Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

With the assumption that a certain general bias does exist (not so much the vast conspiracy that some imagine, but a liberal bent nonetheless), what do you suppose is its impetus? What benefit does the media, news organizations in particular, gain from skewing information to the left?

 

I've really no opinion of my own, so I'm not trying to drive home a point...just curious as to your opinions.

  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

With the assumption that a certain general bias does exist (not so much the vast conspiracy that some imagine, but a liberal bent nonetheless), what do you suppose is its impetus? What benefit does the media, news organizations in particular, gain from skewing information to the left?

 

I've really no opinion of my own, so I'm not trying to drive home a point...just curious as to your opinions.

 

I don't think there is so much as a liberal media bias so much as just news bias in general. Most newspaper organizations have been bought over by other corporations thought the last 20 or so years and will display bias toward the agenda of the parent corporation. The agenda is usually getting people to watch, listen, or read so they can sell advertising and make money. So mainly they are picking a demographic, telling them what they want to hear.

 

The reporting also tends to display the bias of the person writing the story. If the majority of the AP tends to have liberal tendencies so will the stories they produce.

 

Just MHO

Posted

I don't think there is so much as a liberal media bias so much as just news bias in general. Most newspaper organizations have been bought over by other corporations thought the last 20 or so years and will display bias toward the agenda of the parent corporation. The agenda is usually getting people to watch, listen, or read so they can sell advertising and make money. So mainly they are picking a demographic, telling them what they want to hear.

 

The reporting also tends to display the bias of the person writing the story. If the majority of the AP tends to have liberal tendencies so will the stories they produce.

 

Just MHO

Is that you're projection?

Posted

 

 

The reporting also tends to display the bias of the person writing the story.

 

 

You could have just saved yourself a shitload of typing and just gone with this.

Posted

Is that you're projection?

 

I think I ended the post with Just my humble opinion.

 

You could have just saved yourself a shitload of typing and just gone with this.

 

Is that the only part you could understand?

Posted

With the assumption that a certain general bias does exist (not so much the vast conspiracy that some imagine, but a liberal bent nonetheless), what do you suppose is its impetus? What benefit does the media, news organizations in particular, gain from skewing information to the left?

 

I've really no opinion of my own, so I'm not trying to drive home a point...just curious as to your opinions.

 

You're assuming there's motive behind bias. Why not just accept that it's as simple as "Being a member of 'The Fourth Estate' attracts liberals, drawn to the idealism of being a counter-balance to the government. And when you have a group where 80% or better of its members share the same attitudes and ideas, anyone else 'outside' the group is by definition unusual."

 

Bias doesn't have to be conspiratorial, or even directed. It's just as easily (probably more easily) a result of a lack of contrary opinions in an insular like-minded group. Same fundamental lack of plasticity leads to otherwise smart Wall Street types buying shitloads of subprime mortgage bonds because they're all using the exact same risk model.

Posted

The media's customers (viewers) are liberal more than politicians want to admit, and the media is a business and has to sell it's product. It's simple economics. Conservatives don't understand that, because they do not undertake economics, supply side or whatever

 

 

How is that gold investment doing Conservatives?

Posted

The media's customers (viewers) are liberal more than politicians want to admit, and the media is a business and has to sell it's product. It's simple economics. Conservatives don't understand that, because they do not undertake economics, supply side or whatever

 

How is that gold investment doing Conservatives?

 

Where do you get this ****? Do you actually believe the nonsense you post?

Posted

You're assuming there's motive behind bias. Why not just accept that it's as simple as "Being a member of 'The Fourth Estate' attracts liberals, drawn to the idealism of being a counter-balance to the government. And when you have a group where 80% or better of its members share the same attitudes and ideas, anyone else 'outside' the group is by definition unusual."

 

Bias doesn't have to be conspiratorial, or even directed. It's just as easily (probably more easily) a result of a lack of contrary opinions in an insular like-minded group. Same fundamental lack of plasticity leads to otherwise smart Wall Street types buying shitloads of subprime mortgage bonds because they're all using the exact same risk model.

 

 

Very, very well stated DCT,

 

This liberal mindset (rather than conspiracy) that is prominent in all our "mainstream" outlets, is what I was referring to in the (Splicers) thread.

 

Bigfatbillsfan tried (and failed) to refute this by a "scorecard" defense, trotting out the isolated cases of Spitzer and Weiner, as if this equates with the daily bias that we see.

 

 

.

 

The media's customers (viewers) are liberal more than politicians want to admit, and the media is a business and has to sell it's product. It's simple economics. Conservatives don't understand that, because they do not undertake economics, supply side or whatever

 

 

How is that gold investment doing Conservatives?

 

 

Typical gibberish from you.

 

 

The majority of Americans are Conservative, this has been shown in polling time and time again. (see Fox News and its #1 ranking)

 

The Left-leaning members of the Times/Post/ Alphabet networks editorial boards daily decide what THEY THINK the people need to know,

 

too bad for them their time has passed, and the "new" media has supplanted them.

 

 

 

.

Posted

Very, very well stated DCT,

 

 

Typical gibberish from you.

 

 

The majority of Americans are Conservative, this has been shown in polling time and time again. (see Fox News and its #1 ranking)

 

The Left-leaning members of the Times/Post/ Alphabet networks editorial boards daily decide what THEY THINK the people need to know,

 

too bad for them their time has passed, and the "new" media has supplanted them.

 

Tom, is this one of your other handles? I mean what a ball lick!

 

 

Anyway, you "guys" do agree that the media is/are capitalist businesses? Right?

Posted

Very, very well stated DCT,

 

This liberal mindset (rather than conspiracy) that is prominent in all our "mainstream" outlets, is what I was referring to in the (Splicers) thread.

 

Bigfatbillsfan tried (and failed) to refute this by a "scorecard" defense, trotting out the isolated cases of Spitzer and Weiner, as if this equates with the daily bias that we see.

 

.

 

 

 

 

Typical gibberish from you.

 

 

The majority of Americans are Conservative, this has been shown in polling time and time again. (see Fox News and its #1 ranking)

The Left-leaning members of the Times/Post/ Alphabet networks editorial boards daily decide what THEY THINK the people need to know,

 

too bad for them their time has passed, and the "new" media has supplanted them.

 

 

 

.

 

Scorecard argument doesn't work huh?

Posted

The media's customers (viewers) are liberal more than politicians want to admit, and the media is a business and has to sell it's product. It's simple economics. Conservatives don't understand that, because they do not undertake economics, supply side or whatever

 

 

How is that gold investment doing Conservatives?

[/quote

 

 

Do you ever hang your head in shame, knowing that you are one of the 1%? Then again, you might be sly as a fox and just setting things up for a disability pension.

Posted

No. Now WTF is your post about?

 

In other words, the press doesn't just lean to the left. There is left media bias and there is right media bias. To think that the press only leans left is a delusion.

Posted

here's a question: is Sean Hannity impartial?

 

jw

His media corner is a subsection of the media. His advertisers sell to a Conservative audiance, that's why you see so many people selling gold on his show, and on Rush Limbo's show, too. Generally, he benefits from selling to less educated, more gullible and hateful people. That's why the gold charlatans flock to buy advertising in the media sector, its easy pickings selling to those idiots

 

 

The "Main Stream media" has a wider public it has to sell advertising to so its "product," the information it transmits, is less hateful, but more sensational in nature. If it bleeds it leads

Posted

Again (and again) we see this same mistaken argument by the liberal posters on this board (and other sites)

 

Trying desperately to equate the conservative commentators and their shows with the slant that is seen daily in the "so-called" influential newspapers and news programs of the established media.

 

 

Limbaugh and Hannity, and for that matter Lawrence O'Donnel and Rachel Maddow, are paid to give their opinions.

 

The bias that comes out the newsroom is in what stories are actually reported and how they are slanted on the front pages and the newscasts,

 

 

but keep your head in the ground and save the "everyone does it" nonsense for those of you with closed minds.

 

 

 

.

Posted (edited)

You can typically trace journalism and media bias to two simple items: where they went to school, and how much most of them earn relative tot their workload. MOST journalists are given the choice of being paid with either a roll of nickels or a box of Chicklets. Couple this with the fact that few workers put in more hours for less pay than your standard journalist. And by "most" and "your standard" journalists, I'm not talking about your Peter Jennings, Katie Courics, etc. I'm talking about the newsprint people who cover the city council meetings until 2 a.m. in places like Asheville, Pittsburgh, Muskogee and Sacramento, who then have to have copy ready in five hours, only to wake up, see their name in print, and collect their box of Chicklets before spending the next 12-hours reporting on someone else who works half their hours for 10x their pay.

 

Bundle all of that with a top 5 journalism degree from UC Berkeley, and well, it's not so difficult to understand now, is it?

Edited by LABillzFan
Posted

You're assuming there's motive behind bias. Why not just accept that it's as simple as "Being a member of 'The Fourth Estate' attracts liberals, drawn to the idealism of being a counter-balance to the government. And when you have a group where 80% or better of its members share the same attitudes and ideas, anyone else 'outside' the group is by definition unusual."

 

Bias doesn't have to be conspiratorial, or even directed. It's just as easily (probably more easily) a result of a lack of contrary opinions in an insular like-minded group. Same fundamental lack of plasticity leads to otherwise smart Wall Street types buying shitloads of subprime mortgage bonds because they're all using the exact same risk model.

 

I was gonna go somewhere similar....thinking that those in academia, either as students or professors, often wind up working in the media profession. Fourth Estate.

 

here's a question: is Sean Hannity impartial?

 

jw

 

This proves that just becuase youre paid to do something, it doesnt mean you know a lot about it.

 

VERY weak sauce, JW. You SHOULD know better. Im shocked you dont.

 

Either that, or youre just pulling our legs.

×
×
  • Create New...