interesting what a few months in office does to you;

See??? I told you lots of folks believed this ********.

And surprise, surprise, surprise, the two most outspoken of those believers are right wing.

Big shocker there.

The fact remains, the media in this country is, compared to other democracies in the world, right of center. And the media in this country is, by and large, owned by conservatives. And owning something, when the rubber meets the road, determines too often what gets "broadcast" and what doesn't. Much like many corporations workers may lean more democratic than it's ownership, the corporation itself is steered by ownership and management, not by its workers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

The fact remains, the media in this country is, compared to other democracies in the world, right of center. And the media in this country is, by and large, owned by conservatives. And owning something, when the rubber meets the road, determines too often what gets "broadcast" and what doesn't. Much like many corporations workers may lean more democratic than it's ownership, the corporation itself is steered by ownership and management, not by its workers.

---

I don't really think you know how it works. Just because you own it doesn't mean you control all of the say...there is a reason that those in power delegate...and when you delegate...this is what happens. when 80 percent of those that are working for a newspaper or program like NBC cable are liberal (or progressive) what they write and report is likely going to have some level of bias on it.

I'm pretty sure you got owned on this one OFG. the media outlets are liberal, just because you say it isn't doesn't mean it isn't. we are at least giving some hint of proof that it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

See??? I told you lots of folks believed this ********.

And surprise, surprise, surprise, the two most outspoken of those believers are right wing.

Big shocker there.

---

and we are the only two that have had time today to respond...no one else has had a chance to state an opinion....

It seems that most people working in media would be liberal. College (liberal arts, English, literature, journalism, etc) + desire to uncover truths and stand up for the little guy...defend the rights and such. (the people in my English and Lit classes tended to be liberal-minded; conservatives were more readily found in business admin, math or sciences, or in the frathouses.) The only media majority that would probably lean conservative would be editorial writers or talking heads, or radio "personalities" - and of course owners, as OFG pointed out. Owners like Fox make their presence extremely visible in how far outside the norm they push their programming; but others are much less authoritarian.

Now, is that so evident in how the media is handled? I don't know - I've given up on TV news, because it's going for ratings, dollars, etc. I don't do newspapers. I do NPR, and NPR makes such a huge effort to be balanced on EVERY story, that it all but eliminates the idea of bias. The anchors and reporters might ask questions that paint them as liberal, which might bother some; but overall each story manages to represent both sides as fairly as possible. No one shouts over each other, or gets pissed and turns off a mic, or harshly interrogates an ideological enemy.

There are really only two possibilities:
1) Liberals don't see the media as 'liberal' because, like me, we assume the average american is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, race, environmental issues, etc. We also assume the average american is not too well off, and is more concerned about food and bills than tax evasion and immigration. So 'liberal' labels, to us, should really mean 'normal'. But we react negatively because we don't even understand the accusations.
2) Conservatives see the normal outlook to be so far skewed from their point of view, that they have no choice but to label it all 'liberal'. t them, Fox News is still extreme, of course; but everything else seems so out of line with their personal way of thinking, that it truthfully does appear liberal, in relation to their mindset. It's like if there was one guy living in a shack in West Virginia for the last 50 years who was against interracial marraige, civil rights, and everything else fom the 1950s-60s suddenly came out and watched tv; he'd assume those news outlets were tremendously liberal and just wacky as heck, when in reality he's just in the 100th percentile of conservatism.

Maybe individual reporters having an internal morality skewed towards liberal ideals makes it appear as though the country leans in one direction 70 or 80%, when in reality its more like 50/50. Or, maybe conservatives demand equal representation and try to make it look like 50/50 by being louder and more extreme (Rush, Faux News, Coulture, O'Reilly, that nutjob Glen Beck) when it's really more like 70/30. That's what I tend to think.

It is best summed up by Stephen Colbert: "Reality has a well-known liberal bias." :)

If you want to avoid media bias, go with NPR or your own research and reading, or a balance of all sources like Jeffy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

the corporation itself is steered by ownership and management, not by its workers.

---

and that couldn't be a bigger chunk of ******** if I have ever seen it. companies are ran by the people.....owners simply control the funds and direction...but by and large they are ran by the people.

Oh and Jeffy - your work #, name and email are pasted in above - might want to edit those out to avoid spam and what-not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alloutwar

It seems that most people working in media would be liberal. College (liberal arts, English, literature, journalism, etc) + desire to uncover truths and stand up for the little guy...defend the rights and such. (the people in my English and Lit classes tended to be liberal-minded; conservatives were more readily found in business admin, math or sciences, or in the frathouses.) The only media majority that would probably lean conservative would be editorial writers or talking heads, or radio "personalities" - and of course owners, as OFG pointed out. Owners like Fox make their presence extremely visible in how far outside the norm they push their programming; but others are much less authoritarian.

Now, is that so evident in how the media is handled? I don't know - I've given up on TV news, because it's going for ratings, dollars, etc. I don't do newspapers. I do NPR, and NPR makes such a huge effort to be balanced on EVERY story, that it all but eliminates the idea of bias. The anchors and reporters might ask questions that paint them as liberal, which might bother some; but overall each story manages to represent both sides as fairly as possible. No one shouts over each other, or gets pissed and turns off a mic, or harshly interrogates an ideological enemy.

There are really only two possibilities:
1) Liberals don't see the media as 'liberal' because, like me, we assume the average american is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, race, environmental issues, etc. We also assume the average american is not too well off, and is more concerned about food and bills than tax evasion and immigration. So 'liberal' labels, to us, should really mean 'normal'. But we react negatively because we don't even understand the accusations.
2) Conservatives see the normal outlook to be so far skewed from their point of view, that they have no choice but to label it all 'liberal'. t them, Fox News is still extreme, of course; but everything else seems so out of line with their personal way of thinking, that it truthfully does appear liberal, in relation to their mindset. It's like if there was one guy living in a shack in West Virginia for the last 50 years who was against interracial marraige, civil rights, and everything else fom the 1950s-60s suddenly came out and watched tv; he'd assume those news outlets were tremendously liberal and just wacky as heck, when in reality he's just in the 100th percentile of conservatism.

Maybe individual reporters having an internal morality skewed towards liberal ideals makes it appear as though the country leans in one direction 70 or 80%, when in reality its more like 50/50. Or, maybe conservatives demand equal representation and try to make it look like 50/50 by being louder and more extreme (Rush, Faux News, Coulture, O'Reilly, that nutjob Glen Beck) when it's really more like 70/30. That's what I tend to think.

It is best summed up by Stephen Colbert: "Reality has a well-known liberal bias." :)

If you want to avoid media bias, go with NPR or your own research and reading, or a balance of all sources like Jeffy.

---

Just so you know, the right does consider NPR to be the most liberal. No, I'm not making that up. They claim CNN is (Clinton's New's Network) liberal, when that is so laughable I could choke, but they really insist, at least the ones I've talked to here in the rural area of No. Va, that NPR is ultra liberal, further even than (gasp!) CNN.

And it's all a bunch of crap. A bunch of crap believed by a bunch of people. But a bunch of people also believe in "creationism" and "intelligent design" and in an invisible man in the sky too, so just because a bunch of people believe it doesn't make it so, even if it's a majority.

Thank you AOW. and I think you hit the nail on the head really well. And no, NPR isn't slanted very liberally. when I worked in radio I learned that first hand...but i sort of have deviated and forgotten about it....you are right on. Thank you.

and by saying it isn't liberally slanted, is me saying I didn't view it as liberally slanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Just so you know, the right does consider NPR to be the most liberal. No, I'm not making that up. They claim CNN is (Clinton's New's Network) liberal, when that is so laughable I could choke, but they really insist, at least the ones I've talked to here in the rural area of No. Va, that NPR is ultra liberal, further even than (gasp!) CNN.

And it's all a bunch of crap. A bunch of crap believed by a bunch of people. But a bunch of people also believe in "creationism" and "intelligent design" and in an invisible man in the sky too, so just because a bunch of people believe it doesn't make it so, even if it's a majority.

---

well on your last paragraph...those possiblities still exist so deeming anyone neive for believing in those thoughts then you are just instigating a fight with someone. I don't, but I respect those that do and do not deem them morons.

CNN is very liberal...and fox is very conservative...whether you agree or disagree they simply are...even liberals agree to both points....all i see is you simply not being one of them that sees it.

Sorry OFG, I think you're a bit off the mark on this one.
News organizations are run by their editorial staff a lot more then the ownership.

I know where you're trying to go AOW, but these comments are part of the issue that muddy's the water;

Quote:

---

It seems that most people working in media would be liberal. College (liberal arts, English, literature, journalism, etc) + desire to uncover truths and stand up for the little guy...defend the rights and such.

---

Quote:

---

1) Liberals don't see the media as 'liberal' because, like me, we assume the average american is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, race, environmental issues, etc. We also assume the average american is not too well off, and is more concerned about food and bills than tax evasion and immigration. So 'liberal' labels, to us, should really mean 'normal'. But we react negatively because we don't even understand the accusations.

---

Must be because conservatives don't care about the little guy?

Must be because conservatives are all rich business owners. Why is it that conservatives are all clumped into the rich business owners and the vast majority of rural America is forgotten? Outside of the large cities, much of the country is red, and much of that country lives with poverty as well.

I think AOW hit it really well on the head. He seems to understand both sides pretty well and why we both see the other as an idiot. I give win to AOW for being a good mediator in the middle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Must be because conservatives are all rich business owners. Why is it that conservatives are all clumped into the rich business owners and the vast majority of rural America is forgotten? Outside of the large cities, much of the country is red, and much of that country lives with poverty as well.

---

kind of funny, because when Alyssa asked me when we first met...she was like, why are you so conservative? you aren't rich.....

haha as though you have to be rich for conservatism to make sense to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

kind of funny, because when Alyssa asked me when we first met...she was like, why are you so conservative? you aren't rich.....

haha as though you have to be rich for conservatism to make sense to you.

---

i really hate that. Democrats have put a staple on "the poor" as theirs, and label republicans as rich fat cats yet in the same breath call us dumb red necks and make light of the poor lifestyle we choose and our lack of education. Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

Yah, same here - when I was growing up, everyone that I ever met that was a conservative was white, old, relatively rich (or business owner), religious background, AND no college education. When I was 23 I finally met a college graduate, my age, that swung far to the right. I was so shocked. "Didn't you go to college?" I asked, incredulous. Turns out she was raised overseas by her religious missionary parents. Her husband (also conservative) was a young mortgage business hotshot who tried to screw me on a bad deal that would have gotten him a nice cut. So now I had to add in, 'raised religious and/or want to screw you over to profit themselves'. :) j/k

Anyway - my preconceptions seem silly now - people can be conservative based on their upbringing, or any other element of their background, outside of race or economic status. Upbringing can be the thing that sways kids growing up, like parent's outlook, religious status, or even the area and customs of where they grow up. Or the kid can sort of remain neutral and figure things out for themselves later, in college or when they decide to become politically active. Anything can happen.

I know a guy from Louisiana - solid dude, reliable and friendly and just about a good a guy as you can imagine - who has been and always will be staunch conservative. He was just raised in Louisiana; that's how things are there. I was 90% likely to come out of Massachusetts liberal, and he was 90% likely to come out of Louisiana conservative. Not everyone in Louisiana is raised religious, or rich business owners, or high-school-or-less education. And there are plenty of dumb jerk schmucks in Mass that lean liberal. Neither side has a monopoly on intellect, or wealth really (as shown by the rich Dems that run for office or give monetary support).

I realize now that that's the same stereotype that exists on the other side - "A Conservative is a Liberal that has been mugged," my father used to say. It always seemed like a stupid statement - something bad happens to you, and you lose your idealism about life/society and become conservative? I've been robbed, and it took a toll, but didn't shake my core beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alloutwar

"A Conservative is a Liberal that has been mugged," my father used to say. It always seemed like a stupid statement - something bad happens to you, and you lose your idealism about life/society and become conservative? I've been robbed, and it took a toll, but didn't shake my core beliefs.

---

funny, my dad always told me "a conservative is a liberal who grew up."

Just funny....

and to edit....AOW at least you have a firm knowledge and understanding and back it up with your support....you are the type of liberal that I like. You understand what you believe, why you believe it, and you understand the other side...but still hold your beliefs....very respectable.

I'd also like to point out that Conservatism/Liberalism are relative labels. All that being Conservative means is that you largely support the traditional status quo, whatever that may be. All that being Liberal means is that you want to somehow change the traditional views.

Build a time machine to the 1800's and suddenly we're all super Liberal hippy freaks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

Build a time machine to the 1800's and suddenly we're all super Liberal hippy freaks.

---

****

Quote:

---

Joe Scarborough: “Is there a liberal bias in the media or is the bias towards getting the story first and getting the highest ratings, therefore, making the most money?”
Former ABC 20/20 anchor Hugh Downs: “Well, I think the latter, by far. And, of course, when the word ‘liberal’ came to be a pejorative word, you began to wonder, you have to say that the press doesn’t want to be thought of as merely liberal. But people tend to be more liberated in their thought when they are closer to events and know a little more about what the background of what’s happening. So, I suppose, in that respect, there is a liberal, if you want to call it a bias. The press is a little more in touch with what’s happening.”
— MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, January 10, 2005.

---

He's saying "liberal" as in "free thinking", as he states, so, is that somehow a bad thing? To have a bias towards free thought?

Quote:

---

“Most members of the establishment media live in Washington and New York. Most of them don’t drive pickup trucks, most of them don’t have guns, most of them don’t go to NASCAR, and every day we’re not out in areas that care about those things and deal with those things as part of their daily lives, we are out of touch with a lot of America and with a lot of America that supports George W. Bush.”
— ABC News Political Director Mark Halperin during live television coverage immediately before John Kerry’s concession speech on November 3, 2004.

---

How many rich conservative corporate businessmen are in touch with that segment of America? :confused: Yeah, George Bush, grew up in a family of wealth, attended Yale University, had a lot of stuff handed to him by his dad...yeah, he's really in touch with the average mid-Western farmer. :rolleyes:

Now, there's no doubt that there are media outlets that ARE liberally biased, but it's equally true that there are media outlets that are biased the other way. I think it's false to state that the media is completely controlled by liberals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

I sent my dad an email this morning:

Are you kidding? Over 80 per cent of working journalists, when asked of their political leanings, say they consider themselves liberal or progressive. That happens for many reasons...especially college and j-school profs who are traditionally liberal. Most media ownership is conservative.

---

Well, I heard a reference to a survey yesterday that said that only 20% of Americans now identify themselves as Republican. So, I mean, if the country isn't evenly split, why would the media be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alloutwar

It seems that most people working in media would be liberal. College (liberal arts, English, literature, journalism, etc) + desire to uncover truths and stand up for the little guy...defend the rights and such. (the people in my English and Lit classes tended to be liberal-minded; conservatives were more readily found in business admin, math or sciences, or in the frathouses.) The only media majority that would probably lean conservative would be editorial writers or talking heads, or radio "personalities" - and of course owners, as OFG pointed out. Owners like Fox make their presence extremely visible in how far outside the norm they push their programming; but others are much less authoritarian.

...etc

---

Just wanted to say that this was an excellent post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

and that couldn't be a bigger chunk of ******** if I have ever seen it. companies are ran by the people.....owners simply control the funds and direction...but by and large they are ran by the people.

---

I guess this depends entirely on what companies you're referring to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

well on your last paragraph...those possiblities still exist so deeming anyone neive for believing in those thoughts then you are just instigating a fight with someone. I don't, but I respect those that do and do not deem them morons.

---

I'll agree that believing in creationism doesn't make one moronic. I will call you a ***** if you insist that evolution does not exist, even though it's perfectly compatible with the idea of creationism. To quote Bill Maher, and yes, i know, liberal, ho ho ho, and half of this is for comedic effect, but nonetheless:

Quote:

---

nd finally, New Rule: Since viruses, like swine flu, get to be potentially deadly because they "evolved," if you don't believe in evolution and you get it, you have to pray it away.

You can't crap all over Darwin and stem cell research and global warming and then come crawling back to science when you want Tamiflu. That's for us sinners.

A recent Zogby phone poll found that 78% of Americans favor teaching evidence for and against Darwin's theory; 43% also believe the pollster asking the question was in fact a tiny man living inside the phone.

Now, last week I spoke about Governor Rick Perry of Texas, who mentioned secession as an option for dealing with Obama's big government. But, now with swine flu from Mexico coming at him, suddenly the idea of being all alone on the border isn't quite so romantic, is it?

Yes, Governor Perry hates two things: government and science. He appointed a creationist to head the Texas Board of Education. Which is shocking. Texas has a board of education?! And now he wants 37,000 courses of antiviral flu medicine. Sorry, Rick, we're all out. But, we do have 37,000 tea bags. Will that help?

You know, is it too much to ask for a little consistency? When I get sick, you don't see me begging Jimmy Swaggart to put in a word to Jesus about my gout. I go to the doctor like a normal person, and then I sell the left over pills to Rush Limbaugh.

Folks, there is a lot that isn't known yet about this swine flu, but there is one thing that we do know: the process that brought us the new flu is called evolution. It's not rocket science, but it is science. A virus is Darwinian behavior we can see in real time. We can see that it jumps on a host, procreates until the host is exhausted and then jumps on something new. Like Mel Gibson.

Or think of it this way: viruses are like the free market. You adapt to survive or you die. I mean, except for Citibank and AIG and Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, General Motors, Bear Stearns... Okay, bad example. They're nothing like the free market.

And, by the way, intelligence-challenged members of the mainstream media, creationism and Darwinism are not "opposing but equally legitimate theories" to be treated as such. This flu virus didn't make the leap from pigs to humans because God felt like f*cking with Mexicans. It happened because, like I said, viruses adapt to survive. Just like all other organisms on Planet Earth. With the possible exception of the Republican National Committee.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

I'd also like to point out that Conservatism/Liberalism are relative labels. All that being Conservative means is that you largely support the traditional status quo, whatever that may be. All that being Liberal means is that you want to somehow change the traditional views.

Build a time machine to the 1800's and suddenly we're all super Liberal hippy freaks.

---

Yep. True. And things are rarely ever black and white, as well. Very few people are fully "conservative" or fully "liberal." (Just, as an example, many would consider me "liberal"...yet I don't want to ban guns. I hate the liberal political correctness that exists. etc.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

The fact remains, the media in this country is, compared to other democracies in the world, right of center.

---

.

I would like to see somebody dispute that.

I am replying to fili's quote that was in absurdly large font:

fili and OFG.

no one even argued about other countries media. OFG got pissy when I said that the media glorifies Obama...or did so pre-election...and then I responded with quite a bit of evidence that this is so....no one said our media wasn't more or less liberal then other countries....so what the hell is the point of your statement? no one challenged, so your statement is quite moot to make.

It's amazing how far off topic you guys can take this....this was about Obama and gunatanmo...then it was about campaign promises, then it was about liberals vs conservatives...and now it's about how liberal the media is.....it's amazing how people will pick out parts of a statement they don't agree with and find it necessary to argue it until they are hoarse or can't type anymore....it's errnoeoius (god i wish I could spell).

Media is liberal...not just because us conservatives say so...it is...majority of those that write for the media ARE liberal...and their views tend to become reflected in their writings.

Obama backed out on a campagin promise after he found out more information...good for him. maybe he will learn the lesson to not preach before he knows information.

conservatives were raised with different view points then liberals...big ****ing whoppedie doo.

any points i am missing? any other reason to continue a senseless debate where ofg and fili feel like beaten animals backed into a corner where they need to lash out and yell that they are right? no one is attacking you guys....so let it go

The point is, as ohms pointed out, is that it is relative. The U.S. media is "liberal" according to what? According to the world as a whole, it's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Media is liberal...not just because us conservatives say so...it is...majority of those that write for the media ARE liberal...and their views tend to become reflected in their writings.

any points i am missing?

---

Yes. Major points. What does liberal and conservative mean? It has to be in relation to something.

If you brand something 'liberal', liberal according to what? To you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

I am replying to fili's quote that was in absurdly large font:

fili and OFG.

no one even argued about other countries media. OFG got pissy when I said that the media glorifies Obama...or did so pre-election...and then I responded with quite a bit of evidence that this is so....no one said our media wasn't more or less liberal then other countries....so what the hell is the point of your statement? no one challenged, so your statement is quite moot to make.

It's amazing how far off topic you guys can take this....this was about Obama and gunatanmo...then it was about campaign promises, then it was about liberals vs conservatives...and now it's about how liberal the media is.....it's amazing how people will pick out parts of a statement they don't agree with and find it necessary to argue it until they are hoarse or can't type anymore....it's errnoeoius (god i wish I could spell).

Media is liberal...not just because us conservatives say so...it is...majority of those that write for the media ARE liberal...and their views tend to become reflected in their writings.

Obama backed out on a campagin promise after he found out more information...good for him. maybe he will learn the lesson to not preach before he knows information.

conservatives were raised with different view points then liberals...big ****ing whoppedie doo.

any points i am missing? any other reason to continue a senseless debate where ofg and fili feel like beaten animals backed into a corner where they need to lash out and yell that they are right? no one is attacking you guys....so let it go

---

WTF???

Seriously, WTF are you talking about?

Evidence??? Because your Dad says it so, that makes it so??

And I feel like a beaten animal backed into a corner??? How the hell are you garnering that from me pointing out the ******** of the claims of a liberal media??? Because it is ******** you know.

Hmmm, maybe it's questioning your undying right wing beliefs that's got you feeling backed into a corner??? I dunno, but then again, I have no fricken clue where this post came from either.

EDIT: Here is an explanation from Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) that explains it pretty well. While I'm sure you'll scream FAIR is left oriented, I honestly haven't heard that one before.

If you were so inclined, I'd recommend reading more of their website as it pertains to WHY the media has gotten the way it's gotten (too much power in too few hands, to break it down, and I agree), and it also explains away the "myth" of CNN being liberal, which is, considering the original founder, so laughable it can make me choke. I still remember CNN calling those protesting the war "anti-war protestors" while those protesting on the other side were gathering together "in support of the troops". If that's not a right wing slant on the news, then obviously reality must have liberal bias. But you won't like it's take on Faux News. Because it calls it what it is, pretty much a right-wing, Republican propaganda machine. So, I'm sure that "conclusion" will make some feel FAIR is obviously left wing. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Given that most media outlets are owned by for-profit corporations and are funded by corporate advertising, it is not surprising that they seldom provide a full range of debate. The right edge of discussion is usually represented by a committed supporter of right-wing causes, someone who calls for significantly changing the status quo in a conservative direction. The left edge, by contrast, is often represented by an establishment-oriented centrist who supports maintaining the status quo;

---

That sums up the media in this country. Completely right of center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

but then again, I have no fricken clue where this post came from either.

---

I had the same initial thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

WTF???

Seriously, WTF are you talking about?

Evidence??? Because your Dad says it so, that makes it so??

And I feel like a beaten animal backed into a corner??? How the hell are you garnering that from me pointing out the ******** of the claims of a liberal media??? Because it is ******** you know.

Hmmm, maybe it's questioning your undying right wing beliefs that's got you feeling backed into a corner??? I dunno, but then again, I have no fricken clue where this post came from either.

---

who knows? he may have been refering to the numerous studies I cited in the wikipedia link?

Huh? I don't see in what way you can get that jeffy was referring to anything you said.

The point remains, the U.S. media is liberal according to what?

Furthermore, as I said, like it or not, most Americans are "liberal" (20% currently identify themselves as Republicans, according to a study I heard referred to multiple times in the last few days), so one would expect the media, ran by Americans, to therefore be mostly "liberal."

dickay is referring to his post with links/quotes: http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showpos...4&postcount=38

to be fair, OFG was asking what evidence Jeffy had provided. I think?

either way - everyone, lets hold hands and breathe, no reason to get hot and upset at this point. We were doing so good!

Results:
1) we have explored why right-wingers thing the media is biased, and why left-wingers don't see this. We're getting good on that.
2) we have provided examples why individual media people - reporters, etc - might be liberal minded. This doesn't seem to be unacceptable.
3) we have said that the right wing may feel that it should be fairly represented, but 50/50 might not be accurate when the country is more like 60/40, or even 70/30. Hence the negative feelnigs about media bias, and need to overcompensate with ridiculous wingnuts.
4) we have questioned that our media, overall, is right of center when in the world view (read: other democracies). This appears to gel with what the forum members know of the rest of the world.

Food for thought! Lots of it! eat up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alloutwar

either way - everyone, lets hold hands and breathe, no reason to get hot and upset at this point. We were doing so good!

---

http://www.clayz.com/kumbaya.gif

Kumbaya my lord

lol, nice

:confused:
I don't get it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

:confused:
I don't get it...

---

.

Quote:

---

"Kumbaya" (also spelled Kum Ba Yah) is a spiritual song from the 1930s. It enjoyed newfound popularity during the folk revival of the 1960s and became a standard campfire song in Scouting and other nature-appreciative organizations.
The song was originally associated with human and spiritual unity, closeness and compassion, and it still is,

---

Right, but... what's with the four dots in the circle (?) thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

Right, but... what's with the four dots in the circle (?) thing?

---

That's how you play it on the recorder. I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

WTF???

Seriously, WTF are you talking about?

Evidence??? Because your Dad says it so, that makes it so??

And I feel like a beaten animal backed into a corner??? How the hell are you garnering that from me pointing out the ******** of the claims of a liberal media??? Because it is ******** you know.

Hmmm, maybe it's questioning your undying right wing beliefs that's got you feeling backed into a corner??? I dunno, but then again, I have no fricken clue where this post came from either.

EDIT: Here is an explanation from Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) that explains it pretty well. While I'm sure you'll scream FAIR is left oriented, I honestly haven't heard that one before.

If you were so inclined, I'd recommend reading more of their website as it pertains to WHY the media has gotten the way it's gotten (too much power in too few hands, to break it down, and I agree), and it also explains away the "myth" of CNN being liberal, which is, considering the original founder, so laughable it can make me choke. I still remember CNN calling those protesting the war "anti-war protestors" while those protesting on the other side were gathering together "in support of the troops". If that's not a right wing slant on the news, then obviously reality must have liberal bias. But you won't like it's take on Faux News. Because it calls it what it is, pretty much a right-wing, Republican propaganda machine. So, I'm sure that "conclusion" will make some feel FAIR is obviously left wing. :rolleyes:



That sums up the media in this country. Completely right of center.

---

well i don't have much time to reply...i am on my way out the door for tonight's cardinal game.....but...

this came from the constant turning of debates....I made a point....along with a lot of others....and one of those was the media glorifying Obama....and (i forgot who) fili or you replied to it and went off of our topic...and now the last two pages have been about that new debate. you can't just pick one sentence and go completely off topic and change it to a debate you would rather have.

Evidence...i have stated plenty...i would, however, say my father would be a reilable resource for such a point...owning a good chunk of the national media via print would make him a good reference...can anyone disagree to that?

Throwing explitives has never helped in a debate...just shows that you argue with emotion, not with objectiveness...note the number of astricks in your comments....the media is fairly liberal in America....not necessarily in coordination to other countries...but no one was making that point..

I am saying liberal as referring to a democratic mindset...as many liberals tend to be (note: not all liberals are democratic...i realize that...it's simply a point...don't like it, sorry)

you are the only one that keeps calling me far right wing...if you actually knew my political beliefs you would stop beating that horse....i TEND to vote republican...but I am pro gay rights, anti capital punishment and so on...I don't (as you previously stated in another thread) vote simply because of the D and the R.

and past your edit point.....i think AOW has already stated how CNN can be liberally slanted in the eyes of someone like me...just like how you can see Fox news as conservative. even a fellow liberal has made a point that you are fighting against.

Liberal to the point of what I see...not in coordination of other countries....not in coordination to just being democratic....but our newsources and media groups tend to be staffed by predominatly democratic voters....I would say that is a pretty fair assesment...and if you don't think they ever write with their political agendas at heart...then you are just pissing into the wind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

well i don't have much time to reply...i am on my way out the door for tonight's cardinal game.....but...

this came from the constant turning of debates....I made a point....along with a lot of others....and one of those was the media glorifying Obama....and (i forgot who) fili or you replied to it and went off of our topic...and now the last two pages have been about that new debate. you can't just pick one sentence and go completely off topic and change it to a debate you would rather have.

Evidence...i have stated plenty...i would, however, say my father would be a reilable resource for such a point...owning a good chunk of the national media via print would make him a good reference...can anyone disagree to that?

Throwing explitives has never helped in a debate...just shows that you argue with emotion, not with objectiveness...note the number of astricks in your comments....the media is fairly liberal in America....not necessarily in coordination to other countries...but no one was making that point..

I am saying liberal as referring to a democratic mindset...as many liberals tend to be (note: not all liberals are democratic...i realize that...it's simply a point...don't like it, sorry)

you are the only one that keeps calling me far right wing...if you actually knew my political beliefs you would stop beating that horse....i TEND to vote republican...but I am pro gay rights, anti capital punishment and so on...I don't (as you previously stated in another thread) vote simply because of the D and the R.

and past your edit point.....i think AOW has already stated how CNN can be liberally slanted in the eyes of someone like me...just like how you can see Fox news as conservative. even a fellow liberal has made a point that you are fighting against.

Liberal to the point of what I see...not in coordination of other countries....not in coordination to just being democratic....but our newsources and media groups tend to be staffed by predominatly democratic voters....I would say that is a pretty fair assesment...and if you don't think they ever write with their political agendas at heart...then you are just pissing into the wind.

---

very well articulated. point set match..check mate.....at least thats they I view it through my conservative prism :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

this came from the constant turning of debates....I made a point....along with a lot of others....and one of those was the media glorifying Obama....and (i forgot who) fili or you replied to it and went off of our topic...and now the last two pages have been about that new debate. you can't just pick one sentence and go completely off topic and change it to a debate you would rather have.

---

This happens in a pretty good amount of threads (and is not necessarily a bad thing, so long as it is is something which grows out of the main topic and isn't completely irrelevant).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

the media is fairly liberal in America....not necessarily in coordination to other countries...but no one was making that point..

---

That's what we're asking. Liberal according to what standard? Liberal = Democrat? Okay, there's a starting point. And, again, I refer to that poll that found that 20% of Americans currently identify as Republicans. Given that, it's only natural that the majority of journalists identify as non-Republican.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

and past your edit point.....i think AOW has already stated how CNN can be liberally slanted in the eyes of someone like me...just like how you can see Fox news as conservative. even a fellow liberal has made a point that you are fighting against.

---

I don't watch much CNN, but I've never noticed any liberal slant from what I have seen. On the other hand, I think that anybody that watches Fox News for 5 minutes should be able to see their heavy conservative bent, except if you're completely blinded by it that you think it's "fair and balanced" just because it agrees with everything you've said.

Quote:

---

That's what we're asking. Liberal according to what standard? Liberal = Democrat? Okay, there's a starting point. And, again, I refer to that poll that found that 20% of Americans currently identify as Republicans. Given that, it's only natural that the majority of journalists identify as non-Republican.

---

I question your poll, but whatever :rolleyes:

anyway, if you want to live on the presumption that the poll is accurate, as it appears you do since you've sighted it as fact nearly 3-5 times already, than you apparently could answer the question since you posted this;

Quote:

---

Furthermore, as I said, like it or not, most Americans are "liberal" (20% currently identify themselves as Republicans, according to a study I heard referred to multiple times in the last few days), so one would expect the media, ran by Americans, to therefore be mostly "liberal."

---

So apparently you agree the media here is liberal slanted. Why don't you then define compared to what for us?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

I question your poll, but whatever :rolleyes:

---

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp...rinkinggop.jpg

I over-stated when I said most are "liberal." More Americans consider themselves independent than Dem/Rep.

42% lean (or are) Democrat (30% are, 12% lean)
31% lean (or are) Republican (20% are, 11% lean)
19% strictly independent
8% Other/Not Sure

Quote:

---

So apparently you agree the media here is liberal slanted. Why don't you then define compared to what for us?:rolleyes:

---

I suggest you re-read what you yourself quoted, because it states it right in there (and it wasn't my definition, but rather Jeffy's).