National Media Biased?

In case you issed my earlier question spc, I'll ask again:






1. Which Fox News anchors would you identify as "Lefty?"
2. Isn't Fox News on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?


So, if you want, you could keep your TV tuned & locked onto Fox & your radio tuned to Rush & Sean & live happily ever after.

What's the problem??

Devil5052 wrote:In case you issed my earlier question spc, I'll ask again:
1. Which Fox News anchors would you identify as "Lefty?"
2. Isn't Fox News on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?


So, if you want, you could keep your TV tuned & locked onto Fox & your radio tuned to Rush & Sean & live happily ever after.

What's the problem??

Brit Hume is the anchor for fox news. All the other broadcasting is more of host's with guests. They always have someone on the left & someone on the right when debating issues.

1.Are you asking me what hosts are left leaning?
Allen Colmes
Greta Van Susteren

2. Yes it is.

Your last statement shows that you agree with me. I can only watch fox news, you can watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC & read NYT, LAT, Wash Post, AP, NPR & on & on........

Do you realize how dangerous media bias is? Most people get their news from the 3 major networks & big newspapers that all lean left. People think what they say & publish is gospel.

Like I said just be thankful & move on.

[quote="spc"][ Brit Hume is the anchor for fox news. Is Brit Hume a "Lefty?" All the other broadcasting is more of host's with guests. They always have someone on the left & someone on the right when debating issues.

1.Are you asking me what hosts are left leaning? I was asking about news anchors, not personalities or hosts.
Allen Colmes
Greta Van Susteren

2. Yes it is.

Do you realize how dangerous media bias is? Most people get their news from the 3 major networks & big newspapers that all lean left. ...LOL......Now I'll ask you for some proof, (from an unbiased source....ie not Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity)as to where you get that drivel from? I think most people get alot of news from various cable networks (Iincluding Fox) & various newspapers (including conservative papers like The Walll Street Journal) & from talk radio which is almost all consrvative.
The main point here is that "The Media" is always painted as this left wing monolith that makes it almost impossible for the average American to get conservative views, & that's just plain hogwash!

Cavuto is kind of a mixed bag. Con on economic policy, seems more lib/moderate on the social stuff. Greta is a lib host. Shep is center-left, hosts and anchors at times. Geraldo, host not anchor, lefty. Wiel is lefty, though I don't think she hosts anything there anymore. Many left commentators. Chris Wallace, I still can't get a read on him. Pretty even keel (I'd put Tim Russert in the same category, though he does let some center-left show through now and again). Every once in a while Bret Baier (sp?) will sub-anchor for Brit, so does Brian Wilson, who are both pretty even handed (I'd peg Bret as center-right and Brian as center-left).

And while FNC is 24/7, so is CNN, MSNBC (well, they cut off in late night), AP, Reuters, websites for NYT, WaPo and many other papers, various high popularity blogs and news aggregator sites, etc. If, and I stress if, FNC is a conservative network, they are still a relative lone voice in the wilderness of center-left TV news and commentary.

AM Radio is a local news, sports, and conservative talk medium. There have been many attempts by lib radio to make inroads and they simply haven't succeeded. They've been well funded, had high profile hosts, etc. and they still go down in flames. This is the listenership and the market for AM radio at work, and nothing else.

But, just as much as AM radio is a conservative haven, the web is demonstrably a liberal base medium. Lib politics colors much of the web and the lib blogs and aggregators are much more popular than the conservative ones (Drudge being the major exception, and even there studies have shown his linkage to be pretty even handed over the long run). HuffPo, Kos, Google News, digg, and there are many many others all are highly popular and they are either by design or through the vagaries of their user base, decidedly center-left. On the center-right side there are really only a relative handful of popular sites, and their hit rates are way below that seen on the left side.

The point? Lets call the radio and net a wash. Newspapers, there isn't even a comparison. Far and away more lib editorial pages than conservative. Writing and editorial staff at these papers are also heavily lib slanted, as every study and poll of that group has shown. If you wish to maintain the illusion that this slant doesn't make its way into their news reporting, either by story selection, story placement, or story content, then go ahead, but you'll be in the minority as polls of the American public have consistently shown that they see a clear lib-ward slant. TV: FNC vs CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN. Maybe some of those are even keel (I don't think so, but lets grant a couple for the sake of argument) there is still more than enough lib to go against the lone, supposedly conservative, FNC.

Maybe they are all out for money, fine, that means the money thing is a wash and non-relevant to the question of determining relative political biases between these sources.

Devil5052 wrote:The main point here is that "The Media" is always painted as this left wing monolith that makes it almost impossible for the average American to get conservative views, & that's just plain hogwash![/color]

Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Me ... -6664.aspx

More Liberal Media Bias
http://anti-strib.blogspot.com/2008/03/ ... -bias.html

From 2004-2007 out of 143 journalists 125 donated to democrats.

C'mon, Mr. "Media Biased," name me a single other network run by a former party operative of Roger Ailes' rank, or even close to it. The guy was Lee Atwater's collaborator, fer chrissake!

Fixed News is in a bias class by itself. And you guys have the audacity to complain about media bias....

"Why News of Iraq Didn't Surge"

"another key reason why the war has virtually disappeared from the headlines and talk shows these days -- and that's the situation inside Iraq itself. The reduction in violence on the ground that began late last year has coincided with a significant decrease in coverage from the war zone as well."



http://pewresearch.org/pubs/775/iraq-news

[quote="spc"]"Why News of Iraq Didn't Surge"

"another key reason why the war has virtually disappeared from the headlines and talk shows these days -- and that's the situation inside Iraq itself. The reduction in violence on the ground that began late last year has coincided with a significant decrease in coverage from the war zone as well."



Yeah....I guess you're right...What violence in Iraq??

News from just this week:


Fresh clashes grip southern Iraq

The number of gunfights appears to be growing


Basra gunfight
Heavy fighting has continued for a third day between Shia militias and the Iraqi security forces in southern Iraq.
There are reports of extensive exchanges of fire between the Iraqi army and militiamen in Basra and in the town of Hilla, just south of Baghdad.

More than 70 people have died and hundreds have been injured in days of violence sparked by an Iraqi crackdown on Shia militias in Basra.


Another:



US military Iraq toll hits 4,000

Sunday saw widespread violence in Iraq
The number of United States military personnel killed in Iraq since the US-led invasion five years ago has passed the 4,000 mark.
The latest to die were four soldiers whose patrol vehicle was blown up by a bomb in southern Baghdad on Sunday




Another:

Basrans describe life under fire
Two residents in Basra describe conditions in the city and what they know of the fighting between Iraqi forces and local militia.



& on & on & on..........What violence in Iraq???

Here's a little fair & balance for you, MSNBC style:
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx ... a59b20f03c

Don't forget he's talking about a POW war hero.

stockingfull wrote:C'mon, Mr. "Media Biased," name me a single other network run by a former party operative of Roger Ailes' rank, or even close to it. The guy was Lee Atwater's collaborator, fer chrissake!

Fixed News is in a bias class by itself. And you guys have the audacity to complain about media bias....

If we already didn't know what an a$$-hole you were, that post might have held some weight. But then again you failed to mention that Rupert himself, held a Fund raiser for the Clinton campaign. OWNED Again.

Ed.A wrote:

stockingfull wrote:C'mon, Mr. "Media Biased," name me a single other network run by a former party operative of Roger Ailes' rank, or even close to it. The guy was Lee Atwater's collaborator, fer chrissake!

Fixed News is in a bias class by itself. And you guys have the audacity to complain about media bias....

If we already didn't know what an a$$-hole you were, that post might have held some weight. But then again you failed to mention that Rupert himself, held a Fund raiser for the Clinton campaign. OWNED Again.

All that proves, genius, is that the Clintons are venal. Let me know if you need the definition for that.

The question still stands: can any of you right wingnuts name a single network with a former political operative anything close to Roger Ailes' rank (and I use that term advisedly, since the guy was a Lee Atwater collaborator) in anything close to as high a position (Pres of Fake News) as he occupies?

If you can't, STFU about media bias.

stockingfull wrote:If you can't, STFU about media bias.

What do you think of this? In case you missed it. Just curious.
Here's a little fair & balance for you, MSNBC style:
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx ... a59b20f03c

Don't forget he's talking about a POW war hero.

spc wrote:

stockingfull wrote:If you can't, STFU about media bias.

What do you think of this? In case you missed it. Just curious.
Here's a little fair & balance for you, MSNBC style:
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx ... a59b20f03c

Don't forget he's talking about a POW war hero.

"This video not available."

Now answer my question.

Olbermann makes no bones about his bias, just as, for example, O'Reilly or Hannity.

Now, let's try something completely new here: answer my question without dodging it.