http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/....asp?c=rss

By now I'm sure many of you have heard the f**ked up interview CNN gave to Palin. Is the media pulling for Obama? I say yes. Will the media bend ethics to promote Obama and make McC & co look bad? I say yes. Will CNN apologize for looking amaturish and unprepared (at best) or for deliberately trying to torpedo Palin? I say no.

Quote:Is the media biased towards Obama or just incompetent?

Yes.

You guys cry more than a 6 month year old. The Republican ticket is so F*cked up it isn't even funny. There some things that the media hasn't covered that should be put out about these two clowns you call leaders, yet you still complain. Open your eyes.

Looking at the headlines, absolutely yes.

The first black president means news. They're in it for themselves.

That's why you're better off not reading newspapers.

Do the republicans make it easy? Yes.

The media went after Sarah Palin because she's an easy target. McCain could have found several better choices for his running mate...

As a member of the media ... no.

Honestly, I think people give the media, in general, too much credit. There seems to be a sense that there's some vast coordinated effort to sway public opinion (and not just on the presidential election). The media, collectively, just isn't that smart.

If there's bias, it's not malicious or intentional, rather a product of incompetence, ignorance, laziness or part of an effort to garner more viewers/readers.

bitcruncher Wrote:The media went after Sarah Palin because she's an easy target. McCain could have found several better choices for his running mate...

And Joe Biden isn't? That's funny given the comments Biden made about Obama during the primaries and then given his comments about Obama being tested in the first 6 months of his presidency. I don't see the media giving him a grilling over that.

http://www.linearpublishing.com/orsonscottcard.html

They guy who wrote this is allegedly a democrat.

I am fairly certain that Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann would break out in a fist fight to determine which one gets to blow Obama first and Rachel Maddow would be their wingman servincing Michelle Obama

Media trends liberal and it is nothing to whine about. Journalism majors by and large are young liberals that grow up to be old liberals with typewriters, keyboards or microphones. They pretend to be objective but anybody with a political IQ equal to a fence post can tell within 5 minutes of watching or reading a media person where they stand politically.

I think the gig is mostly up for the media as people have more options then ever to get their news. We all know they are trying to spoon feed their political preference whether it is right or left leaning yet they protect their persoanl politics like they are carrying the nuclear codes. It is comical that they actually think Americans don't know where they stand.

I could personally care less and just accept it for what it is. I know if I tune into ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, I know that I am going to get mostly liberal news and their subject matter panels are going to be dominated by Liberals. If I tune into Fox I am going to get a conservative bias with their panels mostly dominated by Conservatives. The print media has also stopped pretending to be objective and you know what you are going to get from them 90% of the time whether it is left or right.

I am a registered Independent that leans Libertarian with mostly nobody to vote for so this whole argument just cracks me up.

FYI, Orson Scott Card is a fairly successful science fiction writer ("Enders Game" is a book that is a great book to give to a teenager who hates to read and will help to get them into reading). His take is pretty accurate. The problem is that the craft of journalism has gone down the sewer. Journalists are more lazy in researching the facts, they are less likely to pursue a story that goes against their personal philosophy (unless its so sensational it has to be covered), and their choices in what to pursue are flawed. Thus, a $150,000 wardrobe gets more attention than Joe Biden proclaiming that foreign powers will kill Americans just to test Obama's fortitude.

BGSUalum1987 Wrote:As a member of the media ... no.

Honestly, I think people give the media, in general, too much credit. There seems to be a sense that there's some vast coordinated effort to sway public opinion (and not just on the presidential election). The media, collectively, just isn't that smart.

"Smart" would mean they're good at it. It's pretty obvious from headlines and the slant of articles that the majority of journalists favor the left. This is not news, it's been demonstrated in many surveys. Moreover, the industry self-selects to some extent.

Quote:If there's bias, it's not malicious or intentional, rather a product of incompetence, ignorance, laziness or part of an effort to garner more viewers/readers.

I agree there is much laziness involved. Many journalists don't want the rigor of questioning their own beliefs. They also let them seep into their writings...again a sign of laziness. Do they intentionally want to influence an election? Not directly, but many journalists believe they know what's best for people and they want to be "heard"...ultimately that is a desire to exert influence, with some evidence in how elections occur.

bitcruncher Wrote:The media went after Sarah Palin because she's an easy target. McCain could have found several better choices for his running mate...

This is true. IMO if McCain loses it is because he picked Palin. He should have went with a conservative Senator or Governor from the South.

keep cryin', the media was biased for Bush in 2000.

uhmump95 Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:The media went after Sarah Palin because she's an easy target. McCain could have found several better choices for his running mate...

This is true. IMO if McCain loses it is because he picked Palin. He should have went with a conservative Senator or Governor from the South.

That's nonsense. McCain was behind in the polls until he picked Palin. She has been an energetic force for his campaign. The worst thing he did was sequester her for 5 weeks prepping her for DC politics.

You check out the response for Palin on a local level...

http://www.limaohio.com/news/palin_29826..._john.html

The national politicos are spinning a different yarn which is EXACTLY what this thread is about. They are creating a story that doesn't exist, except in their political philosophy.

ShoreBuc Wrote:I am fairly certain that Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann would break out in a fist fight to determine which one gets to blow Obama first and Rachel Maddow would be their wingman servincing Michelle Obama

Media trends liberal and it is nothing to whine about. Journalism majors by and large are young liberals that grow up to be old liberals with typewriters, keyboards or microphones. They pretend to be objective but anybody with a political IQ equal to a fence post can tell within 5 minutes of watching or reading a media person where they stand politically.

I think the gig is mostly up for the media as people have more options then ever to get their news. We all know they are trying to spoon feed their political preference whether it is right or left leaning yet they protect their persoanl politics like they are carrying the nuclear codes. It is comical that they actually think Americans don't know where they stand.

I could personally care less and just accept it for what it is. I know if I tune into ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, I know that I am going to get mostly liberal news and their subject matter panels are going to be dominated by Liberals. If I tune into Fox I am going to get a conservative bias with their panels mostly dominated by Conservatives. The print media has also stopped pretending to be objective and you know what you are going to get from them 90% of the time whether it is left or right.

I am a registered Independent that leans Libertarian with mostly nobody to vote for so this whole argument just cracks me up.

I'm with you bro...this whole thing is getting funnier by the day....Glad to know I'm not the only pro-liberty Pirate on this board.

ShoreBuc Wrote:I know if I tune into ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, I know that I am going to get mostly liberal news and their subject matter panels are going to be dominated by Liberals. If I tune into Fox I am going to get a conservative bias with their panels mostly dominated by Conservatives.

Isn't funny how you were able to easily rattle off 5 liberal stations to just one conservative one? I know you were probably just thinking off the cuff and there are more stations of both types out there but your brand recognition shows how much domination the liberals have in the media. With that in mind, there are many more opportunities for liberal biases to be implanted in the news than conservative biases and that means the news we get might not be how some event actually happened but how some news media perceived it to happen.

I think talk radio has a lock on conservative stations which is why the Fairness Doctrine is being rehashed by the left these days.

firmbizzle Wrote:keep cryin', the media was biased for Bush in 2000.

Yeah, somehow I don't remember that. How old are you? Are you going by something you "read"? I seem to remember the media attacking the hell out of Bush.

Rebel Wrote:

firmbizzle Wrote:keep cryin', the media was biased for Bush in 2000.

Yeah, somehow I don't remember that. How old are you? Are you going by something you "read"? I seem to remember the media attacking the hell out of Bush.

Bush got so many passes, they would talk about Al Gore's "earth toned" suits, sighing, "lockbox". The bar was set so low for GWB at those debates. John McCain should have been the nominee in 2000.

DrTorch Wrote:

uhmump95 Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:The media went after Sarah Palin because she's an easy target. McCain could have found several better choices for his running mate...

This is true. IMO if McCain loses it is because he picked Palin. He should have went with a conservative Senator or Governor from the South.

That's nonsense. McCain was behind in the polls until he picked Palin. She has been an energetic force for his campaign. The worst thing he did was sequester her for 5 weeks prepping her for DC politics.

You check out the response for Palin on a local level...

http://www.limaohio.com/news/palin_29826..._john.html

The national politicos are spinning a different yarn which is EXACTLY what this thread is about. They are creating a story that doesn't exist, except in their political philosophy.

If you trust polls (which I don't) he is still behind. Last one I heard claimed that Obama had a 10 point lead on him.

I know some of the people I talk to see her as a political play to get female votes and a shallow one at that.

McCain would be pounding Obama into the ground right now (media or not) if he would have stuck to the issues and not tried to play the experience card (which failed with Clinton) and negative ads.

firmbizzle Wrote:

Rebel Wrote:

firmbizzle Wrote:keep cryin', the media was biased for Bush in 2000.

Yeah, somehow I don't remember that. How old are you? Are you going by something you "read"? I seem to remember the media attacking the hell out of Bush.

Bush got so many passes, they would talk about Al Gore's "earth toned" suits, sighing, "lockbox". The bar was set so low for GWB at those debates. John McCain should have been the nominee in 2000.

Yep. And now we can count on whoever wins in 2008 being a 1 term president. There are way too many problems for any president to survive right now.