Secret's out!

[_Simpson_ 250]

Let's just for one moment assume that there is a left wing bias in the media - which hardly seems credible when one has such prominent mouthpieces as Fox news and the Limbaughs of this world garnering massive attention. However, for the sake of argument, suppose this was true, that only liberal view points are given any prominence - what exactly does whinging about it achieve?

I dont get how people cant think the media isnt bais, huge slant to the left that is. It doesnt have to be a grand conspiracy. Just a majority of people in the media sharing the same ideas. Media heads tend to be more liberal than conservative(I would think that is something we could agree on left or right), so wouldn't it make sense that more liberal ideas get address or ideas looked at in a liberal way. Like you touched on earlier, its nots possible to be totally fair and unbiased, often we(conservatives) see it in subtle ways,its easy for you to overlook these things if you agree with the foundation that there laying.

[Peikko 1,575]

Huge slant to the left? Depends on your perspective. Nothing about the US slants to the left if you look at the US from outside of the US.

That being said, you believe that there is a media bias to the left. Fine. Is 'whining' about how 'unfair it is' or 'how huge a conspiracy there is' (As per article title) useful to you in any way? More than that, what are you being denied? What exactly is missing from the current media? If you feel it is hugely biased to one side, then you must feel that the corresponding 'right wing agenda' is not being represented, correct? So, address that issue in some way rather than moaning on and on about how it's so unfair.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The US is pretty right wing compared to the Europe, and even our leftwing types are no communists.

All this talk of "far left" in a country where nationalism and manifest destiny are rampant is pretty laughable.

All it says is that people are afraid of the center.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Huge slant to the left? Depends on your perspective. Nothing about the US slants to the left if you look at the US from outside of the US.

That being said, you believe that there is a media bias to the left. Fine. Is 'whining' about how 'unfair it is' or 'how huge a conspiracy there is' (As per article title) useful to you in any way? More than that, what are you being denied? What exactly is missing from the current media? If you feel it is hugely biased to one side, then you must feel that the corresponding 'right wing agenda' is not being represented, correct? So, address that issue in some way rather than moaning on and on about how it's so unfair.

Getting people to understand how a media bias works by way of words is a effective tool to right some of the wrongs in media reporting, not just whining as you and hal often call it. Which to me just looks like a attempt to take away from what it is were trying to point out.

With it being almost impossible to be unfair and biased wouldnt it seem reasonable that because a majority of the media heads are liberal leaning that a majority of the reporting would reflect that?

[Peikko 1,575]

I have not noticed that it was true, at least when I read a wide selection of articles, I have noted bias from all directions, less ultra left than ultra right, but all directions.

In the case of these particular types of articles (as posted in the OP) this is most definitely a case of whining that has a 'right wing' agenda. I am surprised, with your eye for bias, that you can't see it.

Edited March 17, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[_Simpson_ 250]

I have not noticed that it was true, at least when I read a wide selection of articles, I have noted bias from all directions, less ultra left than ultra right, but all directions.

In the case of these particular types of articles (as posted in the OP) this is most definitely a case of whining that has a 'right wing' agenda. I am surprised, with your eye for bias, that you can't see it.

Its hard to get to the point when were talking so general. Yes bias can come from all directions. Lets think major media outlets. Take the LA times for example, wouldn't you agree that the staff and writers are overwhelmingly liberal? Wouldn't it make sense that there articles reflect this if we assume that its almost impossible to be fair and unbiased. Considering that the majority of media heads are left leaning wouldn't it make sense that a majority of the media would reflect that, or do you think that a majority of media heads aren't left leaning?

[Peikko 1,575]

I really don't know the answer. All I can say is that I read a variety of different news articles and they have a variety of different view points and bias. I haven't noticed a particular skew to the 'left' but then it might be difficult for me to see it, as I am European, and nothing about the US seems particularly left leaning to me.

Of course, I do find things like this amusing:

Link

I am sure this can't be 'conservative' humour.

[Peikko 1,575]

But, is this, from the same source 'left wing' humour?

Link

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I really don't know the answer. All I can say is that I read a variety of different news articles and they have a variety of different view points and bias. I haven't noticed a particular skew to the 'left' but then it might be difficult for me to see it, as I am European, and nothing about the US seems particularly left leaning to me.

Of course, I do find things like this amusing:

Link

I am sure this can't be 'conservative' humour.

Why do you call that humour? In the Philippines, the Church calls overpopulation a myth, and preaches against contraception. Why would not the Bishop of Brazil preach the same sermons?

But, is this, from the same source 'left wing' humour?

Link

That obviously looks like parody.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The Myth of The Liberal Media

"Beyond the 2000 Election, this conservative media tilt has become a dominant reality in modern U.S. politics. The imbalance also was not an accident. It resulted from a conscious, expensive and well-conceived plan by conservatives to build what amounts to a rapid-response media machine. This machine closely coordinates with Republican leaders and can strongly influence - if not dictate - what is considered news." The Media Is the Mess (July 17, 2001 article)

"I admit it -- the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."

William Kristol, as reported by the New Yorker, 5/22/95

"In the west, 10 or 20 years, there has been massive research documenting the fact that the media are extraordinarily subordinated to external power. Now, when you have that power, the best technique is to ignore all of that discussion, ignore it totally, and to eliminate it, by the simple device of asserting the opposite. If you assert the opposite, that eliminates mountains of evidence demonstrating that what you are saying is false. That's what power means. And the way we assert the opposite is by just saying that the media are liberal."

Noan Chomsky, in FSTV's documentation The Myth Of The Liberal Media

For conservatives of every persuasion, it is a self-evident truth that the mass media are liberally biased. As a proud liberal myself, I wish it was true: where are those liberal TV channels? Could I please sign up for them? All I get on my satelite system are center-right channels such as CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and far-right channels such as the "we distort, you deride", Fox News, owned by equally far-right media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, and assorted christian nutball channels such as the Trinity Broadcasting Network or Pat Robertson's The 700 Club, carried by Fox Family.

Believing in freedom of speech, I do not mind that far-right viewpoints are presented on TV on a daily basis. What I strongly object to is that these viewpoints are not balanced by equally far-left viewpoints. Tune to CNN's Capital Gang, and you'll see a centrist TIME columnist (Margaret Carlson) and a socially liberal but economically conservative Wall Street Journal Editor (Al Hunt) debate two rabid right wingers, Kate O'Beirne and Robert Novak. Progressive voices are completely shut out from the program. Or tune to Fox News' Hannity & Colmes which is nothing but a thinly veiled solo show for far-right firebrand Sean Hannity who is so "balanced" by the tame Colmes that he might just as well be opposed by a scarecrow made to look like Colmes. College dropout Hannity does almost all of the talking; he introduces guests from the "Family Research" Council as "our good friend from the FRC", habitually refers to his own views and those of regular guest Jerry Falwell as "christian" without any qualifier (ignoring the fact that religious right views are not representative of mainstream christianity), and treats liberal guests as mere props to get his own point of view across, which usually involves interrupting and screaming. Fair and Balanced?

http://www.webpan.com/dsinclair/myths.html

[_Simpson_ 250]

I really don't know the answer. All I can say is that I read a variety of different news articles and they have a variety of different view points and bias. I haven't noticed a particular skew to the 'left' but then it might be difficult for me to see it, as I am European, and nothing about the US seems particularly left leaning to me.

Of course, I do find things like this amusing:

Link

I am sure this can't be 'conservative' humour.

I see, ok I can understand that, after all we dont have any numbers to go by.

As far as you being European the terms might be different but the idea is the same. Example, you would consider fox and CNN to be right but wouldn't you agree that fox is further to the right, its the lack of those to the right of CNN that conservatives have a issue with. The radio here is overwhelming conservative, liberals arent very well represented on the radio as I would argue that conservatives very well represented in the TV media.

[_Simpson_ 250]

The Myth of The Liberal Media

"Beyond the 2000 Election, this conservative media tilt has become a dominant reality in modern U.S. politics. The imbalance also was not an accident. It resulted from a conscious, expensive and well-conceived plan by conservatives to build what amounts to a rapid-response media machine. This machine closely coordinates with Republican leaders and can strongly influence - if not dictate - what is considered news." The Media Is the Mess (July 17, 2001 article)

"I admit it -- the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures."

William Kristol, as reported by the New Yorker, 5/22/95

"In the west, 10 or 20 years, there has been massive research documenting the fact that the media are extraordinarily subordinated to external power. Now, when you have that power, the best technique is to ignore all of that discussion, ignore it totally, and to eliminate it, by the simple device of asserting the opposite. If you assert the opposite, that eliminates mountains of evidence demonstrating that what you are saying is false. That's what power means. And the way we assert the opposite is by just saying that the media are liberal."

Noan Chomsky, in FSTV's documentation The Myth Of The Liberal Media

For conservatives of every persuasion, it is a self-evident truth that the mass media are liberally biased. As a proud liberal myself, I wish it was true: where are those liberal TV channels? Could I please sign up for them? All I get on my satelite system are center-right channels such as CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and far-right channels such as the "we distort, you deride", Fox News, owned by equally far-right media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, and assorted christian nutball channels such as the Trinity Broadcasting Network or Pat Robertson's The 700 Club, carried by Fox Family.

Believing in freedom of speech, I do not mind that far-right viewpoints are presented on TV on a daily basis. What I strongly object to is that these viewpoints are not balanced by equally far-left viewpoints. Tune to CNN's Capital Gang, and you'll see a centrist TIME columnist (Margaret Carlson) and a socially liberal but economically conservative Wall Street Journal Editor (Al Hunt) debate two rabid right wingers, Kate O'Beirne and Robert Novak. Progressive voices are completely shut out from the program. Or tune to Fox News' Hannity & Colmes which is nothing but a thinly veiled solo show for far-right firebrand Sean Hannity who is so "balanced" by the tame Colmes that he might just as well be opposed by a scarecrow made to look like Colmes. College dropout Hannity does almost all of the talking; he introduces guests from the "Family Research" Council as "our good friend from the FRC", habitually refers to his own views and those of regular guest Jerry Falwell as "christian" without any qualifier (ignoring the fact that religious right views are not representative of mainstream christianity), and treats liberal guests as mere props to get his own point of view across, which usually involves interrupting and screaming. Fair and Balanced?

http://www.webpan.com/dsinclair/myths.html

Are things fair and blanced in the media? If not which way are they leaning?

Saying that the left isn't over represented in TV and newspapers is like saying that the right isn't over represented on the radio.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Are things fair and blanced in the media? If not which way are they leaning?

Saying that the left isn't over represented in TV and newspapers is like saying that the right isn't over represented on the radio.

IMO, I think it's the wrong approach to journalism - to try and bring 'fairness and balance', because it implies that there are opposing sides to every story and that all sides deserve equal consideration and coverage. It's up to the journalists to use journalistic integrity by not necessarily removing their own opinion on the matter, but by asking the right questions, playing the devil's advocate when needed, showing when there is a legitimate opposing view or views and making a clear distinction between editorial news and regular news coverage. My biggest gripe is that too often those lines are blurred and I think it is done so deliberately to persuade the viewers that what they are getting isn't really opinion, but just someone reporting to them the facts.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Are things fair and blanced in the media? If not which way are they leaning?

Saying that the left isn't over represented in TV and newspapers is like saying that the right isn't over represented on the radio.

IMO, I think it's the wrong approach to journalism - to try and bring 'fairness and balance', because it implies that there are opposing sides to every story and that all sides deserve equal consideration and coverage. It's up to the journalists to use journalistic integrity by not necessarily removing their own opinion on the matter, but by asking the right questions, playing the devil's advocate when needed, showing when there is a legitimate opposing view or views and making a clear distinction between editorial news and regular news coverage. My biggest gripe is that too often those lines are blurred and I think it is done so deliberately to persuade the viewers that what they are getting isn't really opinion, but just someone reporting to them the facts.

its this blurring of these line that gives us a media that isnt fair and balanced. A balance I would argue that leans to the left. The journalist today are overwhelmingly liberal and they are unfortunately blurring those lines you mentioned.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Are things fair and blanced in the media? If not which way are they leaning?

Saying that the left isn't over represented in TV and newspapers is like saying that the right isn't over represented on the radio.

IMO, I think it's the wrong approach to journalism - to try and bring 'fairness and balance', because it implies that there are opposing sides to every story and that all sides deserve equal consideration and coverage. It's up to the journalists to use journalistic integrity by not necessarily removing their own opinion on the matter, but by asking the right questions, playing the devil's advocate when needed, showing when there is a legitimate opposing view or views and making a clear distinction between editorial news and regular news coverage. My biggest gripe is that too often those lines are blurred and I think it is done so deliberately to persuade the viewers that what they are getting isn't really opinion, but just someone reporting to them the facts.

its this blurring of these line that gives us a media that isnt fair and balanced. A balance I would argue that leans to the left. The journalist today are overwhelmingly liberal and they are unfortunately blurring those lines you mentioned.

Editorial news is editorial news. A study I read showed that while regular newspaper journalists tended to be lean left politically, the editors tended to lean to the right. About all you can do is call a specific news media out when they distort the truth, but as far as shutting up political opinion, whether it's Rush Limbaugh or Keith Olberman, your best defense is to use your remote and simply turn them off.