Media Bias

I gotta admit I was having difficulty following some of your post... but I think the last paragraph nailed it. The hard news is what it is, beyond that... its practically all spin. left and right.

sure there is liberal oriented media, but to claim its overwhelming seems to me to deny the obvious... radio for instance is dominated by the conservative. Newspapers go all over the place. Blogs are all over the place. to me... television leans conservative with the exception of Olberman and the comedy channel.

 It always cracks me up when I read that certain tv news sources are liberal outlets. In my mind.. anybody that believes FOX news is fair and balanced has completely lost touch with reality...but again... I respect anybodies right to disagree :)

Big,

No worries @ following the post.  It's understandable.  You're relatively new & this issue goes back some time.  It's a combination of a # of issues posted in the past & brought up recently.  Keep in touch.  Scan some past posts.  It will give you a better perspective.  Hopefully, more replies will follow & that will add to understanding. Always keep an open mind & never be afraid to ask a question or two.  JATFUR.

RichK

Rick

I will keep this simple. You disagree with me and there is nothing you are going to say that is going to change my mind. I disagree with you and there is nothing I can say that will change your mind.

I do not have, in your words "such disdain" for anyone so please don't put any words into my mouth.

Seeing you seem to feel that my critical thinking, basic reading comprehension, and common sense are lacking. I see no point in continuing.

You start your first paragraph stating you want to open up an honest forum to investigate. Then you digress and denigrade. I think that speaks volumes. 

To add insult to injury, do you actually think I am going to play this charade and answer your questions and provide you with research data? I don't think so.  

Think what you will, and I'll do the same.

Have a good night Sir

TRUTHHURTS

TH,

Disdain: To look on with scorn.

Scorn:  Open dislike and disrespect or derision often mixed with indignation.

Your comments in your reply titled, Barak, 5.12.08 7:59 PM.  "Mainstream media leans left & to cover it would hurt their goals simple as that."

Your comments in your reply titled, "Media Bias," 5.12.08, 10:50 PM.  "If you want to work for them (left leaning mainstream media) you must take part in their agenda."

Not only do your words meet the requirements for the definition of disdain, you made two accusations but furnished no sources nor any proof.

I said, "If you have such disdain for the liberal point of view...."yet now you claim that I am putting words in YOUR mouth? I put no words in your mouth because I did not claim you SAID anything @ disdain.  THAT is reading comprehension.  THAT is making an accusation based on what?  Nothing.

I, like any other blogger, ask only that if you are going to make a statement, or in your cases, accusations, that you provide something, anything, to substantiate them.  You did not. Please refer me to where I required you to do my research.  If you can provide it, I will definitely apologise.  But as it stands now, it is yet another statement &/or accusation by you with nothing to back it up.

Denigrate you?  Don't blame me or anyone else if you couldn't comprehend the implications of YOU providing members of the "left leaning media," for all of us to see, who then proceeded to apparently support your claims.  That responsibility is yours & no one elses. 

You can ignore or deny, the choice is yours.  All anyone asks for is accuracy.

Have a good day sir.

RK

TH,

Welcome to the blogging world of Solo.  It really boils down to a couple of points.

If you use basic intelligent reasoning and indpendent synthesis of thought in stating an opinion, be ready to be questioned like a cop in L.A. during a beating trial - you will be asked to back it up with copious amounts of research found on your memory stick. 

All in all though, he is a great guy and fun to ping on and get pinged from.  Above all, don't take it personal - he treats us all like that. 

One other thing, pretty much everything on the negative side of the decision matrix is Bush's fault. 

Have fun with it!!!

P.S. Don't you love these 'global warmed' mornings lately?

I have never denied the fact that I can be a stickler, no, scratch that, the biggest pain in the butt for providing sources, accuracy & substantiating an accusation or statement.  I require it of myself & I require it of others.  I do this for very good reasons.  Any person with the ability to speek, type or write, can make an accusation or a statement in opposition to another.  They do this knowing that people, being people, will not take the time & effort to check up on it & will assume the accuracy of that person.  So why go to all the trouble?  Let me put it other real world terms.

If you had a physical problem & went to the doctor  & he reccomended a questionable, possibly dangerous course of treatment, wouldn't you want a second opinion?  Assuming the doctor is reputable, he would probably be the first to tell you to seek one.

If you were charged with a serious crime, or any crime, actually, wouldn't the first thing you'd want to do is to lawyer up to make the accuser provide evidence?

If you have a problem with your vehicle, take it in & get an estimate that you thought excessive, wouldn't you want the mechanic to substantiate the proposed procedure?  Wouldn't you even think of getting a second opinion? 

In all three instances, I would hope so.  Requiring, proof, accuracy, justification, comprehension & common sense is, indeed a burden.  Contrary to what was said, one doesn't need, "copious," amounts of information or a memory stick.  I use multiple sources because of the old saying, "The smaller the sample, the more erroneous the conclusion."  The memory stick is just a devise of convenience for storing data & I can't see anything wrong with that. 

I also see absolutely nothing wrong in asking a person to be accurate or back up what they claim, especially for the reasons above.  I still thank the people who taught me the value of those qualities & question those who would attempt to belittle them or don't use the same system.  Yeah.  It's a burden.  But it beats the heck out of any alternative.

RK

Disdain= Intence scorn, Extreme contempt or disgust for somebody or something.

There is my proof, left leaning spin. That little word "Extreme" missing out makes a big diference. Who did you work for in Chicago?

I guess it was ok when you thought in another post that the right leaning folks were dominating the media. I didn't see you throw out any proof. or evidence.

I did give the folks a couple links as I stated to get them started but I am not anyones personal secretary go do the research yourself it will be good for you.

TRUTHHURTS

RK

I meant no criticism, everybody has their style.  The trick is to learn to "play well with others" whether they are of the same mold. 

My primary critique of your style is that you seem to want to take the subjective, intelligent, independent thought out of the equation of coming up with an opinion.  Whether we all dig for facts and catalog and reference them in our replies and comments really doesn't matter when we state an opinion.  These are comments, not research papers or newspaper articles. 

Now, for blatant and outright accusations - sure, back them up with something concrete. Because, you know what they say, Opinions are like certain orifices, everybody has one.

I did see something the other day from you that struck me as interesting - your comment in the Blog on McCain's age you stated:

"I find it curious that in all the explanations, why would any one want to vote into office a person who who would basically continue the utter failing policies of George W Bush.  I just don't see any kind of logic to support this reasoning." - RichK

In the interest of proof and accuracy, where are your facts that point to the fact that McCain will "basically continue the utter failing policies of George W. Bush."?  Or is just your opinion?

Just curious.

TH,

Since you didn't say what dictionary souce you used, I will have to assume, & I may be wrong, that it used the word DEFENCE which is a British variance on how we spell it, which is DEFENSE.  Not a problem, we have many word like that.  I used Merriam-Webster's Colligiate, Tenth Ed., 1997.  It listed both spellings but only defined it under the word, DEFENSE.  That may or may not explain the use or absence of the word EXTREME but in either case, it would seem that both definintions would be valid with or without that word.

Since you made no refference to which blog/reply you saw what you claimed were my comments on right wing media domination, I have made several, my source was Editor & Publisher.  Since that source was used quite some time ago, I'm sorry that I can't provide you with a date to set up a time line.

On this, the latest blog where I have mentioned it, I stated where I worked in the 4th paragraph for all to read.

I'm not sure why you mentioned the web sites that you provided.  I didn't question them before & I'm not questioning them now.  I made it clear that I was centering on the two comments of yours which was not @ the links, but your accusations, which, by the way, I see that you still have not provided any comment, let alone, any substantiation.  No worries, I'm used to that.

Once AGAIN, I ask nobody to provide me with research or do any work on anything I say.  Only for what they say.  You can keep repeating this charge without explanation, but I think I should warn you it helps no one.  Let me know when that sinks in.  It's getting tedious.

RK

CCC,

I didn't take it as a criticism.  I did, however want to give my reasons, as I've done before.  Small point, but I have alwas been taught, & have considered that it is a system, not a style.  Small point, as I said, but it is a big difference.

On subjective, intelligent, independent thought.  I don't take them out of the equation.  Quite the contrary.  I use them as a starting point.  Case in point, those same good qualities start the train of thought.  But without a good system to ascertain the accuracy they are just good thoughts.

I agree 100% with on the subject of opinions & orifaces & I don't hink we need to expand on that.

On your question of McCains age & following Bush's policies.  Funny, I think Lily asked me the very same question in one of these blogs.  Maybe you missed it or maybe I didn't explain completely.  My mind is not running 100% the last couple of weeks.  My jaw is hurting & I'm getting root canal tomorrow.  Sorry for any fuzzy thinking on my part.  Back to McCain.  It's not my opinion.  I do agree with it in part.  But I have come across it in numerous pubs & news opinion segments.  The one question I have @ it is that any new president will continues some policies or downgrade or eliminate those of a predessesor.  That's not news.  The other thing I question is the fact that if he is going to continue Bush's policies, at least some of them, which ones & why has McCain & a # of other Republicans put so much distance between themselves & Bush?  Is it ONLY because he is a lame duck or is it indeed because the consensus of the "experts," is that so many of his policies are failures?  I can't quite put my finger on it, but there seems to be a bit of a dichotomy there.  Maybe I'll figure it out AFTER the root canal.  GEE!  I just can't wait.  Toodles.  JATFUR.

RichK

Yes this is getting very tediuous. I am very sorry I did not spell difference correctly.

I will give you an example of the many that are out there of media bias and slant. 

Back on August 27th, Time magazine reported on the death of an officer who had hit an obstruction while escorting President Bush as part of a motorcade. Here is the headline:

"Bush Motorcade Kills Cop"

This was outrageous, as it accuses Bush of being responsible for deliberately killing a police officer. But it was not outrageous enough, though, to satisfy Time’s indulgence in Bush Derangement Syndrome. The other day, Time reported on the death of an officer in Hillary Clinton’s motorcade. Here’s the headline from that story:

"Officer Killed Escorting Clinton"

http://www.americandaily.com/article/21687

All one has to do is research, and they will find it is true and factual the media is leaning left these days. You wanted an example you got one it's public printed record.

I don't expect this to change your mind in any way because I know how committed you are to the left cause and thats ok. I do not disdain you and et al I disagree.

TRUTHHURTS

Here is another interesting little link.

 http://howardwasright.com/index.php/more/111/

TH,

I wholeheartedly agree with your examples, especially because I get TIME every week & enjoy it.  While the title, "Bush Motorcade Kills Cop," might, & I emphasize, MIGHT, be technically correct, I would have thought that a better choice of words, as in your second example, would have been offered by professional editors.

We also see examples like this in many publications.  To add to the fact that some parts of media leans right & some lean left, I would also mention that they do make mistakes in many areas as you have shown.  Not defending TIME, the only other possible explanation I could offer is that they might have learned from their first mistake &/or they got a different editor/proof reader. 

As with others, without knowing me, you have put me firmly on the left.  You aren't the first & won't be the last.  Do I hate Bush, Cheney & what they have done?  Absolutely.  According to polls, many other people think the same way.  Also, apparently, so do a number of Republicans not to mention a goodly portion of the rest of the world.  I also advocate small, but effective government, low taxes when possible, conservative fiscal policies, intelligent foreign policies, a free, responsible press, adherence to the Constitution, equal justice under law, respect for the law, the separation of church & state & the repeal of the designated hitter rule.

How those things automatically put me on the left, let alone far left, some one will have to explain.  No one has yet.  I wonder why.  Oh, just one more thing, as Lt. Columbo would say.  I voted for Bush in 2000.  Yeah!  Nice guess.  Not correct, but nice.  Don't feel down.  As I said, you're not the first & won't be the last to guess wrong.

RK

Your correct there are right leaning media that have done the same, and I stay away from them as well, and they are far fewer in numbers.

But you are missing my whole premiss, in that the majority of media today lean left, vote demoratic, and spin just like that Time headline. This is verifiable facts that can be proven when researched. That is all I am saying.

As a side note I too voted for Pres. Bush and have been disappointed in some of his stances. History will review his Presidency and his legacy. But what the American people do not need is rhetoric and spin, let the truth and facts, failures and merits, speak for themselves. This is not happening by the "majority" mainstream media. Their headlines, and reporting should be accurate, factual, and objective without bias. Like that TV show Dragnet- "just the facts maam, just the facts".

TRUTHHURTS

TH,

We may have much ado @ nothing here.  I took your advise & did some research.  I hope I'm correct.  As I mentioned in a reply to CCC, my brain is a bit fuzzy from the pain in my jaw.  I am so happily awaiting root canal tomorrow.  But I digress.

I went back to the original blog & went forward .  I checked my entries &, once again, if I read correctly, I did not miss your point or disagree with it. In one entry, I stated your claim & said, "Fair enough."  In another, I explained that except for the raw news, the right & left are pretty equal. (I won't change my statement because of exceptions, but base it on the rule)  It's when they start to give their opinion & do an editorial that they spin their little hearts out.  That goes equally for the left as it does for the right.

When I originally made my statement @ the media being slanted to the right, at the time I was, as stated, using stats from Editor & Publisher.  I could also have read it from the Pew Research Center, I don't remember.  But at the time, the figures said right.  Now they say left.  I say, big woof.  It must be considered that there is a cyclical nature here.  Point is, the BS spin of the right is just as BS laden as is the BS spin of the left.  I don't think I'm wrong in saying that if we stick around long enough, we may see more cycles when one is more dominant than the other.  There is one common pattern here.  I hesitate to masterfully state the totally obvious, but the common factor is BS.  And it just doesn't change.  And each side is just as guilty as the other.  No better, no worse.

I agree that we don't need rhetoric & spin but we've had it, we've got it now & in all probabilities, we'll continue to have it in the future.  Think: viewers = ratings = advertising minutes/dollars = those willing to be led by the nose = votes = power = money.  And it just keeps going round & round without much change.  That's why it behooves one well to check out more than one news source on both sides.  An dats da name of dat tune.

Sorry that we were both disappointed @ Bush, but as stated, we are not alone.  On the good side, I read something in the news today that Bush must just be boiling over.  Starting with his presidency, the rolls of the ACLU have doubled along with the donations.  According to them, it's unprecedented.  They attributed it to him & I think they even thanked him.  Ya just gotta love the irony.

RK