I question the assertion from the right that we have a powerful "liberal media"

[Pogo]

The American Society of Newspaper Editors conducted a survey in 1997 to ascertain the political persuasions of media contributors, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of, or sympathized with the Democratic Party. While 15% chose the Republican Party. Bear in mind that these are 'educated' people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated by left wing academia. Presently with the appearance of Fox News- which tends to slant towards the right wing - those numbers would probably differ somewhat.

Largely starting in the 90s, the right wing ... began to display an uneasiness and outright disgust with the blatant distortion and vigorous indoctrination being perpetrated by the Left and began to produce and promote a somewhat more balanced media. Although they are far from the levels of devious expertise employed by the left , who've had decades of experience, their meager attempts to resist Big Brother did not go unnoticed. Leftist rabble rousers were in an uproar, I mean how dare the Right Wing fight back , how dare they employ the underhanded and devious tactics which the left believed to be their exclusive domain.
Media Matters for America

You haven't made an argument. You've conflated the personal politics of reporters (which is not the entire news system anyway -- they have editors, owners and publishers) with the stories they report.

The "liberal media" fantasy -- unless I've been misreading it for decades-- refers to the content in the media. Not the personal politics of one segment of those who work within it.

And it also presupposes that no reporter can be objective and leave his/her own POV out of a story. Which is unsupported by any evidence.

Further your use of the phrase "indoctrinated by left wing academia" exposes your own fatal bias.

Pogo sees actual evidence, and rejects it. Is anyone surprised?

Windbagger still hasn't learned to read. Imagine my surprise.

 

[rdean]

The media is too lenient with the antics of Republicans

Check this out:

Jon Stewart Slams Mainstream Media In Interview With Tom Brokow - Business Insider

John Stewart is asking Tom Brokaw when did "fact checking" and "journalism" separate.

 

[rightwinger]

The media is too lenient with the antics of Republicans

Check this out:

Jon Stewart Slams Mainstream Media In Interview With Tom Brokow - Business Insider

John Stewart is asking Tom Brokaw when did "fact checking" and "journalism" separate.

The Republicans have bullied the media with their constant whining about how everyone picks on them

As a result, the media fails to report on the blatant obstructionism and temper tantrums being generated by Republicans

 

[GreenBean]

"Liberal media" is a fantasy created by the Eliminationists who want a one-party state and can't stand the thought of dialogue or alternative views to their own. What we have in fact is a massive corporate media, a few megalopolic monsters with tentacles reaching into every possible facet of human commuication (TV stations, radio stations, TV networks, TV production companies, internet sites, ISPs, movies, magazines, book publishing, advertising, even sports teams and arenas, which makes it possible not only to control the news but actually dictate what the news is.

Liberal media? It does exist out there somewhere. Good luck finding it. That shit we're bombarded with wall to wall everywhere else? Corporate controlled and in no way independent.

"I admit it -- The liberal media were never that powerful and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." -- William Kristol

"I've gotten balanced coverage and broad coverage - all we could have asked. ... For heaven sakes, we kid about the liberal media, but every republican on earth does that." -- Pat Buchanan

The American Society of Newspaper Editors conducted a survey in 1997 to ascertain the political persuasions of media contributors, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of, or sympathized with the Democratic Party. While 15% chose the Republican Party. Bear in mind that these are 'educated' people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated by left wing academia. Presently with the appearance of Fox News- which tends to slant towards the right wing - those numbers would probably differ somewhat.

Largely starting in the 90s, the right wing ... began to display an uneasiness and outright disgust with the blatant distortion and vigorous indoctrination being perpetrated by the Left and began to produce and promote a somewhat more balanced media. Although they are far from the levels of devious expertise employed by the left , who've had decades of experience, their meager attempts to resist Big Brother did not go unnoticed. Leftist rabble rousers were in an uproar, I mean how dare the Right Wing fight back , how dare they employ the underhanded and devious tactics which the left believed to be their exclusive domain.
Media Matters for America

You haven't made an argument. You've conflated the personal politics of reporters (which is not the entire news system anyway -- they have editors, owners and publishers) with the stories they report.

The "liberal media" fantasy -- unless I've been misreading it for decades-- refers to the content in the media. Not the personal politics of one segment of those who work within it.

And it also presupposes that no reporter can be objective and leave his/her own POV out of a story. Which is unsupported by any evidence.

Further your use of the phrase "indoctrinated by left wing academia" exposes your own fatal bias.

The smug ignorance of Liberal Buffoons is such as yourself is stupendously overwhelming. Get off your soap box jackass and read the post - my phrase of indoctrination as you so buffoonishly put it is not "my phrase" it is from the site I cited in the last post.


I know it might be a tad complex and difficult for a warped little leftie with a miniscule IQ such as yourself but perhaps you might try reading a book -

Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

"In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left"



[ame=http://youtu.be/uTAOagSDewk]Liberal Media Bias, Dishonesty & Hypocrisy Exposed - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Cons have been brainwashed into thinking that the whole world is against them in a conspiracy. It's a strategy that worked for decades but is now backfiring in the information age. It's easier than ever to recognize overt partisanship and that's why MSNBC has terrible ratings and Air America failed. Because nobody bought or is buying their bullshit.

Fox News and con talk radio still profit off of the brainwashing. In maybe 10 or so years they'll have to start talking about the issues again instead of regurgitating talking points.

Which is consistent with being confronted with the fact that your political dogma is for the most part untrue.

If that was actually true you would be a paranoid schizophrenic by now. What actually happens is that when dogmatic idiots are confronted with facts, they ignore them. This is the only possible explanation for your insistence that the Supreme Court wrote the Constitution.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The media is too lenient with the antics of Republicans

Check this out:

Jon Stewart Slams Mainstream Media In Interview With Tom Brokow - Business Insider

John Stewart is asking Tom Brokaw when did "fact checking" and "journalism" separate.

Damn, look at that, rdean made an intelligent post.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The media is too lenient with the antics of Republicans

Check this out:

Jon Stewart Slams Mainstream Media In Interview With Tom Brokow - Business Insider

John Stewart is asking Tom Brokaw when did "fact checking" and "journalism" separate.

The Republicans have bullied the media with their constant whining about how everyone picks on them

As a result, the media fails to report on the blatant obstructionism and temper tantrums being generated by Republicans

Funny, I hear about it every day. How the fuck do you know about it if it isn't reported?

 

[Pogo]

The American Society of Newspaper Editors conducted a survey in 1997 to ascertain the political persuasions of media contributors, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of, or sympathized with the Democratic Party. While 15% chose the Republican Party. Bear in mind that these are 'educated' people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated by left wing academia. Presently with the appearance of Fox News- which tends to slant towards the right wing - those numbers would probably differ somewhat.

Largely starting in the 90s, the right wing ... began to display an uneasiness and outright disgust with the blatant distortion and vigorous indoctrination being perpetrated by the Left and began to produce and promote a somewhat more balanced media. Although they are far from the levels of devious expertise employed by the left , who've had decades of experience, their meager attempts to resist Big Brother did not go unnoticed. Leftist rabble rousers were in an uproar, I mean how dare the Right Wing fight back , how dare they employ the underhanded and devious tactics which the left believed to be their exclusive domain.
Media Matters for America

You haven't made an argument. You've conflated the personal politics of reporters (which is not the entire news system anyway -- they have editors, owners and publishers) with the stories they report.

The "liberal media" fantasy -- unless I've been misreading it for decades-- refers to the content in the media. Not the personal politics of one segment of those who work within it.

And it also presupposes that no reporter can be objective and leave his/her own POV out of a story. Which is unsupported by any evidence.

Further your use of the phrase "indoctrinated by left wing academia" exposes your own fatal bias.

The smug ignorance of Liberal Buffoons is such as yourself is stupendously overwhelming. Get off your soap box jackass and read the post - my phrase of indoctrination as you so buffoonishly put it is not "my phrase" it is from the site I cited in the last post.

I know it might be a tad complex and difficult for a warped little leftie with a miniscule IQ such as yourself but perhaps you might try reading a book -

Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

"In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left"

[ame=http://youtu.be/uTAOagSDewk]Liberal Media Bias, Dishonesty & Hypocrisy Exposed - YouTube[/ame]

So for his expert witness he calls ........... Bernard Goldberg

I should counter with Michael Moore. Just to keep the joke running.

Fact is, Sparky, you posted a sliver of the pie and expect us to conclude that based on the ingredients of that one slice, you know what all pies taste like, without even eating any.

Again, your premise hangs on the assumptions that (a) a reporter cannot leave his/her personal bias out of a story (objectivity is impossible) and that (b) they in no way have editors, publishers, media owners or vetters to screen what they do -- nor is there ever any corporate pressure from those owners to highlight this story or squash that one. None of which is true.

 

[Statistikhengst]

NSA, IRS, Benghazi, ObabaCare, and Obama is still in the White House ONLY because most people still believe the major media outlets

Actually, he's still there because he won re-election in 2012, fair and square, 51.01% to 47.15%, 332 EV to 206 EV.

Any other questions?

 

[GreenBean]

You haven't made an argument. You've conflated the personal politics of reporters (which is not the entire news system anyway -- they have editors, owners and publishers) with the stories they report.

The "liberal media" fantasy -- unless I've been misreading it for decades-- refers to the content in the media. Not the personal politics of one segment of those who work within it.

And it also presupposes that no reporter can be objective and leave his/her own POV out of a story. Which is unsupported by any evidence.

Further your use of the phrase "indoctrinated by left wing academia" exposes your own fatal bias.

The smug ignorance of Liberal Buffoons is such as yourself is stupendously overwhelming. Get off your soap box jackass and read the post - my phrase of indoctrination as you so buffoonishly put it is not "my phrase" it is from the site I cited in the last post.

I know it might be a tad complex and difficult for a warped little leftie with a miniscule IQ such as yourself but perhaps you might try reading a book -

Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

"In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left"

[ame=http://youtu.be/uTAOagSDewk]Liberal Media Bias, Dishonesty & Hypocrisy Exposed - YouTube[/ame]

So for his expert witness he calls ........... Bernard Goldberg

I should counter with Michael Moore. Just to keep the joke running.

Fact is, Sparky, you posted a sliver of the pie and expect us to conclude that based on the ingredients of that one slice, you know what all pies taste like, without even eating any.

Again, your premise hangs on the assumptions that (a) a reporter cannot leave his/her personal bias out of a story (objectivity is impossible) and that (b) they in no way have editors, publishers, media owners or vetters to screen what they do -- nor is there ever any corporate pressure from those owners to highlight this story or squash that one. None of which is true.

Bernard Goldberg has tremendous integrity and credibility , he's a former cog in the vast liberal machine who got disgusted and spilled the beans - my guess is you probably didn't have a clue as to who he was b4 I posted that - at least judging by your former posts you appear to be - [as I previously speculated] - of a relatively low IQ - the problem with folks such as yourself is that although you generally lack the requisite intelligence to engage in any serious or challenging debate - you are incapable of comprehending your ineptitude and actually believe that people aren't laughing at you - they're laughing with you. LMAO

Regards and have a nice day !

 

[Pogo]

The smug ignorance of Liberal Buffoons is such as yourself is stupendously overwhelming. Get off your soap box jackass and read the post - my phrase of indoctrination as you so buffoonishly put it is not "my phrase" it is from the site I cited in the last post.

I know it might be a tad complex and difficult for a warped little leftie with a miniscule IQ such as yourself but perhaps you might try reading a book -

Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

"In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left"

Liberal Media Bias, Dishonesty & Hypocrisy Exposed - YouTube

So for his expert witness he calls ........... Bernard Goldberg

I should counter with Michael Moore. Just to keep the joke running.

Fact is, Sparky, you posted a sliver of the pie and expect us to conclude that based on the ingredients of that one slice, you know what all pies taste like, without even eating any.

Again, your premise hangs on the assumptions that (a) a reporter cannot leave his/her personal bias out of a story (objectivity is impossible) and that (b) they in no way have editors, publishers, media owners or vetters to screen what they do -- nor is there ever any corporate pressure from those owners to highlight this story or squash that one. None of which is true.

Bernard Goldberg has tremendous integrity and credibility , he's a former cog in the vast liberal machine who got disgusted and spilled the beans - my guess is you probably didn't have a clue as to who he was b4 I posted that - at least judging by your former posts you appear to be - [as I previously speculated] - of a relatively low IQ - the problem with folks such as yourself is that although you generally lack the requisite intelligence to engage in any serious or challenging debate - you are incapable of comprehending your ineptitude and actually believe that people aren't laughing at you - they're laughing with you. LMAO

Regards and have a nice day !

And my guess, Danth-boy, is that when I started working in broadcasting over thirty years ago you weren't even born yet. Come back when you have something with a little more weight than cheap ad hominem. Maybe then I'll let you have your ass back.

 

[GreenBean]

So for his expert witness he calls ........... Bernard Goldberg

I should counter with Michael Moore. Just to keep the joke running.

Fact is, Sparky, you posted a sliver of the pie and expect us to conclude that based on the ingredients of that one slice, you know what all pies taste like, without even eating any.

Again, your premise hangs on the assumptions that (a) a reporter cannot leave his/her personal bias out of a story (objectivity is impossible) and that (b) they in no way have editors, publishers, media owners or vetters to screen what they do -- nor is there ever any corporate pressure from those owners to highlight this story or squash that one. None of which is true.

Bernard Goldberg has tremendous integrity and credibility , he's a former cog in the vast liberal machine who got disgusted and spilled the beans - my guess is you probably didn't have a clue as to who he was b4 I posted that - at least judging by your former posts you appear to be - [as I previously speculated] - of a relatively low IQ - the problem with folks such as yourself is that although you generally lack the requisite intelligence to engage in any serious or challenging debate - you are incapable of comprehending your ineptitude and actually believe that people aren't laughing at you - they're laughing with you. LMAO

Regards and have a nice day !

And my guess, Danth-boy, is that when I started working in broadcasting over thirty years ago you weren't even born yet. Come back when you have something with a little more weight than cheap ad hominem. Maybe then I'll let you have your ass back.

Wow, you call that a debate - you haven't posted a single fact , you claim to have been in broadcasting over 30 years [ As what - the janitor?] yeah okay ...if you say so .... uh huh.

You have anything intelligent to post ? Anything you could refute - doesn't appear likely ...
[ I think the liberal toilet at your job needs some new toilet paper - those people really are full of shit you know ... get to work !]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Bernard Goldberg has tremendous integrity and credibility , he's a former cog in the vast liberal machine who got disgusted and spilled the beans - my guess is you probably didn't have a clue as to who he was b4 I posted that - at least judging by your former posts you appear to be - [as I previously speculated] - of a relatively low IQ - the problem with folks such as yourself is that although you generally lack the requisite intelligence to engage in any serious or challenging debate - you are incapable of comprehending your ineptitude and actually believe that people aren't laughing at you - they're laughing with you. LMAO

Regards and have a nice day !

And my guess, Danth-boy, is that when I started working in broadcasting over thirty years ago you weren't even born yet. Come back when you have something with a little more weight than cheap ad hominem. Maybe then I'll let you have your ass back.

Wow, you call that a debate - you haven't posted a single fact , you claim to have been in broadcasting over 30 years [ As what - the janitor?] yeah okay ...if you say so .... uh huh.

You have anything intelligent to post ? Anything you could refute - doesn't appear likely ...
[ I think the liberal toilet at your job needs some new toilet paper - those people really are full of shit you know ... get to work !]

You haven't seen the best part yet, when he actually posts something that can be challenged, and someone does it, he claims he didn't say it.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

In my mind, the only evidence of liberal-controlled television is MSNBC. I don't understand this belief that networks like CNN, CBS, or ABC have this glaring liberal bias. While I am not necessarily a fan of these networks, I would say they do a good job in their unbiased reporting. All of them have been critical of Obama.

I think many on the right want to believe there is huge liberal bias on television news because these networks don't confirm the radical bullshit propaganda that is spewed on Fox News.

In my opinion, if you want to avoid media bias on television, don't watch fake news networks like Fox News or MSNBC. The rest of them keep it fair.

You’re correct to question it, in fact there is no ‘liberal media,’ ‘powerful’ or otherwise.

The media relate facts and the truth that often conflict with subjective rightist dogma, where conservatives incorrectly perceive this as ‘bias.’

Just as ridiculous is the notion that the media ‘sit on’ news events to benefit the left, or ‘refuse’ to investigate issues for the same reason – needless to say these notions are idiocy.

This is my favorite argument. "It's not that the media has is biased toward the democrats, it's that the democrats are correct and the media reports facts."

Lololol. Keep chugging that Koolaid

 

[B. Kidd]

Bernard Goldberg has tremendous integrity and credibility , he's a former cog in the vast liberal machine who got disgusted and spilled the beans - my guess is you probably didn't have a clue as to who he was b4 I posted that - at least judging by your former posts you appear to be - [as I previously speculated] - of a relatively low IQ - the problem with folks such as yourself is that although you generally lack the requisite intelligence to engage in any serious or challenging debate - you are incapable of comprehending your ineptitude and actually believe that people aren't laughing at you - they're laughing with you. LMAO

Regards and have a nice day !

And my guess, Danth-boy, is that when I started working in broadcasting over thirty years ago you weren't even born yet. Come back when you have something with a little more weight than cheap ad hominem. Maybe then I'll let you have your ass back.

Wow, you call that a debate - you haven't posted a single fact , you claim to have been in broadcasting over 30 years [ As what - the janitor?] yeah okay ...if you say so .... uh huh.

You have anything intelligent to post ? Anything you could refute - doesn't appear likely ...
[ I think the liberal toilet at your job needs some new toilet paper - those people really are full of shit you know ... get to work !]

Pogo used to do the news for some now defunct midwest radio station.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wML2V6crNc0]WKRP - "Monster Lizard" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One of his live broadcasts.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf3mgmEdfwg]WKRP "As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly" Thanksgiving - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Stephanie]

links with article and a video at site

SNIP:'
Top CBS, ABC, CNN execs all have relatives working as advisors for White House


posted at 5:31 pm on May 13, 2013 by Allahpundit
Not just any execs and not just any advisors, either. Watch as Ric Grenell floats a possible explanation for some of the Benghazi coverage, especially vis-a-vis rumors that CBS is unhappy with Sharyl Attkisson’s dogged reporting. Would the media reaction really be different without the sibling/spouse conflicts of interest, though? Half of me thinks the blood ties between the White House and media VIPs deserve lots of publicity and half of me thinks that publicizing it inadvertently lets them off the hook. They’re not in the tank out of family loyalty, they’re in the tank out of ideological loyalty. Replace the leadership at CBS, ABC, and CNN and you’ll get the same results. But Grenell’s not arguing to the contrary: The point here is simply to show that our government leadership and our media leadership are so chummy that, not infrequently, they’ve literally lived in the same house. It’s an especially vivid illustration of a wider problem.

And that problem can be pretty darned wide.

all of it here
Top CBS, ABC, CNN execs all have relatives working as advisors for White House « Hot Air

 

[Pogo]

And my guess, Danth-boy, is that when I started working in broadcasting over thirty years ago you weren't even born yet. Come back when you have something with a little more weight than cheap ad hominem. Maybe then I'll let you have your ass back.

Wow, you call that a debate - you haven't posted a single fact , you claim to have been in broadcasting over 30 years [ As what - the janitor?] yeah okay ...if you say so .... uh huh.

You have anything intelligent to post ? Anything you could refute - doesn't appear likely ...
[ I think the liberal toilet at your job needs some new toilet paper - those people really are full of shit you know ... get to work !]

You haven't seen the best part yet, when he actually posts something that can be challenged, and someone does it, he claims he didn't say it.

He gave me no "challenge", Dickbag. All he has is gainsaying. I came back ready to refute whatever he had posted but he had already done it for me.

You on the other hand have a long history of alleging this or that in a post, being challenged to prove it, and running away like the coward you are because you made it up in the first place.

Doesn't impress me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wow, you call that a debate - you haven't posted a single fact , you claim to have been in broadcasting over 30 years [ As what - the janitor?] yeah okay ...if you say so .... uh huh.

You have anything intelligent to post ? Anything you could refute - doesn't appear likely ...
[ I think the liberal toilet at your job needs some new toilet paper - those people really are full of shit you know ... get to work !]

You haven't seen the best part yet, when he actually posts something that can be challenged, and someone does it, he claims he didn't say it.

He gave me no "challenge", Dickbag. All he has is gainsaying. I came back ready to refute whatever he had posted but he had already done it for me.

You on the other hand have a long history of alleging this or that in a post, being challenged to prove it, and running away like the coward you are because you made it up in the first place.

Doesn't impress me.

One of us can't read. Since I didn't say he challenged you, and actually implied that he did not, it must be you.

 

[Amelia]

Factchecking and journalism were clearly separate for most of Obama's presidency.

Luckily this situation appears to be reversing now that the Obama administration has burnt bridges with the press.

But they still often do things like report lousy O-care enrollment numbers with a smiling face and no comment about how bad those numbers are in comparison to what is needed for O-care to be solvent.