Left-wing bias in the american media.

[Caligastia]

Yeah... they become well known and then they feel that THEY are part of the news... sad... but you know, many people don't seem to mind
For me, viewing the news is simple... know the bias, and take it into consideration when viewing or reading it.

Well you have the advantage of knowing what goes on behind the scenes

[Imran Siddiqui]

They should have disclaimers .

I look at the same issue from many different sources to try to get a balance, myself.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
They should have disclaimers .

I look at the same issue from many different sources to try to get a balance, myself.

Fox News channel seems to be pretty balanced...or am I just brainwashed?

[Imran Siddiqui]

You are brainwashed

Foxnews is horribly biased to the right, and gets lampooned. The other networks just don't admit their subtle biases.

[Pembleton]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Sorry, we don't lay down and let you roll all over us. We fight fire with fire.

And yes, it was more "reasonable, intelligent, and rational" than the biased one, Khan Singh, arguments.

The outburst you gave seems to hide a certain insecurity about the right-wing's intelligence. If you felt secure about it, I would think that you would just laugh it off or dismiss it. By falling to an even less "intelligent" response, you are merely affirming the point rather than refuting it.

Unfortunately, you seem to equate intelligence with force, might or wealth. So with the way you define it, perhaps you aren't insecure at all.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Well you have the advantage of knowing what goes on behind the scenes

Since media has been my job for over 24 years, I do know what is going on. However, you don't need any special knowledge to figure out their biases... JUST LISTEN TO HOW AND WHAT THEY SAY... that alone should give you a clue

Oh... and Fox News... Balanced...

Stop it... you're killing me...


Heck, I lean to the right on many issues, and I think they are funny

[Khan Singh]

I didn't say that all conservatives are dim-witted. Only those who complain about liberal bias in the media. And I gave reasons for my opinion. Squealing childishly and endlessly about other people freely expressing their opinions is either dim-witted or anti-democratic----take your choice.

Or are you suggesting that there is some sort of liberal conspiracy to control the media and brainwash Americans? Well if that's what you believe, then I am calling you a dim-wit. Whine about it all you want, I'm not taking it back.

The fact of the matter is that conservatives are perfectly free to start whatever media they want, and express whatever opinions they choose. But they can't complain if people won't buy it. If there are more liberal media in America, then presumably there is a reason for it. Nobody is forcing people to buy the New York Times.

Aren't conservatives the ones who say that the market is the best way to decide right and wrong? Well there you go then.

[Bereta_Eder]

that was the first (ok second) time I've ever seen Imran being "rude" in answering back. And I'm posting in these forums a long time.

Cut him some slack He is one of the most chivalrous and galant posters Apolyton has.

(myself excluded )

[Imran Siddiqui]

Pemb: You might think I'm affirming it, but I'm not going to let the slight go unpunished.

I've suffered enough cracks about evil, greedy right wingers. But you'd like me to laugh it off. It'd enable you to take pot shots and not have to deal with insults in turn.

Sorry, but I ain't falling to that trick.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by paiktis22
that was the first (ok second) time I've ever seen Imran being "rude" in answering back. And I'm posting in these forums a long time.

Cut him some slack He is one of the most chivalrous and galant posters Apolyton has.

(myself excluded )

If I may ask... what was the first?

I didn't say that all conservatives are dim-witted. Only those who complain about liberal bias in the media.

So all that complain about the liberal bias are dimwitted? What about those liberals that admit it?

Squealing childishly and endlessly about other people freely expressing their opinions is either dim-witted or anti-democratic----take your choice.

So if I get mad about someone saying something about 'The Nazi's were right', that would mean I'm either dim-witted or anti-democratic, because I oppose a person freely expressing their opinion?

Or are you suggesting that there is some sort of liberal conspiracy to control the media and brainwash Americans? Well if that's what you believe, then I am calling you a dim-wit. Whine about it all you want, I'm not taking it back.

And who ever said that?

Or are you putting words into people's mouths?

The fact of the matter is that conservatives are perfectly free to start whatever media they want, and express whatever opinions they choose. But they can't complain if people won't buy it. If there are more liberal media in America, then presumably there is a reason for it. Nobody is forcing people to buy the New York Times.

Yes, but the mainstream media dismisses any claim about bias. They should admit that they do have a subtle bias. They can freely express their opinions, just don't be fradulent in the advertising .

And check the bolded part. They can't complain? So you are now taking free speech away?

Aren't conservatives the ones who say that the market is the best way to decide right and wrong? Well there you go then.

Do you want your news to be what is most popular, or that which reports the facts? This is why sometimes I wish the US government had a seperate news channel (like BBC), not based on ratings, but on accurate reporting (or as close as possible). However, news editors know that some people want to hear some things.

[Pembleton]

Originally posted by paiktis22
that was the first (ok second) time I've ever seen Imran being "rude" in answering back. And I'm posting in these forums a long time.

Cut him some slack He is one of the most chivalrous and galant posters Apolyton has.

Well I don't have enough experience with this forum to know people well enough, but my failing memory in my recent increasing senility seems to recall that he's been pretty reasonable in other responses to some of my threads that don't deal with politics. So I was just surprised at his outburst. I'm giving him some slack. That's why I responded. I have fallen prey to insults in the past too. It's human.

I think intelligent right-wingers exist. Unfortunately, I haven't come across too many of them. The same goes for "liberals" too. But being more *biased* towards liberal (I wouldn't necessarily call myself a liberal), it's easier to overlook. I think most people are generally stupid no matter what their politics.

This is why I tend to avoid most political discussion. I usually only post in political topics that are more philosophically based rather than anything that is going to be simplistically pigeonholed into a liberal/conservative polemic. Being rather bored of late, and the fact that I found Khan's post rather funny, I couldn't help it here.

Don't mind me, I'll just go on my merry way and stick to more mundane issues. They're less prone to futile flame wars.

[DanS]

Here's the scoop. There is an incredible left-wing bias in the upper crust media. But everybody accepts this bias, considering that they do good work and generally reflect the views of the cities in which they reside.

Consider The Washington Post. Center-left to left. Every now and then they try to pass something off as fact that just ain't so. You have to watch them carefully. But really, they do excellent work by and large and the vast majority of the issues that they cover would be covered by a top-flight center-right to right paper, if there were any in this market.

Compare to The Washington Times. They are on the right. But the paper sucks on the whole, so nobody reads them.

I'm OK with this situation. If the right wants more right-wing bias than left-wing bias, they'll have to work for it with many years of solid journalism.

As to the gentleman who wrote this book, the journalistic profession has a vendetta against him, I'm afraid. Sad to see them stoop to attacking him personally.

[mactbone]

Remember, there are about a handful of people that control 90% of the world's meida/information.

Ted Turner is one, and Rupert Murdoch is another.

Almost everyone I've talked to says the media is liberal, but I am glad for one thing. Most newspapers don't contain people like the staff on my University's paper. Yikes, if they were any more liberal they'd be European.

"Tagging kegs so that the police can arrest me if minors drink from it is wrong!"

Ugh, I need to do something about it...

[Sikander]

I saw Bernard Goldberg interviewed on The News Hour about his book. His main point was the same as Ming's. Journalists come from such a narrow spectrum of the population and reside professionally with so many like-minded cronies that they don't see their own biases. Ironically, the journalist chosen to give the opposing viewpoint and the moderator, who was obviously another journalist could not understand even this basic premise, and the whole 15 minutes alloted to the segment was basically a waste of time, with Goldberg repeating his premise, and the opposing journalist arguing in non sequiters. Goldberg's point is that there is no conspiracy, just a lack of intellectual diversity.

The situation has changed a lot since the 1970s, when the broadcast news was dominated by the three major networks. The perception of bias came to a head in the 1980s (and bias here is a comparison of the news media's opinions to those of the general population of the U.S.), and the networks made strides to find and employ people whose opinions were more varied. Many if not most of these people came from government rather than journalism schools.

It is interesting to compare Journalists with Teachers and Lawyers. All three groups tend to be very cohesive politically (with Lawyers being the least so of the three), all three groups also tend to be much more liberal than the population at large, and all are in a position of trust, that of conveying and manipulating information for the good of society. All three groups are villified by the right, and held in general in low esteem by the public at large. I cannot think of three other groups in American society which give themselves more awards than these three, though if they won't do it who will?

I think it is proper to question and examine those who decide what news we see, or indoctrinate our children, or decide what the laws mean. While I may disagree with some of the aspersions cast from time to time, I don't think that the nation is well served by these important occupations being dominated by any particular political ideology, even if they all agreed with me.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by MacTBone
Remember, there are about a handful of people that control 90% of the world's meida/information.

While I think you're overstating it a bit (The US media is controlled by a few corporation, but the world media is fairly diverse), your point is important.

During the past five years or so, mergers have left the US media in the hands of a few corporations. That is the most disturbing trend and one that can be measured objectively. The news people receive is being funnelled through the viewpoint of a few.

As for the original subject of this thread, it is an old lie put forth by conservatives and told so many times that people begin to believe it is the truth.

The US media is controlled by corporations and the coverage provided reflects their interests. You will not see stories about how the US might be better off with more diverse media ownership, or that corporations should pay higher taxes. These issues are simply not discussed.

As for journalist being liberal by nature, that's not really true. The corporate directors high senior media executives who come from the same background or believe in the same things. Those executives then hire editors who think along the same lines as they do. The editors then hire reporters who have similar beliefs.

A truly left-wing journalist is simply not going to make it up through the ranks to a position where they can influence the news.

Finally, what an American considers liberal, many others would consider conservative. Consider medicare. Canadians and Europeans would consider this a basic right. Americans see it as a socialist threat to their way of life.

Saying the American media is left-leaning is like saying Thatcher was a good liberal.