National Media Biased?

tvb · By: **tvb** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:51 pm

Critics of the media, particularly those who claim the media doesn't cover the "good news" (no matter where it is) fail to realize that viewers generally don't care about good news. There is nothing newsworthy about standing in front of a building and reporting that it didn't get blown up today or didn't catch on fire. If there was something newsworthy about it, how in the world would you choose what structurally sound building to report on?

What road is worthy of a report about? The one with a roadside bomb or the one that doesn't? Should the media report on you because you are just an all around good person or should it report on the jerk down the street commiting crimes?

Ed.A · By: **Ed.A** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:05 pm

stockingfull wrote:
Funny, I watched Mitt's religion speech (you know, the one where he said the word "Mormon" but twice) and nearly wretched as Chris Matthews fell all over himself saying how "great" and "presidential" it was.

Guess it was just more of that conservative media bias.

Holy $h!t, you are way too funny.

spc · By: **spc** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:26 pm

The Iraq story: how troops see it.

"And at the end of the 3/25's tour, a member of the Iraqi Army said: "Marines are not friends; marines are brothers,"

"It is that Iraq has touched some of these men in ways that even they have trouble explaining. This, after all, has not been a normal war. Corporals Mayer and Schuller went over not to conquer a country, but to help win its hearts and minds. In some cases, though, it won theirs."

"Iraq has given them a sense of achievement"

"This is what they wish to share with the American people - and is also the source of their frustration. Their eight months in Iraq changed their lives, and they believe it has changed the lives of the Iraqis they met as well."

How about a little more of this kind of reporting. Please read the article:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p01s02-usmi.html

tvb · By: **tvb** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:15 pm

The Iraq story: how troops see it.

Problem is the troops are not here to see it. Compounding the issue, their families aren't watching either because they can't afford to pay the cable bill.

It may suck to see it that way but teevee of every type earns money by feeding the audience what it wants and the feel good visuals about the war don't make the cut.

Ed.A · By: **Ed.A** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:42 pm

tvb wrote:
The Iraq story: how troops see it.

Problem is the troops are not here to see it. Compounding the issue, their families aren't watching either because they can't afford to pay the cable bill.

It may suck to see it that way but teevee of every type earns money by feeding the audience what it wants and the feel good visuals about the war don't make the cut.

So are saying it's pointless to bring hope and a feeling of freedom to these people? Are we so Cynical that our voice is lost to the world?

I see videos of people in shops watching TV, I see people in market places shopping. We are finally making a run for the end.

I know there is pain and suffering in Iraq and Afganistan, I can walk you through places in Africa that would make you vomit, the genocide that most ignore, places that make Iraq look like Disney World. Where the UN troops rape kids for a sandwich.

I know that it was US that brought supplies and aid to the Tusnami victims...nobody else in FORCE like WE.

We....yes WE, the USA have done more and contributed more than anyother country in the WORLD, to the poor and down trooden, yet we are looked DOWN upon?

To those that don't appreciate our kids, you can just P!$$ off.

stockingfull · By: **stockingfull** On: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:10 pm

One of our problems of national self-perception is that, because we (oh, and the Brits) liberated France, we think France somehow owes us unquestioning allegiance forever. Or Germany. Or Italy. Ooops, strike those, we didn't liberate them, we defeated them. OK, or the Phillipines.

But it doesn't work that way. We, um, "liberated" them to give them back their "liberty", which is their freedom to make their own decisions, which is what we say we are doing every time we invade someplace.

And the rest of the world may fairly question our credibility on, for example, fair elections in Russia, when our current President needed the 5 Republicans on the Supreme Court to pull a 180 on their basic judicial philosophies in order to intervene in a state election matter to award him the Presidency in 2000.

Similarly, when we treat prisoners as we did in Abu Ghraib, or gulag them at Gitmo, the world questions whether we are the paragon of virtue we like to say we are. And rightly so. So our outrage at "human rights" conditions in China, or North Korea, starts to ring rather hollow.

And when we decide to invade a country which hadn't attacked anybody since we blew them out of Kuwait, how can we be surprised when Germany says they don't want to participate? Can we fault them for remembering what happened to them the last time they started invading countries which hadn't attacked them?

You see, we're not as virtuous as we sometimes like to think. And there is no more important function of the press than reminding us of that. Because it gives us the very important choice of getting back on the path or deciding that we're more concerned with efficiency, that we no longer care to be the nation of higher principle, of virtue, that we're content with being no more ethical than the rest.

spc · By: **spc** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:38 am

stockingfull wrote:One of our problems of national self-perception is that, because we (oh, and the Brits) liberated France, we think France somehow owes us unquestioning allegiance forever.

Yes they do.

coalkirk · By: **coalkirk** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:50 am

We liberated them twice if you'll recall. Once I'll say was payback for their help in the American Revolution. The second time, they owe us.

coalkirk · By: **coalkirk** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:55 am

More to the topic of this thread. The type of people who tend to go into journalism as well as academia tend to be liberal in general. So their personal biases do understandably come through in their reporting. Are there some conservative journalists? Sure. But not on the evening news on network TV.

Devil505 · By: **Devil505** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:17 am

coalkirk wrote:More to the topic of this thread. The type of people who tend to go into journalism as well as academia tend to be liberal in general. So their personal biases do understandably come through in their reporting. Are there some conservative journalists? Sure. But not on the evening news on network TV.

Good morning Coalkirk,

I would refer you to the long list of conservative journalists/spokesmen seen every day & night on the national media, at all hours, that I posted at the begining of this thread. Again, my point is arguing against those who feel that only liberal views are represented on the national media & that this belief is demostrably wrong.

coalkirk · By: **coalkirk** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:25 am

Good morning. I think the disconnect is in distingusihing between what is considered "mainstream media", the ABC's, NBC and CBS evening news and the 24 hour cable news outlets. Other than that I think we agree.

stockingfull · By: **stockingfull** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:32 am

coalkirk wrote:We liberated them twice if you'll recall. Once I'll say was payback for their help in the American Revolution. The second time, they owe us.

Sorry, but no matter how many times it happens, "liberate" means to restore someone's freedom, not to merely transfer them from Germany's slave to our perpetual "yes man." Freedom necessarily implies the right to disagree.

Once again, the media are there to remind us when we aren't following our own principles.

Devil505 · By: **Devil505** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:33 am

coalkirk wrote:Good morning. I think the disconnect is in distingusihing between what is considered "mainstream media", the ABC's, NBC and CBS evening news and the 24 hour cable news outlets. Other than that I think we agree.

I think the old networks, NBC,CBS & ABC are fast becoming dinasuars(sp) in terms of the number of viewers for news each night.(Just look at who their ads are aimed at.......the elderly, sick & inferm!!.....they will al be dead soon!!....cruel but accurate) Cable is taking over & there are as many varying opinions (available to be viewed on cable )as there are views.

coalkirk · By: **coalkirk** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:57 am

stockingfull wrote:
coalkirk wrote:We liberated them twice if you'll recall. Once I'll say was payback for their help in the American Revolution. The second time, they owe us.

Sorry, but no matter how many times it happens, "liberate" means to restore someone's freedom, not to merely transfer them from Germany's slave to our perpetual "yes man." Freedom necessarily implies the right to disagree.

Once again, the media are there to remind us when we aren't following our own principles.

If there were more people around like you during wwII, we'd all be goosestepping now. Thank god there were men and women who understood evil and conflict and had the balls to face it head on.

Devil505 · By: **Devil505** On: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:36 am

[quote="spc"]The Iraq story: how troops see it.

I said I wasn't going to do this but I guess I can accept your statement that you are really a nice guy...& seeing as I am trying to be less confrontational, let's try this:

Do you feel you have the authority/right to speak for all troops who have or are serving in Iraq?
(a bit presumptuous, dont you think?)

National Media Biased?

Which way do they go?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?

Re: National Media Biased?