Media Bias

[Rugger]

The media bias in all political campaigns is pretty apparent if you are paying attention. This obviously and unfairly sways the election. What do you make of this? What do you see as a viable solution?

 

[Arrogant]

The media bias in all political campaigns is pretty apparent if you are paying attention. This obviously and unfairly sways the election. What do you make of this? What do you see as a viable solution?

What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?

What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?

What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said "I do" to?

What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she was in a car crash, gained 40 pounds and no longer measured up to his standards?

What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?

What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

What if Obama were a member of the "Keating 5"?

What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?

This is what racism does.

It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.


The fact that the media continues to call McSame a "maverick" simply because he calls himself one, despite voting with Bush 92% is hysterical.

Likewise, Obama has received a free pass on a variety of issues.

Fox leans right, MSNBC leans left.

People are fools if they rely on the mainstream news to provide them with an accurate view of what's going on. These are the same people that bought Bush's WMD story hook, line, and sinker.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

:toofunny:

 

[whiskers]

The former white house press secretary was on cnn (i think) saying they would literally hand fox scripts

 

[Dwight Schrute]

The media has always been biased to the right. How could anyone not see it. They are in the tank for McCain. Its plainly obvious.

 

[RobInKuwait]

The media has always been biased to the right. How could anyone not see it. They are in the tank for McCain. Its plainly obvious.

I know I will get flamed by all the lefties, but I think Fox is the most unbiased.

The way they lean lean right in my eyes, is that they get much more heavy hitting analysts/hosts from the right (Newt, Hannity, ect) simply by default because the other networks won't put them on.

Also, its not like they hide AP stories, especially not online. They give just as much anti-McCain AP play as pro-McCain. I don't think that is true for other networks.

 

[AE14]

gotta say I cant watch fox and msnbc anymore, both are too far out there

 

[RobInKuwait]

gotta say I cant watch fox and msnbc anymore, both are too far out there

Give me an example of Fox reporting that is "out there". I'm not talking about what Hannity says during analysis, but actual reporting.

 

[Fastone]

I know I will get flamed by all the lefties, but I think Fox is the most unbiased.

The way they lean lean right in my eyes, is that they get much more heavy hitting analysts/hosts from the right (Newt, Hannity, ect) simply by default because the other networks won't put them on.



Also, its not like they hide AP stories, especially not online. They give just as much anti-McCain AP play as pro-McCain. I don't think that is true for other networks.

I won't flame you because you have a "right" to your opinion. I just totally disagree with you on this, which is my "right".

:bruce3:

 

[RobInKuwait]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/26/dems-blast-mccain-after-bailout-negotiations-go-sour/

This was the top story this morning. Definitely not written to be flattering for McCain.

 

[AE14]

Give me an example of Fox reporting that is "out there". I'm not talking about what Hannity says during analysis, but actual reporting.

I am just curious why can someone not use Hannity as an example, but when discussing MSNBC nothing is off limits?

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Hannity is not a journalist. The two biggest shows (O'Reilly and H&C) do not claim to be news. They are opinion shows.

Olbermann, Schuster, etc....claim to be journalists and news.

 

[AE14]

Olberman show is as much news as OReilly. Lets get real

They could claim to be the tooth fairy to, but it doesnt make it true

 

[RobInKuwait]

I am just curious why can someone not use Hannity as an example, but when discussing MSNBC nothing is off limits?

I'm talking about the actual reporting of the news, not the analysts. Thinking back to the conventions....MSNBC and CNN gave flattering coverage of the Democratic convention, not having any negative shots or side stories. Meanwhile, at the republican convention they showed shots of people yawning, cut to protesters often, and did a side story during Lieberman's speech about "all the empty seats." That's not fair and unbiased coverage.

I thought Fox's coverage of the Democratic convention was evenhanded, fair and impartial.....or at the very worst, at least respectful.

I said in the first post that its obvious that Fox has all the strongest right wing analysts, probably because nobody else would have them.

 

[AE14]

I'm talking about the actual reporting of the news, not the analysts. Thinking back to the conventions....MSNBC and CNN gave flattering coverage of the Democratic convention, not having any negative shots or side stories. Meanwhile, at the republican convention they showed shots of people yawning, cut to protesters often, and did a side story during Lieberman's speech about "all the empty seats." That's not fair and unbiased coverage.

I thought Fox's coverage of the Democratic convention was evenhanded, fair and impartial.....or at the very worst, at least respectful.

I said in the first post that its obvious that Fox has all the strongest right wing analysts, probably because nobody else would have them.

Actually CNN has quite a few right wing analysts.

THey are the only ones who seem fairly "middle of the road" IMO

 

[RobInKuwait]

Actually CNN has quite a few right wing analysts.

THey are the only ones who seem fairly "middle of the road" IMO

I saw them show an Obama speech on the economy for 20 minutes. The entire speech they had a shot of the dow showing +403 in the top right corner, then happy wall street traders in the bottom right corner. Subliminal message....look how well Obama's policies work...even though this speech is in no way related to the finish today.

I know I have never seen a random McCain campaign speech in full on CNN, and I'm sure he wouldn't get that golden treatment if he did.

 

[AE14]

I saw them show an Obama speech on the economy for 20 minutes. The entire speech they had a shot of the dow showing +403 in the top right corner, then happy wall street traders in the bottom right corner. Subliminal message....look how well Obama's policies work...even though this speech is in no way related to the finish today.

I know I have never seen a random McCain campaign speech in full on CNN, and I'm sure he wouldn't get that golden treatment if he did.

I have to agree with you here. I always laugh at certain aspects like this, however when they are dealing with later programming, and the news personnel changes, I see more balance.

Some of the earlier hosts (Blitzer etc...) I could do without

 

[RobInKuwait]

I have to agree with you here. I always laugh at certain aspects like this, however when they are dealing with later programming, and the news personnel changes, I see more balance.

Some of the earlier hosts (Blitzer etc...) I could do without

Fair enough. :afro:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Olberman show is as much news as OReilly. Lets get real

I have. Neither is news. One claims it is, yet the amount of Republicans he has had in the last 5 years can be counted on one hand. O'Reilly has both sides on every single night.

They could claim to be the tooth fairy to, but it doesnt make it true

When you put Olbermann on to anchor elections, its not just a claim anymore.

 

[AE14]

I have. Neither is news. One claims it is, yet the amount of Republicans he has had in the last 5 years can be counted on one hand. O'Reilly has both sides on every single night..

I agree, both are a fraud, and neithber is news. I do agree that OReilly has had more, but Olberman is not as scant as that.

When you put Olbermann on to anchor elections, its not just a claim anymore.

I also recall a lot of the Hannity coverage of the RNC, and it was a Repub love fest. He kept calling Obama the "community organizer". It was so silly

 

[Dwight Schrute]

I agree, both are a fraud, and neithber is news. I do agree that OReilly has had more, but Olberman is not as scant as that.

Sure he is. He doesn't have Republicans on.

I also recall a lot of the Hannity coverage of the RNC, and it was a Repub love fest. He kept calling Obama the "community organizer". It was so silly

As a result of almost every news organization mocking Palin as a "mayor of a small town". Maybe if CNN didn't report the dailykos.com stories as "news" the bias wouldn't have looked as apparent.

 

[Arrogant]

I know I will get flamed by all the lefties, but I think Fox is the most unbiased.

The way they lean lean right in my eyes, is that they get much more heavy hitting analysts/hosts from the right (Newt, Hannity, ect) simply by default because the other networks won't put them on.

Also, its not like they hide AP stories, especially not online. They give just as much anti-McCain AP play as pro-McCain. I don't think that is true for other networks.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D08K7Q6hyE"]YouTube - McClellan on Fox News and White House talking points[/ame]
:think:



Not enough, let's include the law breaking drug addict (no, not Cindy McCain):

The two biggest faces of the right wing media, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly have been the biggest hypocrites. After the news of Bristol Palin's pregnancy, Rush Limbaugh came on the air with the following talking points.


1. The Left's ridicule of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her family will backfire.

2: Gov. Palin's daughter, Bristol, made a classic "average American" mistake, endearing her to born-again Christians.

3: Gov. Palin is energizing heartland Middle Americans and "values voters."

4. Leftists are sexists.

Okay. If Bristol Palin made a classic American mistake, so did Jamie Lynn Spears right? Both were underage girls who got pregnant and thrust into the spotlight. SO what did Limbaugh say when Jamie Lynn Spears got pregnant?


Caller: Would you tend to think that a family in this position,
though, wouldn't you think that there would be a more watchful eye as
a parent to be watching over these kids so this doesn't happen to
them?

RUSH: I would certainly hope so, but it's long past time for this to
happen. The parents here are the culprits!

Shouldn’t the same thing apply to Sarah and Bristol Palin? Her family was in a similar high profile position. Shouldn’t she have been paying a more watchful eye on her daughter? Isn’t she the ‘culprit’ in this crime of teen pregnancy?

Bill Oreilly also ran with his FOX/GOP talking points saying,


‘Millions of families are dealing with teen pregnancy, and as long as society doesn't have to support the mother, father or baby, it is a personal matter. It's true that some Americans will judge Governor Palin and her family, and she will have a hard time running for vice president if there is much more chaos. For the sake of her and her family, we hope things calm down. This country needs a vibrant policy debate, not a soap opera.’

However when Jamie Lynn was pregnant this is what he had to say:

'Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves. And by the way, the mother, Lynne Spears, has reportedly already sold pictures of the upcoming baby of her 16-year-old for a million bucks. Incredible pinhead'

 

[Arrogant]

Fox News on The Clinton Vandalized The White House and Air Force One Story

May 21, 2001

During the White House transition in January, one story proved irresistible to many conservative pundits: Departing Clinton staffers had gone on a wild rampage and "trashed" or "vandalized" the White House, even looting Air Force One. Allegations of the Clinton aides' reckless destruction of public property swept through the media. For some, the story symbolized the difference between a morally compromised Clinton presidency and a more dignified, honorable Bush administration.

An official government investigation, however, reveals one major problem with these stories: They never happened.

According to statements from the General Services Administration that were reported on May 17, little out of the ordinary occurred during the transition, and "the condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy."

Ironically, the investigation came in response to a request from Rep. Bob Barr (R.-Ga.), and many conservatives who had assumed that the wild rumors would be confirmed by an official inquiry. That wasn't the case. (The "looting" of Air Force One had also been denied months ago by officials at Andrews Air Force base -- Kansas City Star, 2/9/01).

Leading the cry against the trashing of the White House was the Fox News Channel. Virtually every major Fox personality reported it as fact, often expressing their own personal outrage. Guests on the channel chimed in, condemning the Clintons and their staffers. Consider the following reports:

--Brit Hume (1/25/01): "By the way, the reported vandalism in those White House offices now includes power and phone cords cut... trash dumped on floors, desk drawers emptied onto floors, pornographic pictures left in computer printers, scatological messages left on voice mail, and cabinets and drawers glued shut. And the Washington Times reports that the presidential 747 that flew Bill and Hillary Clinton to New York on inauguration day was stripped bare. The plane's porcelain, china... and silverware, and salt and pepper shakers, blankets and pillow cases, nearly all items bearing the presidential seal, were taken by Clinton staffers who went along for the ride. The Washington Times quoted a military steward as saying that even a supply of toothpaste was stolen from a compartment under a sink."

--Sean Hannity (1/26/01): "Look, we've had these reports, very disturbing reports -- and I have actually spoken to people that have confirmed a lot of the reports -- about the trashing of the White House. Pornographic materials left in the printers. They cut the phone lines. Lewd and crude messages on phone machines. Stripping of anything that was not bolted down on Air Force One. $200,000 in furniture taken out."

--Fred Barnes (1/27/01): "Now, you know what else helped Bush have such a good week? It was the contrast with the Clintons' sleazy departure from the White House, which is a hot story in itself.... You had the trashing of the White House itself. We don't know how much, but the typewriters, the voicemail, the graffiti on the walls and so on, reflecting, I think, a real bitterness that they should not have reflected, at least in that."

--Bill O'Reilly (1/26/01): "I mean, the price tag right now is about $200,000, so that's a felony right there."

--Oliver North, radio host (1/26/01, "Hannity & Colmes"): "There's an awful lot about this whole administration that never looked right to many of us. And of course, their closing act in this whole thing, which was basically trashing the White House, you know, pillaging what was available on Air Force One.... We should expect from white trash what they did at the White House."

--Paula Zahn (1/26/01): "All right, but this is the White House, for God's sakes. We're not talking about people living in a fraternity."

--Tony Snow (1/28/01): "When I first heard about reported vandalism by disgruntled Clinton-Gore staffers, I got a little bit steamed. I've got a certain affection for the White House, due in no small part to my own service there during the first Bush administration. So, inspired by my experience and fond memories, I dashed off an angry newspaper column about the incident. But then the Bush team did something very wise. It did nothing, and that was the right choice. Sometimes you have to look past little idiocies and outbursts, understanding that life's just too short to fret over such things."

"A little bit steamed" is putting it mildly: As the Kansas City Star reported (5/17/01), one of Snow's syndicated newspaper columns was nearly a case study in dishonest reporting. Snow wrote that the White House "was a wreck" and that Air Force One "looked as if it had been stripped by a skilled band of thieves -- or perhaps wrecked by a trailer park twister."

 

[Mulletsoldier]

B,

Why don't you just link them to the discussion we had some time ago? This thread is old news!

 

[Dwight Schrute]

B,

Why don't you just link them to the discussion we had some time ago? This thread is old news!

Do you really want everyone to see just how wrong you were?

:lol:


Plus I don't even have to make this arguement, the media freely admits it themselves as do Democrats!


[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfuroXnoLhM"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/nomedia]

:woohoo: