelevant to that.

FACTS sir... Maybe you don't comprehend the notion that power generally overcomes weakness more often then NOT!
READ and learn!!!!

The President-elect's top aide, Edwin Meese, indicated that the new administration's strategy might well incorporate elements of all three of these options.

Asserting that Reagan ''would want to build'' on the negotiations initiated by Carter, he went on: ''What new ideas, new thoughts, new actions that might be added to that will depend on the circumstances at the time. But I don't think you ever go back to ground zero.''

There was a clear consensus among Reagan's advisers that his administration must, above all, prevent the hostage issue from overshadowing vital American foreign-policy interests. To quote one strategist on the President-elect's team: ''The administration should conduct quiet negotiations but get the hostage issue off the front page, which Carter couldn't do.''

Reagan's strategy in the final days of the transition was to encourage the Iranians to come to terms quickly with Carter rather than look for a better deal from him. By alluding to Iranian leaders as ''barbarians'' guilty of kidnapping, his aides said he was deliberately signaling his intention to switch from Carter's conciliatory approach to Teheran to a much tougher line.

The message was spelled out by Meese: ''I think the Iranians ought to think over very carefully the fact that it would certainly be to their advantage in every way to get our hostages back now.''

Out of all the uncertainty that surrounded the immediate fate of the hostages and the practical options open to a Reagan administration, two clear points emerged:

First: The President-elect had no ready-made new strategy that would end the deadlock and insure quick release of the imprisoned Americans.

Second: It was inconceivable that Reagan could offer more-generous terms to Teheran than those proposed by Carter to win freedom for the prisoners. To do so, political observers pointed out, would compromise from the outset the new President's avowed intention to pursue a foreign policy based on a more muscular American posture around the world.
Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

See what I mean? You even bought the image yourself. Along with, I have no doubt, no small amount of deodorant, or whatever other crap your TV Master happened to be selling along with that image. Reagan had jack squat to do with it; Carter was reportedly "obsessed" with resolving the situation in what for most defeated-for-reelection administrations is a lame duck quiet time.

So here you bought the image TV sold you, which happens (by coincidence) to make the opposite case from your "ideology" fantasy --- and you don't even see the contradiction.

Markable and remarkable.

 

[healthmyths]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

I'll give you one right now.

Who freed the Iran hostages? Ask around, even on this board with the availability of Google to look it up, and you'll be astounded how many think Reagan did, or had something to do with it.

That's because mass media found it much more saleable to depict a plane taking off from Iran at the same time Reagan was taking the oath of office, which presents that implication. It's much more dry and tedious and boring to pore over the relentless work of Carter and Christopher, who actually did it, to hammer out the Algiers accords.

That's because a drawn out treaty haggle that goes on for weeks simply oesn't contain the drama that can sell deodorant, while a profile of a stern new-President face juxtaposed against the action of flying jets sells a ton of it. That image is of course inaccurate, but accuracy is not what mass commercial media is about. Selling eyeballs is what it's about. Soap opera.

Television sells the same thing Donald Rump does ---- raw emotion. Ideological "bias" is irrelevant to that.

FACTS sir... Maybe you don't comprehend the notion that power generally overcomes weakness more often then NOT!
READ and learn!!!!

The President-elect's top aide, Edwin Meese, indicated that the new administration's strategy might well incorporate elements of all three of these options.

Asserting that Reagan ''would want to build'' on the negotiations initiated by Carter, he went on: ''What new ideas, new thoughts, new actions that might be added to that will depend on the circumstances at the time. But I don't think you ever go back to ground zero.''

There was a clear consensus among Reagan's advisers that his administration must, above all, prevent the hostage issue from overshadowing vital American foreign-policy interests. To quote one strategist on the President-elect's team: ''The administration should conduct quiet negotiations but get the hostage issue off the front page, which Carter couldn't do.''

Reagan's strategy in the final days of the transition was to encourage the Iranians to come to terms quickly with Carter rather than look for a better deal from him. By alluding to Iranian leaders as ''barbarians'' guilty of kidnapping, his aides said he was deliberately signaling his intention to switch from Carter's conciliatory approach to Teheran to a much tougher line.

The message was spelled out by Meese: ''I think the Iranians ought to think over very carefully the fact that it would certainly be to their advantage in every way to get our hostages back now.''

Out of all the uncertainty that surrounded the immediate fate of the hostages and the practical options open to a Reagan administration, two clear points emerged:

First: The President-elect had no ready-made new strategy that would end the deadlock and insure quick release of the imprisoned Americans.

Second: It was inconceivable that Reagan could offer more-generous terms to Teheran than those proposed by Carter to win freedom for the prisoners. To do so, political observers pointed out, would compromise from the outset the new President's avowed intention to pursue a foreign policy based on a more muscular American posture around the world.
Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

See what I mean? You even bought the image yourself. Along with, I have no doubt, no small amount of deodorant, or whatever other crap your TV Master happened to be selling along with that image. Reagan had jack squat to do with it; Carter was reportedly "obsessed" with resolving the situation in what for most defeated-for-reelection administrations is a lame duck quiet time.

So here you bought the image TV sold you, which happens (by coincidence) to make the opposite case from your "ideology" fantasy --- and you don't even see the contradiction.

Markable and remarkable.

Sorry but this was not from TV.... Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

 

[OldLady]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

How was the media biased about the Boston Marathan bombing?

Simple Google search on "Media's blunder in the Boston Marathon bombing" had over About 316,000 results so I took the first one! Pretty simple.
Internet is so helpful.
Boston Bombings Reveal Media Full Of Mistakes, False Reports (VIDEO)

Yes. A good friend's brother is a cop in Cambridge, so I was glued to the coverage until it was over. I agree the race to print each "breaking" fact led to a lot of confusion and rumors that had to later be corrected. That, however, is not 'bias.' That is broadcasting before verifying your facts.

I agree the media tends to have its "favorites," and that becomes obvious when you compare them to other outlets -- how much time is devoted to an issue, what the 'experts' say on the panels they invite -- but it's not that hard to get the drift. I watch PBS, one of the major 3, and Fox. They all invariably cover the same major news stories and there is not really that much difference in what is reported. None of them like Trump, but they keep him in the spotlight like a mutant life form they can't bear to take their eyes away from. And it has helped him enormously. He's about to sweep New York and take Pennsylvania without even eating knish!

 

[CowboyTed]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

They are all biased, MSN, FOX, CNN, et al. Maybe one should consider all points of view and draw your on conclusion.

I never said Fox was not BIASED! They in fact are more conservatively biased then the OTHER network/cable news. YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
But again... look at the facts not attack the messenger!
Tell me if a hack newsperson donates money to a political party as 85% of the MSM did to democrats they certainly want to protect their donation by writing/showing positive stories about GOP and negative about Dems! Are you that naive?

The problem you have Healthmyths is that you think that some how the Media handpicks only liberals from college to enter their industry..

When there is no proof to anyway believe that...

But what is proven is, the people asked to investigate both parties on a daily basis give 88%(your figure) to one party...

To me that shows that they think one is running the country better than the other...

That should be an indicator to you as why you should vote Dem too

 

[my2¢]

Yes the media is bias, but complaining about it strikes me the same as hearing Citizens United complain against political spending being considered free speech.

 

[Pogo]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Yet no one seems to be able to find cherry picked examples of conservative bias in the blamemainstreet media. Why is that?

I'll give you one right now.

Who freed the Iran hostages? Ask around, even on this board with the availability of Google to look it up, and you'll be astounded how many think Reagan did, or had something to do with it.

That's because mass media found it much more saleable to depict a plane taking off from Iran at the same time Reagan was taking the oath of office, which presents that implication. It's much more dry and tedious and boring to pore over the relentless work of Carter and Christopher, who actually did it, to hammer out the Algiers accords.

That's because a drawn out treaty haggle that goes on for weeks simply oesn't contain the drama that can sell deodorant, while a profile of a stern new-President face juxtaposed against the action of flying jets sells a ton of it. That image is of course inaccurate, but accuracy is not what mass commercial media is about. Selling eyeballs is what it's about. Soap opera.

Television sells the same thing Donald Rump does ---- raw emotion. Ideological "bias" is irrelevant to that.

FACTS sir... Maybe you don't comprehend the notion that power generally overcomes weakness more often then NOT!
READ and learn!!!!

The President-elect's top aide, Edwin Meese, indicated that the new administration's strategy might well incorporate elements of all three of these options.

Asserting that Reagan ''would want to build'' on the negotiations initiated by Carter, he went on: ''What new ideas, new thoughts, new actions that might be added to that will depend on the circumstances at the time. But I don't think you ever go back to ground zero.''

There was a clear consensus among Reagan's advisers that his administration must, above all, prevent the hostage issue from overshadowing vital American foreign-policy interests. To quote one strategist on the President-elect's team: ''The administration should conduct quiet negotiations but get the hostage issue off the front page, which Carter couldn't do.''

Reagan's strategy in the final days of the transition was to encourage the Iranians to come to terms quickly with Carter rather than look for a better deal from him. By alluding to Iranian leaders as ''barbarians'' guilty of kidnapping, his aides said he was deliberately signaling his intention to switch from Carter's conciliatory approach to Teheran to a much tougher line.

The message was spelled out by Meese: ''I think the Iranians ought to think over very carefully the fact that it would certainly be to their advantage in every way to get our hostages back now.''

Out of all the uncertainty that surrounded the immediate fate of the hostages and the practical options open to a Reagan administration, two clear points emerged:

First: The President-elect had no ready-made new strategy that would end the deadlock and insure quick release of the imprisoned Americans.

Second: It was inconceivable that Reagan could offer more-generous terms to Teheran than those proposed by Carter to win freedom for the prisoners. To do so, political observers pointed out, would compromise from the outset the new President's avowed intention to pursue a foreign policy based on a more muscular American posture around the world.
Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

See what I mean? You even bought the image yourself. Along with, I have no doubt, no small amount of deodorant, or whatever other crap your TV Master happened to be selling along with that image. Reagan had jack squat to do with it; Carter was reportedly "obsessed" with resolving the situation in what for most defeated-for-reelection administrations is a lame duck quiet time.

So here you bought the image TV sold you, which happens (by coincidence) to make the opposite case from your "ideology" fantasy --- and you don't even see the contradiction.

Markable and remarkable.

Sorry but this was not from TV.... Iran Hostage Crisis: A Hot Potato for Reagan?

But the image was. And then you went running to the internet to find some blog to support the image --- rather than to the history books to find the facts. You went to try to fit the square peg into the round hole, with a blog of speculation written before Carter and Christopher got it done. Because the image of Reagan juxtaposed with jets is one you want to help sell --- even though it directly contradicts your whole premise for this thread.

You whined and moaned about "waaah --- nobody can find an example of conservative bias", and now you whine and moan because you got one. You're like the little kid who whoops and hollers when he scores a run but when the other team scores a run melts down to "that didn't count!"

In fact it isn't an example of "conservative bias" --- that's just dumbing-down to the simplistic level at which you started this thread, a fantasy world where commercial media somehow makes its money from taking ideological stances, even though no one has ever been able to demonstrate how it can do that. Commercial media sold that "Morning in America" image because it SOLD. Facts are dry and boring and mundane; emotion SELLS.

Nobody makes money by taking an ideological slant. There's no way to do that. Media makes money by appealing to the heartstrings. Because emotional appeal means attention, and attention means ratings, and ratings means profit. That's how commercial media works. What the actual facts are doesn't even enter into it. As you've just demonstrated.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

They are all biased, MSN, FOX, CNN, et al. Maybe one should consider all points of view and draw your on conclusion.

I never said Fox was not BIASED! They in fact are more conservatively biased then the OTHER network/cable news. YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
But again... look at the facts not attack the messenger!
Tell me if a hack newsperson donates money to a political party as 85% of the MSM did to democrats they certainly want to protect their donation by writing/showing positive stories about GOP and negative about Dems! Are you that naive?

Sorry Healthmyths, I wasn't attacking you by pointing out that they all have their bias. In fact, I think that the media is much more liberally biased, and we should all understand the perspective of our news sources.

 

[Stephanie]

the people need to wake up to the fact that These Lamestream medias like: abc, nbc, cbs, cnn, PmsNbc, etc are all Leftleaning biased and in the pockets for the DNC. they've become an Enemy to the rest of the people who aren't DemoRat

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

poll of 2,014 adults agree!
The poll was conducted Feb. 18-March 21 with funding from the American Press Institute. It used a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news industry about equal to Congress and well below the public's view of other institutions.

The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.

In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic failure and "another shock to journalism's credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry."
Poll: Vast majority of Americans don't trust the news media

So I keep trying to get you people on the fence, thinking you are objective to understand ... the information sources for many of you are tainted!

Tainted as THESE studies show that helped get Obama elected and re-elected!
This study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election BY PAUL BEDARD MARCH 16, 2015
shows this biased MSM wrote these stories that show that the Democrat Bias is very evident!
A sweeping study of some 130,213 news articles on the 2012 presidential match between President Obama and Mitt Romney has proven anew that there was a strong pro-Democratic bias in the U.S. and international press. The study, published in the authoritative journal Big Data Society, also tested the campaign themes the media focused on and determined that Obama succeeded in stealing the economic issue from Republican Romney.
"Overall, media reporting contained more frequently positive statements about the Democrats than the Republicans.
Overall, the Republicans were more frequently the object of negative statements," wrote the study authors,
Their conclusion:
"The Republican Party is the most divisive subject in the campaign, and is portrayed in a more negative fashion than the Democrats."
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

This is the same MSM that over 85% of media donated money to Democrats in 2008!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the 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 Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

This is the same MSM that LOVES Obama so much that here in the words of a MSM publication they show it!

The Editor of NewsWeek, Evan Thomas.
Thomas was once asked about George Bush and this is his response.
"our job is to bash the president[Bush], 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.He-Could-Go-All-The-Way: 'Today' Cheers Obama's Football Play

RIGHT HIS job was to BASH Bush.
He is a journalist. Unbiased. Objective. Professional. RIGHT??

But when it came to Obama?

This same hard-nosed "bashing journalist"- Editor of NewsWeek gushed about Obama.....
"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’
A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"???
That's not reporting, that's gushing!

As a result this biased reporting with headlines/30 second sound bites designed to maximize negatives
regarding Trump, GOP et.al. and minimize the disasters that Obama/Democrats have wrought is what
any honest American should consider when forming any opinions especially when it comes to presidential approval polls!

This is for you on the fence people. Those of you that still after nearly 8 years of destructive efforts to tear down the values of America still can't come to the realization that Obama/Democrats have come to
blame America for all the world's woes!

I did a Google search on "Obama blames America" and this is the result :About 620,000 results!

And who puts these stories out? The biased MSM that also blames America!

They are all biased, MSN, FOX, CNN, et al. Maybe one should consider all points of view and draw your on conclusion.

Great screen name! BuckToothMoron. Funny shit.

Yes, cable television "news" channels are biased and they can be since they don't fall under the same FCC regulations that network news agencies do.

I don't rely on television news since it's either reduced to headlines or slanted. I get a variety of periodicals from the WSJ to Rolling Stone, and I read a lot of non-fiction. Jane Mayer's "Dark Money" is what I'm on right now. Wow, just WOW.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I keep telling you, mass media is first and foremost commercial. That means it reports what sells.

Nobody in the world makes money from taking an ideological stance. They make money from attracting ears and eyeballs. And they'll do that by finding disasters and scandals and who-cares celebrities to make fake news out of --- which makes the vast majority of what it reports. Meanwhile you're scraping up cherrypicked impressions to whine about as if that has anything to do with how they work.

It doesn't.

Well there is reporting. Then there is fabricating and/or editorializing.
The problem here and the issue is the latter.
Media companies can attract viewers/listeners/readers by simply reporting legitimate news. But the entertainment end of the business is the low hanging fruit.
With the massive availability of near real time news, people no longer have to wait for the 6 pm newscast or tomorrow's paper to get the news and information the want.
So media companies have dumbed down the news. They have placed bias on it. No longer is it necessary to be the most informative to report the news, just be the FIRST to report.
If the initial report is inaccurate, so what, they say. The producers can use any one of a plethora of excuses such as "this is a developing story" to cover for their ineptitude and sometimes out right lying to the public.
Another example of the insidious damage news organizations have done to journalism is the use of polls.
The purpose of polls is to take the temperature of the events of the day. To find what the public thinks of the news.
Now news organization use polls to CREATE the news. That is lazy, incompetent and unethical.