View Full Version : Media Bias
furie
09-08-2004, 11:57 AM
Do you think the Media is bias to one side
of the spectrum more than the other? If
so, what side do you think it favors?
JPMNICK
09-08-2004, 12:02 PM
I think that is a tough question to answer due to the use of the word "media"
I feel as if print media is slightly left, but more balanced than TV or radio media which is more right.
http://home.comcast.net/~nickcontardo/a_schilling_ft1.jpg
Thanks to Monsterone for my first sig.
SatCam
09-08-2004, 12:10 PM
http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/oscars/75th_academy_awards_luncheon_photos/michael_moore/lunch.jpg
"I'm right, you're wrong!"
<marquee>Beware, this is a scrolling marquee. ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿThis Marquee scrolls. WATCH OUT! ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿWatch your ass for the scrolling marquee!!!!</marquee>
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/SatCam/mariosig.jpg" align="right" alt="Still taking a shit" /><a href="http://www.satelitecam.tk">Ron and Fez Drops and Bits</a>
50%[color=white]
Teenweek
09-08-2004, 12:10 PM
Ny times, cnn, msnbc, cbs, nbc, abc far left (oops my bad)
Fox news- Slightly right
Ny Post-Far right
This message was edited by Teenweek on 9-8-04 @ 4:16 PM
GodsFavoriteMan
09-08-2004, 12:11 PM
Ny times, cnn, msnbc, cbs, nbc, abc far right
Fox news- Slightly right
Ny Post-Far right
Huh? What? Fox is further to the left than those others? You really believe that?
<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/GodsFavorite.jpg" width="300" height="107"></p>
furie
09-08-2004, 12:11 PM
you're right, it is a complex question with an even more complex answer, but we're talking in general. taking it all together.
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/furie1335/.Pictures/rfsigs/FuturamaRush.jpg">
<marquee>"All right! It's Saturday night, I have no date, a two liter bottle of Shasta and my all Rush mix tape, let's rock!"
</marquee>
<a href="http://fallingtowardsapotheosis.blogspot.com/">mental vomit</a>
furie
09-08-2004, 12:12 PM
NY time far right?!? have even read the times?
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/furie1335/.Pictures/rfsigs/FuturamaRush.jpg">
<marquee>"All right! It's Saturday night, I have no date, a two liter bottle of Shasta and my all Rush mix tape, let's rock!"
</marquee>
<a href="http://fallingtowardsapotheosis.blogspot.com/">mental vomit</a>
JPMNICK
09-08-2004, 12:15 PM
TeenWeek must have meant to say left.
The times is way left.
http://home.comcast.net/~nickcontardo/a_schilling_ft1.jpg
Thanks to Monsterone for my first sig.
Teenweek
09-08-2004, 12:16 PM
Sorry, big mistake
I think a much more appropriate poll answer than any of those would be: "Completely inept."
http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig
LiquidCourage
09-08-2004, 02:57 PM
Our media just sucks, plain and simple. I wish it was SOMETHING. RIght now mainstream media is just a bland load of crap.
TheMojoPin
09-08-2004, 04:13 PM
I agree totally with JPMNICK. Newspapers tend to sway to the left. TV media, at least the biggest shows, and newsradio, tend to sway right. Only the major newsmagazines (Time, Newsweek, US News & World Report) seem to hit the middle more often than not.
But very few really swing to any kind of extreme, except for blatantly biased sources like The Nation or The Weekle Standard or The New Republic. Fox News, I don't think is heavily biased when it comes to their actual news reporting, but their ratings are driven by shows with ridicuously outrageous personal biases (O'Reilly, Hannity, Neil Cavuto, that "Heartland" guy), but only Hannity really hits the "far right." It's rare when you find mainstream media outlets with far left or right biases.
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."
This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-8-04 @ 8:14 PM
JPMNICK
09-08-2004, 04:29 PM
you agreeing with me validates me as a human. thank you sir.
http://home.comcast.net/~nickcontardo/a_schilling_ft1.jpg
Thanks to Monsterone for my first sig.
shamus mcfitzy
09-09-2004, 08:46 PM
Our media just sucks, plain and simple. I wish it was SOMETHING. RIght now mainstream media is just a bland load of crap.
this is pretty close to what I think. Our media really is American-biased in most forms. One might say, well it should be because we aint so bad and its our media, but really its kinda stupid to most degrees (basically all the news networks were beating the war drum leading into Iraq last March).
This might be because I think left is right (correct) but I think the NY Times is one paper that actually seems to be an actual source for news (I've also read, I think, the Houston Chronicle which I also found pretty good and that didn't seem all that left, so whatever). In comparison, don't even try to get news from the Daily News or Post because you are getting stuff that is so catered to the stupid that it doesn't surprise me if the headlines take the most time to come up with (cause they're so clever).
curtoid
09-10-2004, 09:40 AM
In Washington there are two newspapers - "The Washington Post," which has long been accused of being "liberal," and the Washington Times, which has the rap as to being a conservative paper.
Within DC, though, very few people really give much weight to the "Times," which is run by the Reverend Sun Yun Moon; their inaccuracies are legendary, even prompting the weekly free paper, "The City Paper," to do a regular set of "corrections" of facts the "Times" screwed up on. The paper has almost no subscription; most people pick it up on the way to work, and on weekends it should really go out of print.
Just yesterday, while on the subway, I noticed someone was reading the "Times," and open to the article on the 1000 American troops killed in Iraq - one day after the rest of the world ran with the story, and buried on page "A-11."
During the 1990s, a day didn't go by without a scathing article on Clinton. And yet...it was the "Washington Post" that broke the story of Monica.
The tired argument that the "Post" is a lefty publicity rag hasn't been accurate since 1988 when the "Post" refused to endorse a candidate for President, because they didn't want to go with Dukakis. In recent years, with their support of the Iraq war and buying into much of the GOP spinsters echo chamber, the Post REALLY doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the "NY Times" and "LA Times" - Bill O'Liar's favorite whipping boys.
On television, no president has had it as smooth as Dubya (Letterman and the Daily Show aside), while Democratic follies are given much more airtime. During the war, Kopple, Rather, Brokaw and Jennings all acted like giddy school children, as we revved up to a war half the country was uneasy with, at best.
And when protestors are shown on television, the camera crews always (!!!) zero in on the moments that will make good television (ie: the trouble makers), even though the 50 - 100 people are not an accurate representation of the 500,000 people that showed up to peacefully voice decent.
And recently, it was CNN, which the FOX watchers would like morons to believe is the Liberal equivalent, which ran the infamous Howard Dean "yell" over 600 times in one week.
OH! And Larry King, CNN's drooling mascot, was even the master of ceremonies at Bush's first inauguration event - the one with Ricky Martin at the Lincoln Memorial.
"Liberal Media" - Pfffft!
How about "Conservative Crybabies Who Don't Want To Hear Anything Negative Unless It's About a Godless, Socialist, Un Patriotic Democrat"
;)
Finally, do comparisons of the 2000 election campaign of the negative articles and reports on Al Gore compared to the relative cake walk George Bush got.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/curt4_sig.jpg
"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB
This message was edited by curtoid on 9-10-04 @ 1:46 PM
TheMojoPin
09-10-2004, 10:40 AM
Finally, do comparisons of the 2000 election campaign of the negative articles and reports on Al Gore compared to the relative cake walk George Bush got.
No kidding.
Gore was absolutely savaged during 2000. Bush had a drop in the bucket of the "negative" media coverage.
I'm convinced that it just ties into how major media outlets cater to these "liberal bias" charges with things like what's described by Curtoid. Nobody wants to be called out by bigmouths like O'Reilly or Rush, since people take their word as gospel, so they go out of their way to cater to the "other side." Nobody EVER calls out Hannity or O'Reilly or Rush when they make mistakes.
I'm infuriated Hannity blatantly said my bookstore chain had "REFUSED" to carry the book Unfit For Command. He said this on his radio show TWO DAYS AFTER we had started selling the book, and had sold out of all 30 copies we managed to get. The book was published by a dinky little publishing company that pushed up it's printing by almost a MONTH because of the media coverage the title received, and wasn't able to fill the nationwide bulk orders it was getting for it. For almost two weeks, we were only able to get about 20 copies or so a week, and they sold out right away. What do we do? WE ORDERED NONSTOP FOR TWO BUSINESS WEEKS STRAIGHT. Yet because of what assholes like Hannity said, we literally had customers coming in and chastising, arguing with, yelling at and insulting my booksellers because we were supposedly "refusing" to carry the book. It was absolutely disgusting. I got called to deal with at least a dozen different situations like this. And if it wasn't that, it was people complaining about the "bias" of our Current Affairs table, or storefront display. No, we couldn't POSSIBLY just put out the books put out in the last month, LIKE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO TO MAKE MONEY. Nooooo, we're obviously catering to a "liberal bias," and now we have to ensure there's an even number of "left" and "right" books on any political display. Hey, and guess whose book was often brought up as one we "should be displaying?" Oh my, Mr. Hannity! Hmm, nevermind your fucking book came out in FEBRUARY. Nevermind we had it displayed for two weeks right by the front entrance. Nevermind we had it on our bestsellers list for over a month, again, displayed right by the front entrance. No, we're supposed to display this egomaniac's book nearly eight months after it came out on the NEW RELEASE Current Affairs display. Where could these customers have POSSIBLY gotten that suggestion? Gee, I wonder...
I've e-mailed both Hannity's radio show and TV show, but have gotten no response from either, no really expect any kind of correction. Guys like him are free to say whatever they want without anyone calling them on it because they just fall back on the absurd, "oh, look at the liberal bias coming down on me! Boo-hoo!"-horseshit. Fuck him and his Jay Leno-looking head.
People come in and will take complete piles of political books off the displays and shelves they don't like and dump them across the store. They'll turn all the face-outs of books they don't like around, or cover them up with that author's political counterpart. And 99% of the time what books are covered up or moved or hidden? The so-called "liberal" titles. Am I saying that all conservatives are politically-driven book-buying assholes? No. But I AM saying that most of the politically-driven book-buying assholes I do deal with are conservatives.
Lighten the fuck up. I've heard fucks like Rush and O'Reilly telling their listeners to go into stores and do shit like this. How fucking childish.
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."
This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-10-04 @ 2:59 PM
Mike Teacher
09-10-2004, 10:45 AM
The USA Media is biased by definition, towards stories in the US, that will get ratings. Sadly this involves mostly Who killed Who in the USA, and Who Fucked Who in the USA, and not much else.
Real Global news? Ha.
One word: Sudan.
What?
Who?
Where?
=
The headlines should be screaming from the rooftops what the Janjaweed are doing there.
Who?
Ah, not much, just what Powell call correctly yesterday: Genocide.
Well done again, UN!
<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/anisig4">
This message was edited by Mike Teacher on 9-10-04 @ 2:46 PM
badorties
09-10-2004, 11:05 AM
The USA Media is biased by definition, towards stories in the US, that will get ratings. Sadly this involves mostly Who killed Who in the USA, and Who Fucked Who in the USA, and not much else.
this is my purely biased, cynical and subjective view:
on the whole, newspapers and other media outlets are little more than vehicles for advertising ...
tabloids and network news need to capture the attention of viewers to garner the charged advertising rates ... sexy headlines and juicy stories take precedent over more 'important' issues ...
blow jobs in the oval office, paris hilton's dog, bennifer, and sport scores sell better than genocide in a far off land ...
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=badorties"><br>
+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+
jeffdwright2001
09-10-2004, 11:09 AM
I thought this was going to be a thread comparing folks that are pro Media versus pro Persia.
Mesopotamia fever. Catch it!
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=jeffdwright2001"><br>
"It is not best to use our morals weekdays, it gets them out of repair for Sunday." - Mark Twain 1898
Thanks to Reefy & M1 for my sigs!!
TheMojoPin
09-10-2004, 11:11 AM
Pip-pip! Somebody pull up an Ottoman!
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."
Mike Teacher
09-10-2004, 11:29 AM
on the whole, newspapers and other media outlets are little more than vehicles for advertising ...
winning cowbell!
Look, i'm a ham-and-egger, but i'm on the board of contributors for the asbury park press. the fancy title means i dont make a dime, but they open the pages to regular joes like me, who they think can write a sentence. Anyone who read my posts will at least know my problem is keeping an article to under 800 words.
Anyway, the people at the paper will tell you the above, that the paper is there for the Ads; it's public knowledge, and common practice. I forget what a full pager for one day costs at the NY Times. $40,000? That might be low.
I forget who made the arguements on here or on-air, that suggests whatever the majority/plurality of Americans like Most, must, by definition, be 'Best'.
Which might suggest McDs is the 'best' food, and the National Enquirer is the 'best' paper or Whoever is Number #1 this week is actually Best. If it happens to be the new Prince, fine, but usually, it's some suck ass act. Here today, gone later-on today...
=
And exactly why the papers will remain the papers. Until they can figure out a way to do it; people do not seem to want to curl up and read the NY Times on a Sunday with a PDA. They want the physical paper. And for the Ad people, they say:
[Hit it K.C!!]
Thats the Way !! Uh Huh I Like it !! uh Huh Uh Huh...
=
As for media bias, and Newspaper Features, TV shows and Books being made that seem unbiased but are basically set up between 'interviewer' and 'interviewee' Read up on the Life magazine Coup with the Mercury Seven Astros. The competition screamed bloody murder.
<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/anisig4">
This message was edited by Mike Teacher on 9-10-04 @ 3:35 PM
curtoid
09-10-2004, 01:15 PM
No kidding.
Gore was absolutely savaged during 2000. Bush had a drop in the bucket of the "negative" media coverage.
Hmmmm...clever how you avoided coming out and saying what you know you wanted to say...the phrase that should be your new mod quote...and a perfect tattoo on you arm (below the one of the Katzenjammer Kids)...
Curtoid was right.
Was that so tough?!
:)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/curt4_sig.jpg
"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB
This message was edited by curtoid on 9-10-04 @ 5:15 PM
Mike Teacher
09-10-2004, 04:11 PM
????????????????
<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/anisig4">
Freakshow
09-10-2004, 04:53 PM
I thought this was going to be a thread comparing folks that are pro Media versus pro Persia.
I'm a big fan of the Assyrians, myself. My cousin in California married an Assryian girl, so I have to be for them.
<center><img width=300 src=http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=Freakshow>
Thanks Furtherman, SatCam, Reefdweller, and Monsterone!<br>I hate traveling, mostly because my dad used to beat me with a globe.</center>
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.