When will the GOP recognize the MSM is the enemy and the MSM favors Democrats?

[bedowin62]

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

Prove your statement with a link please. Just your saying so doesn't make it so!

your ignorance as to history is not really my problem... although it probably is one of the root causes of the garbage you spew.

do i really need to tell you that the editorials in the courant were intended to influence people?

and correction: it was started by ben's brother... he was originally a printer's apprentice there.

but the thought that newspapers weren't intended to influence is laughable.

i thought they wre intended to inform mostly leftard

but thanks for the heads up. i'll remember what you're crying about here next time you try to dismiss claims by the Right that the Left is trying to influence with their multiple news outlets, rather than inform, the next time you losers are crying that Fox isnt really news reporting ok????

 

[bedowin62]

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

LIBS ARE LOSERS who lie to themselves

doo dah doo dah

bedowin never took English in school

oh de doo dah day.

you're picking your nose while you sing that right leftard???

 

[NYcarbineer]

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

Prove your statement with a link please. Just your saying so doesn't make it so!

your ignorance as to history is not really my problem... although it probably is one of the root causes of the garbage you spew.

do i really need to tell you that the editorials in the courant were intended to influence people?

and correction: it was started by ben's brother... he was originally a printer's apprentice there.

but the thought that newspapers weren't intended to influence is laughable.

lol, what does he think Thomas Paine's pamphlets were?

 

[healthmyths]

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

Prove your statement with a link please. Just your saying so doesn't make it so!

You deny that newspapers have always contained plenty of editorial content?

lol good one.

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

Prove your statement with a link please. Just your saying so doesn't make it so!

You deny that newspapers have always contained plenty of editorial content?

lol good one.

Editorial pages contain Opinions and they identify as such!

Which is different though the HEADLINES which are to be journalistically neutral not biased.
But that's been my whole point. Commentators like Rush/ Hannity are NOT journalists.

YET Bob Schieffer who WE ALL KNOW as a "Newsman" said it best when he unknowingly proved the BIAS of the MSM!!!
Bob Schieffer is retiring, with Sunday's "Face The Nation"
"We now don’t know where people get their news, but what we do know is they’re bombarded with information 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Most of the information is wrong and some of it is wrong on purpose.
It is our job, I think, in mainstream journalism to try to cut through this mall of information and tell people what we think is relevant and what they need to know.
That is the job of the journalist and I have to say it’s harder and harder."
Stunning Admission By Retiring MSM Journalist - States MSM Should Decide Relevancy Of News And Determine What People "Need To Know," Laments The "Revolution Of Communications"

NOW do you understand why I am bitching and griping about the MSM??? THEY believe today NOT when I was in journalism school in the 60s that
THEIR JOB is to EDUCATE you! They know better! They are the intellectually elite! And this is so bogus!
Their job as a journalist is NOT to be subjective! NOT to cull news they think WE should read and hear.

But almost all the MSM really believes like Obama that they are superior intellectually then us in the "fly over country".
Well Schieffer and his ilk are so out of touch! What he said was the reason for the losing of the war in Vietnam and in Iraq.
They presented the positions THEY thought were the right ones. The body counts. The images. The constant barrage of Americans do all the wrong things
in Vietnam and Iraq! This was the MSM objective!

As I've stated I was in journalism in the 60s in college and some of the same people that were members of the SDS/Weathermen were also in my journalism
classes! They later became the editors/producers of MSM and this hatred of the USA fomented in the 60s by the likes of Obama's buds Bill Ayers, etc.
has been the purpose of the now existing editors/producers of headlines and evening news.
Hatred of America. Show every way possible how bad our country is. Nightly badgering of Abu Ghraib which was done by 11 people! Even though
there were hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq... what did we see/read nightly? Abu Ghraib and those images.
What was the purpose?
The same thing in Vietnam. These disgusting MSM editors/publishers are so well illustrated by this well known editor's totally biased comments!

One of those MSM biased editors, of NewsWeek supposedly a "professional journalist" takes a position regarding his "job".

The Editor of NewsWeek who once was asked about Bush:
"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...

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!

 

[jillian]

A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"??? That's not reporting, that's gushing!

Puleeze...

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

First lets admit that there is bias in news. There is bias in sports. There is bias in weather. There is bias in fashion. There is bias in where you take your car to get it serviced. There is bias in the way the teacher grades your paper. Anytime you hear Briebart or whatever that guy's name is, you discount it out of hand since it has been so obviously biased in the past.

Bias exists.

The question is this; does it sway anyone. The answer is no.

But lets entertain the OP's whine of bias. Lets say there is bias in the media. One would have to explain the "right track" polling then.

You'd have that red line (the red line isn't necessarily republicans or consea) way below the blue one (the blue one isn't necessarily democrats or liberals),

It sways independents who fail to vet their new sources and creates more lefties who trust what they're told.

If that were the case you'd see a stair step from the lower left to the upper right.

No, you'd see the opposite results if the bias wasn't prevalent.

Hilarious as always.

Typically defeated non-response.

 

[mudwhistle]

It's not the msm it's reality that is against republicans.
The news can either report accurately or how you would consider fairly

Even Fox is full of shit now.They cut Trump off at the knees during the first debate.

Ever notice that CNN and Fox traded some of their journalists?

 

[healthmyths]

The media has always been a political force in this country.

The 1st Amendment's freedom of the press is there to protect opinion more than to protect reporting the news.

Get over it.

I wonder if they even remember that ben franklin started his newspaper to convince people of the correctness of his political views.

just saying.

no doubt those lovely "constitutionalists" would limit every right except for the 2nd amendment if they could.

Prove your statement with a link please. Just your saying so doesn't make it so!

your ignorance as to history is not really my problem... although it probably is one of the root causes of the garbage you spew.

do i really need to tell you that the editorials in the courant were intended to influence people?

and correction: it was started by ben's brother... he was originally a printer's apprentice there.

but the thought that newspapers weren't intended to influence is laughable.

lol, what does he think Thomas Paine's pamphlets were?

"Pamphlets". Not newspapers.
Opinion pieces. Not newspapers.
My journalism classes taught me LONG before the biased MSM people knew about journalism that a journalist is to be objective and practice the Five Ws.

The Five Ws, Five Ws and one H, or the Six Ws are questions whose answers are considered basic in information-gathering. They are often mentioned in journalism (cf. news style), research, and police investigations.[1] They constitute a formula for getting the complete story on a subject.[2] According to the principle of the Five Ws, a report can only be considered complete if it answers these questions starting with an interrogative word:[3]

• Who did that?
• What happened?
• Where did it take place?
• When did it take place?
• Why did that happen?

Some authors add a sixth question, “how”, to the list, though "how" can also be covered by "what", "when", or "where":[3]

• How did it happen?

Each question should have a factual answer — facts necessary to include for a report to be considered complete.[4] Importantly, none of these questions can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no".

Five Ws - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Factual. Not guesses.
So for those of you that still haven't a clue here is an example of a BIASED head line!

GOP Victories Inflate Ratings For Fox News.”
Clearly, the insinuation is that the contributing factor to FNC’s ratings victory is because they were inflated by the Republican victories.
That implies some level of FNC bias, and the New York Times seems to have realized that today.
(It should be noted that the headline writer is different than the author of the piece.)

The Times‘ correction today reads:
A headline on Thursday with an article about television ratings for elections coverage on Tuesday night may have left the incorrect impression that ratings for Fox News on Election Night were artificially increased. The network’s coverage had bigger ratings gains than those of its rivals; its ratings were not inflated.

And now the headline on the original piece (which also includes the correction) is “Fox Wins Election Night Ratings on Cable.”

Headline Bias? New York Times Issues Fox News-Related Correction

See the difference? The first headline gave an OPINION NOT the facts.
NYT had to correct the "insinuation" And State the facts: "Fox Wins election Night ratings On Cable".
That was a fact... this was an opinion GOP Victories Inflate Ratings For Fox News.”
NOT what objective MSM should be doing but it is done often and the majority of people don't read the article... but the headline!

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Too liberal for you huh? Yeah I understand.

The Main Stream Media is made up of a large number of diverse opinions. I'm sure you can find the same history elsewhere.

NO the MSM is NOT made up of diverse opinions!
Don't you read?
In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
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

A specific example of how the MSM loves Democrats is this quote from the Editor of NewsWeek
COLOR="Blue"]I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." [/COLOR]
Evan Thomas on Hardball,
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug and the Democrat Bias is very clear!
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election
BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election

That's all by Republican/conservative choice. No one bars the Right from the media.

Bullshit! Non-lefties are ostracized by media.
What's more, editors decide what makes copy.

YOU are right! Editors/producers DO determine what makes the stories that people read/see.
So explain these EDITORS/producers political position?

Here an editor of NewsWeek supposedly a "professional journalist" takes a position regarding his "job".
And of course the MSM lapped Obama up to such a degree that the Editor of NewsWeek who once was asked about Bush:
"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
But when it came to Obama???

"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
Evan Thomas on Hardball, 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!

And putting THEIR money where their mouth is:
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

Again...prove with FACTS and links that dispute the vast majority of the MSM is biased towards the left.

Remember, your opinions are formed by information you get from these biased MSM.
At least be intellectually honest to always preface whatever you read by the filter, 85% of MSM voted with their pocketbook for Democrats!

Maybe you should get the GOP to pass a law that makes it illegal for media outlets to express any pro-Democrat opinions.

Journalists are not supposed to express any opinions. That's what the op-ed section is for.

 

[healthmyths]

A professional NEWS editor calling a mortal man "sort of God"??? That's not reporting, that's gushing!

Puleeze...

That's all you can say??? Obviously you are a very very shallow person.
Thomas is a hardened tough editor who's job was according to him BASH BUSH... BUT when it came to the Messiah??????
PULEEEZEEEEE!

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

But morons who fail to vet left wing biased news just perpetuate the dishonesty.

OR..., the people have vetted the news and have determined that it's the right that's dishonest. You have to work for what you get. Right wing whining about the media usually amounts to "we want it because we deserve it" with very little in the way of facts to back it up.

You just perpetuated the dishonesty.
You haven't noticed the news stories referring to repubs grilling Hillary but no mention of democrats failing to grill Hillary? You didn't see the biased misrepresentation of McCarthy's words about the effect as opposed to the reported purpose of the Benghazi investigation?

Are you saying that the media doesn't have the right to make their own decisions about what is right or wrong? The right is constantly whining about the imagined expectation of equal outcomes. Why would you demand equal outcomes when it comes to media workers right to make up their own minds? If you can't convince them that your way is right, that's your fault.....not theirs.

News media is supposed to report and document, not funnel the story.

Tell that to fox.

Why? What do you know about Fox? You never watch it.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The Main Stream Media is the enemy of partisans not moderates.



The birth of Fox News sprang from Murdoch’s decision to create a television empire around sports, as he had previously in Australia and the U.K. In 1993 Fox bought the rights to broadcast the games of the NFL’s then dominant NFC division, swiping football from CBS for nearly $1.6 billion. “We’re a network now. Like no other sport will do, the NFL will make us into a real network,” Murdoch exulted to Sports Illustrated. “In the future there will be 400 or 500 channels on cable, and ratings will be fragmented. But football on Sunday will have the same ratings, regardless of the number of channels. Football will not fragment.”

He was right. And he wanted a winning weekly bookend for football to strike at another top-rated CBS program. “At that stage, Rupert Murdoch had in mind to set up a Fox News answer to ’60 Minutes,’” Neil told me. “It was to be an hour-long news show going out after the NFL football program on Fox.” His costar was to be Judith Regan, a young woman who had sliced her way to the top-selling echelons of the book publishing business. Smart, and possessed of finely sharpened elbows, Regan had by this point been rewarded with her own imprint, ReganBooks, at Murdoch’s HarperCollins publishing house. Neil started getting uneasy as Murdoch brought in a consultant to help punch up the concept of what news would look and sound like on Fox. The idea of creating a show yielded to the idea of creating an entire cable network—a niche news channel.

The new network would speak to viewers who felt the rest of the press was too liberal, like the New York Times, even 60 Minutes itself. The consultant had been a political strategist for presidents Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush, the executive producer of a TV show starring Rush Limbaugh, and the head of financial news channel CNBC.

His name was Roger Ailes.

The birth of Fox News - Salon.com

You use a salon link to make that point? You just dmonstrated the impact of left wing news bias.

Too liberal for you huh? Yeah I understand.

The Main Stream Media is made up of a large number of diverse opinions. I'm sure you can find the same history elsewhere.

MSM is guided by institutional left wing bias.

Finally, someone on the Right Wing ventured a definition of left wing bias, an institutional bias for truth.

Wrong. Left wing bias, largely institutional. If you're taught by left wing academics what you believe to be centered is skewed left. It's your foundation. Institutional.

 

[BULLDOG]

OR..., the people have vetted the news and have determined that it's the right that's dishonest. You have to work for what you get. Right wing whining about the media usually amounts to "we want it because we deserve it" with very little in the way of facts to back it up.

You just perpetuated the dishonesty.
You haven't noticed the news stories referring to repubs grilling Hillary but no mention of democrats failing to grill Hillary? You didn't see the biased misrepresentation of McCarthy's words about the effect as opposed to the reported purpose of the Benghazi investigation?

Are you saying that the media doesn't have the right to make their own decisions about what is right or wrong? The right is constantly whining about the imagined expectation of equal outcomes. Why would you demand equal outcomes when it comes to media workers right to make up their own minds? If you can't convince them that your way is right, that's your fault.....not theirs.

News media is supposed to report and document, not funnel the story.

Tell that to fox.

Why? What do you know about Fox? You never watch it.

Sure I do. Not a lot, but some. I watch it or the same reason I come here. To see what the crazy right is whining about now.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You just perpetuated the dishonesty.
You haven't noticed the news stories referring to repubs grilling Hillary but no mention of democrats failing to grill Hillary? You didn't see the biased misrepresentation of McCarthy's words about the effect as opposed to the reported purpose of the Benghazi investigation?

Are you saying that the media doesn't have the right to make their own decisions about what is right or wrong? The right is constantly whining about the imagined expectation of equal outcomes. Why would you demand equal outcomes when it comes to media workers right to make up their own minds? If you can't convince them that your way is right, that's your fault.....not theirs.

News media is supposed to report and document, not funnel the story.

Tell that to fox.

Why? What do you know about Fox? You never watch it.

Sure I do. Not a lot, but some. I watch it or the same reason I come here. To see what the crazy right is whining about now.

That makes no sense. You think everything and everyone at Fox is right wing? You need to stop relying on what left wing media tells you.

 

[BULLDOG]

Are you saying that the media doesn't have the right to make their own decisions about what is right or wrong? The right is constantly whining about the imagined expectation of equal outcomes. Why would you demand equal outcomes when it comes to media workers right to make up their own minds? If you can't convince them that your way is right, that's your fault.....not theirs.

News media is supposed to report and document, not funnel the story.

Tell that to fox.

Why? What do you know about Fox? You never watch it.

Sure I do. Not a lot, but some. I watch it or the same reason I come here. To see what the crazy right is whining about now.

That makes no sense. You think everything and everyone at Fox is right wing? You need to stop relying on what left wing media tells you.

Spoken like a true dittohead.

 

[healthmyths]

The Main Stream Media is the enemy of partisans not moderates.



The birth of Fox News sprang from Murdoch’s decision to create a television empire around sports, as he had previously in Australia and the U.K. In 1993 Fox bought the rights to broadcast the games of the NFL’s then dominant NFC division, swiping football from CBS for nearly $1.6 billion. “We’re a network now. Like no other sport will do, the NFL will make us into a real network,” Murdoch exulted to Sports Illustrated. “In the future there will be 400 or 500 channels on cable, and ratings will be fragmented. But football on Sunday will have the same ratings, regardless of the number of channels. Football will not fragment.”

He was right. And he wanted a winning weekly bookend for football to strike at another top-rated CBS program. “At that stage, Rupert Murdoch had in mind to set up a Fox News answer to ’60 Minutes,’” Neil told me. “It was to be an hour-long news show going out after the NFL football program on Fox.” His costar was to be Judith Regan, a young woman who had sliced her way to the top-selling echelons of the book publishing business. Smart, and possessed of finely sharpened elbows, Regan had by this point been rewarded with her own imprint, ReganBooks, at Murdoch’s HarperCollins publishing house. Neil started getting uneasy as Murdoch brought in a consultant to help punch up the concept of what news would look and sound like on Fox. The idea of creating a show yielded to the idea of creating an entire cable network—a niche news channel.

The new network would speak to viewers who felt the rest of the press was too liberal, like the New York Times, even 60 Minutes itself. The consultant had been a political strategist for presidents Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush, the executive producer of a TV show starring Rush Limbaugh, and the head of financial news channel CNBC.

His name was Roger Ailes.

The birth of Fox News - Salon.com

You use a salon link to make that point? You just dmonstrated the impact of left wing news bias.

Too liberal for you huh? Yeah I understand.

The Main Stream Media is made up of a large number of diverse opinions. I'm sure you can find the same history elsewhere.

MSM is guided by institutional left wing bias.

Finally, someone on the Right Wing ventured a definition of left wing bias, an institutional bias for truth.

Wrong. Left wing bias, largely institutional. If you're taught by left wing academics what you believe to be centered is skewed left. It's your foundation. Institutional.

And it is ever so evident as this story!

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias
Jesse Watters crashed Cornell University to test students on their liberal “indoctrination” after a report claimed that 96 percent of Cornell professors' donations went to Democrats.
However, in the middle of the regular “Watters’ World” questioning, Jesse was kicked off the campus because Cornell media relations had not granted him permission to interview students.

“We ask that you don’t interview students on campus,” Melissa Osgood, Cornell’s deputy director of media relations said.

“Cornell doesn’t have a problem with Fox News, does it?” Watters asked.

“Absolutely not,” Osgood said.

After Watters asked repeatedly, even the senior director of Cornell media relations would not budge, saying that Fox News could not interview students “on campus” and that he would send Watters a statement.

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias

 

[hazlnut]

The establishment GOP exemplified by McCain still think the MSM is not biased! These out of touch GOP don't get it after all these years that the MSM is so left wing biased and the proof is where the money goes.

Where did the MSM put their money in 2008?
In 2008 85% of media donated money to Democrats!
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

A specific example of how the MSM loves Democrats is this quote from the Editor of NewsWeek
COLOR="Blue"]I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." [/COLOR]
Evan Thomas on Hardball,
Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

And to insure the Democrat election what did the MSM do?
130,213 stories can't be swept under the rug and the Democrat Bias is very clear!
Smooch: Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election
BY PAUL BEDARD | MARCH 16, 2015 | 10:49 AM
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.

• "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

Not true.

It's been proven not true.

Doesn't matter though.

It's a convenient excuse for weak candidates and weak policy.

 

[BULLDOG]

You use a salon link to make that point? You just dmonstrated the impact of left wing news bias.

Too liberal for you huh? Yeah I understand.

The Main Stream Media is made up of a large number of diverse opinions. I'm sure you can find the same history elsewhere.

MSM is guided by institutional left wing bias.

Finally, someone on the Right Wing ventured a definition of left wing bias, an institutional bias for truth.

Wrong. Left wing bias, largely institutional. If you're taught by left wing academics what you believe to be centered is skewed left. It's your foundation. Institutional.

And it is ever so evident as this story!

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias
Jesse Watters crashed Cornell University to test students on their liberal “indoctrination” after a report claimed that 96 percent of Cornell professors' donations went to Democrats.
However, in the middle of the regular “Watters’ World” questioning, Jesse was kicked off the campus because Cornell media relations had not granted him permission to interview students.

“We ask that you don’t interview students on campus,” Melissa Osgood, Cornell’s deputy director of media relations said.

“Cornell doesn’t have a problem with Fox News, does it?” Watters asked.

“Absolutely not,” Osgood said.

After Watters asked repeatedly, even the senior director of Cornell media relations would not budge, saying that Fox News could not interview students “on campus” and that he would send Watters a statement.

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias

Waters claim to fame includes stalking a female reporter, ambushing a 75-year-old PBS host, and telling homeless New Yorkers to get jobs. A really disgusting piece of crap, but fox viewers like disgusting stuff like that.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

News media is supposed to report and document, not funnel the story.

Tell that to fox.

Why? What do you know about Fox? You never watch it.

Sure I do. Not a lot, but some. I watch it or the same reason I come here. To see what the crazy right is whining about now.

That makes no sense. You think everything and everyone at Fox is right wing? You need to stop relying on what left wing media tells you.

Spoken like a true dittohead.

You did it again. You're parroting.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Too liberal for you huh? Yeah I understand.

The Main Stream Media is made up of a large number of diverse opinions. I'm sure you can find the same history elsewhere.

MSM is guided by institutional left wing bias.

Finally, someone on the Right Wing ventured a definition of left wing bias, an institutional bias for truth.

Wrong. Left wing bias, largely institutional. If you're taught by left wing academics what you believe to be centered is skewed left. It's your foundation. Institutional.

And it is ever so evident as this story!

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias
Jesse Watters crashed Cornell University to test students on their liberal “indoctrination” after a report claimed that 96 percent of Cornell professors' donations went to Democrats.
However, in the middle of the regular “Watters’ World” questioning, Jesse was kicked off the campus because Cornell media relations had not granted him permission to interview students.

“We ask that you don’t interview students on campus,” Melissa Osgood, Cornell’s deputy director of media relations said.

“Cornell doesn’t have a problem with Fox News, does it?” Watters asked.

“Absolutely not,” Osgood said.

After Watters asked repeatedly, even the senior director of Cornell media relations would not budge, saying that Fox News could not interview students “on campus” and that he would send Watters a statement.

Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias

Waters claim to fame includes stalking a female reporter, ambushing a 75-year-old PBS host, and telling homeless New Yorkers to get jobs. A really disgusting piece of crap, but fox viewers like disgusting stuff like that.

Again, you expose your own closemindedness and dishonesty by relying on left wing propagandists to give you info on Fox. Just watch it yourself and provide your own insights.