Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Liberal Bias in the media CBS

MaDmaN

MaDmaN

Board Supporter
Dan Ranthar should be fired and the president of CBS should step down..Those records about Bush's gaurd service were bogus and the contact that supplied CBS is a fruitcake with known mental problems.CBS held onto the story and tried to cover it up.Do you think for 1 minuet if it was about John Kerry they would have gone this far with it..No Way

JMO....
 
Are you saying the media has a liberal bias....... that's just a conspiracy theory.lol
A talk radio host who work for a CBS affilate got fired for saying on the air he though Rather should resign or be fired.
 
VanillaGorilla said:
Are you saying the media has a liberal bias....... that's just a conspiracy theory.lol
A talk radio host who work for a CBS affilate got fired for saying on the air he though Rather should resign or be fired.
Click to expand...


ABC,NBC,CBS Liberal Bias IMO..Fox news has a right wing Bias

The need for the big story took Dan Rather down
 
IW is right that all media is bias and it has not changed since the beginning of media.. Hearst was even responsible for the coining of the term "yellow journalism" because of his bias.. and I have a feeling even back in the time of the town crier that were a few of those that put some slant to the evening cry :D
 
Iron Warrior said:
All media is biased, I just watch news for entertainment, O'Reilly does a good job of entertaining me.
Click to expand...

I love O'Reilly - but hes been pretty liberal in the past 3 weeks. Believing the Swift Boat guys should be censored. And Giving Rather the 'benefit of the doubt'.
 
The bias **** is so obvious, if people can't figure it out they should be declared "too dumb to vote".
Click to expand...
I think that happened to Florida in the 2000 election. How people being to dumb to vote to a conspiracy against black voters is beyond me.
 
ABC,NBC,CBS Liberal Bias IMO..Fox news has a right wing Bias

The need for the big story took Dan Rather down
Click to expand...
I don't know that it was the big story that was the motivation. Rather daughter is very active in the Kerry campaign. Rather himself has spoken at fund raisers. The producer Mary mapes is very liberal. She actually put Burkett in touch with the Kerry Campaign which I have never heard of happening ever. They talked to people and ignored them when it contradicted Burkett's story. I think this is an example of wishful thinking and letting political ideology take over good journalism skills. In other words they had such a hard on to get Bush they ignored evidence that the story wasn't true.
It also shows they don't realize that the face of journalism has changed. They are no longer the gate keepers of the news. The internet and talk radio has changed that. I think they thought it was 10 years ago and the rest of the press would turn a blind eye to it as they have done in the past.
 
Ahh who cares. It was a mistake. His reputation is probably ruined enough, at least let him keep his job.
 
Read the book Bias by B. Goldberg. He worked at CBS for years with Dan Rather.
 
Last edited:
Rather has always been biased. Hell, all major newsmakers are biased. The probelm is he crossed the line of journalistic ethics.

Hell, just look at Rush Limbaugh (he ain't biased). :blink: He tells all those drug addicts to cease and desist. He even goes so far as gobbling up all the hillbilly heroin so no one else can get any. The guy is a freaking martyr. LOL.

My point is, think about what you hear and read. If it smells like ****, it is probably bullshit.
 
Rather is a reporter (news), Limbaugh is a pundit (opinion) - its a different story to pass off opinion as news. Thats where the trouble lies. and frankly, danger
 
Deoudes59 said:
Rather is a reporter (news), Limbaugh is a pundit (opinion) - its a different story to pass off opinion as news. Thats where the trouble lies. and frankly, danger
Click to expand...


Bingo....He should be fired!
 
Deoudes59 said:
Rather is a reporter (news), Limbaugh is a pundit (opinion) - its a different story to pass off opinion as news. Thats where the trouble lies. and frankly, danger
Click to expand...


Excellent point. The problem with Limbaugh is that neither he nor his listeners see it this way. Limbaugh is not the only one who does this (I was just using him for an example).

The problem is (IMO) is that people have certain ideas and they want their news reporters (or pundits) to agree with their beliefs.

In short, the news media is and always will be entertainment. Objective reporting bores the masses. Sad but true.
 
Excellent point. The problem with Limbaugh is that neither he nor his listeners see it this way. Limbaugh is not the only one who does this (I was just using him for an example).
Click to expand...
You are comparing apples and oranges. Rush is not a journalist. He is a conservative radio host. Most people can differentiate between what Rush does and a news broad caster or a journalist does.At one point in time journalism was about just the facts, who, what, where, why, and when. They should give both sides of the political spectrum tough questions. Unfortunately times have changed. Now, Hillary Clinton gets soft ball questions and a conservative will be raked over the coals and interrupted when they try to answer any questions.
 
Bingo....He should be fired!
Click to expand...
I agree if Dan had any dignity he would resign. I really don't think that he believes he did any thing wrong. The day he issued the apology he said there will be no apology or investigation.
 
Bring her on I say. Guiliani and/or McCain will mop the floor with that marxist feminazi
 
Bring her on I say. Guiliani and/or McCain will mop the floor with that marxist feminazi
Click to expand...
She did beat Guiliani before though. The press helped but you can count on them doing it again. I don't really like McCain. He is basically a democrat that is for the military. The McCain campaign finance reform was blatantly unconstitutional.
 
No I agree, who knows where McCain stands. He's pro-life and military but on other issues is all over the place. Hillary could only beat Guilani in New York. Who else do we think may run? Bill Frist? Jeb Bush? Arnold?
 
labrad said:
Rather has always been biased. Hell, all major newsmakers are biased. The probelm is he crossed the line of journalistic ethics.

Hell, just look at Rush Limbaugh (he ain't biased). :blink: He tells all those drug addicts to cease and desist. He even goes so far as gobbling up all the hillbilly heroin so no one else can get any. The guy is a freaking martyr. LOL.

My point is, think about what you hear and read. If it smells like ****, it is probably bullshit.
Click to expand...

Rush- lol, that's some funny ****.

I agree, ethically he crossed a big line..assuming he knew everything. I'm somewhat of a liberal, at least socially and I find this whole deal not so much embarassing for me but disappointing.

There's plenty of ammo against both candidates that one shouldn't have to lie but both parties and their respective media outlets have become so adept at the art of spin that it should shame us all into some serious ethical reform.

The media has become increasingly biased it seems (CBS/NBC) or at the very least, increasingly sensationalistic (FOX being a prime example here).

The McNeil Lehrer News Hour on PBS is about as close to the old school, data only style of reporting as you can get and even it manages to slip in some viewpoints here and there.
 
No I agree, who knows where McCain stands. He's pro-life and military but on other issues is all over the place. Hillary could only beat Guilani in New York. Who else do we think may run? Bill Frist? Jeb Bush? Arnold?
Click to expand...
I think Guilani is their best bet to win. Mitt Romney would be a good choice as well. I don't think Cheney will run.
 
The McNeil Lehrer News Hour on PBS is about as close to the old school, data only style of reporting as you can get and even it manages to slip in some viewpoints here and there.
Click to expand...
They have had their problems too. When Juanita Broadrick came forward with a rape charge against Clinton they refused to report on it. Jim Lehrer gave Clinton and anyone from his administration soft ball questions when they should have asked tough ones. They frequently have people on from liberal think tanks and don't identify them as such. They also have gay activist Richard Rodriguez frequently contribute essays( if you can call them that). PBS also got in trouble about ten years ago for giving donors names to the democratic party. They will spend more than two minutes on a story which is a good thing.
 
size said:
Read the book Bias by B. Goldberg. He worked at CBS for years with Dan Rather.
Click to expand...
That is a good book. I read it and it was a revelation. Most people do not realize how subtly they can be influenced.

Of course, there was nothing subtle about Dan Rather's behavior. I noticed in his "confession" he apologized for not checking his sources better. He neglected to mention that he had used "those sources" before. He also stated that he would have aired the show even if he did not have the (forged) documents. Since the purpose of the show was to reveal this new "evidence" (we have heard about Bush's National Guard career for years now and there was no reason for another rehash), I have a hard time believing that he would have had anything substantive to report without them.
 
Rather should be fired. How can somebody be so biased and still be considered a journalist? Are people suposed to believe him in the future? He's no better than all these other a$$hole celebrities that try to use they're fame to impose they're opinions on the general public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top