Msnbc/ge Lib Media Bias... Er, Again

[TheScotsman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI


Nice rifle.

Oh, and nice msnbc spin. The part they edited...

http://s.azcentral.com/home/File-/picture/67955/1


Hmmmm now who would think the pms/nbc crowd would start some racist BS by editing out the fact the guy was black. Just someone tell me that was just an oversight on PMS-nbc's part, please. Hell. maybe the producer is


Bahahah... I love the lib media, they look more like a collection of escapees from an institution every day.

[Svaals]

Say what you want about liberal media bias, but I'd say that right-wing extremism is far more dangerous to this country than lefties. And the Department of Homeland Security agrees. I mean, a poor cameraman not getting the face shot of the man toting the assault rifle is far more benign than Glenn Beck giving his opinion on poisoning the Speaker of the House.

[tinyj316]

*sigh*

Hey, Scotty...when was your last hookah related post? Seems like you do nothing but troll the liberals with your right wing rhetoric.... Its getting rather old...

Can you either start contributing more than garbage, or kindly gtfo? kthxbai

[jdehart]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI


Nice rifle.

Oh, and nice msnbc spin. The part they edited...

http://s.azcentral.com/home/File-/picture/67955/1


Hmmmm now who would think the pms/nbc crowd would start some racist BS by editing out the fact the guy was black. Just someone tell me that was just an oversight on PMS-nbc's part, please. Hell. maybe the producer is


Bahahah... I love the lib media, they look more like a collection of escapees from an institution every day.

I agree with you that msnbc is nuts, but I'm no longer surprised by the mind boggling things they spin up... I pretty much expect it now.

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

[SimplexCoda]

Say what you want about liberal media bias, but I'd say that right-wing extremism is far more dangerous to this country than lefties. And the Department of Homeland Security agrees. I mean, a poor cameraman not getting the face shot of the man toting the assault rifle is far more benign than Glenn Beck giving his opinion on poisoning the Speaker of the House.

I really think that both extremes are detrimental to our current situation. i feel that there have been times in our countries history when liberals have benefited us, and times when conservatives have done the same. Dont get me wrong, i find my self on the conservative side, but being an extremist and closed minded will not help. Dont take me as saying you are extreme either, its just my opinion that they are both dangerous.

*sigh*

Hey, Scotty...when was your last hookah related post? Seems like you do nothing but troll the liberals with your right wing rhetoric.... Its getting rather old...

Can you either start contributing more than garbage, or kindly gtfo? kthxbai

Whoa dude.

[Scalliwag]

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

Nah, most of us don't give a piss what rightwing nazi hacks think because that's an oxymoron anyways with special emphasis on the "moron"
So you boys get your news from.... let me guess....
that "fair and balanced" news outlet that former Bush spokesman Tony Snow come from? The one that head of was a former RNC chairman? Where GW's cousin is one of their program directors. Faux Noose? Or maybe Rush Limpdick?
Face it guys you're in the minority. You spend your days whining about crap like this and forgetting about how badly your repub homies whacked shit up when they had full control.
Get the hell over it. Quit being Sorelosermans. We saw exactly how great your ideaologies played out and we're having to try and get over that.
You're pissed we get it and we really don't give a fuck. Do you ever do anything productive or just whine?

[jdehart]

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

Nah, most of us don't give a piss what rightwing nazi hacks think because that's an oxymoron anyways with special emphasis on the "moron"
So you boys get your news from.... let me guess....
that "fair and balanced" news outlet that former Bush spokesman Tony Snow come from? The one that head of was a former RNC chairman? Where GW's cousin is one of their program directors. Faux Noose? Or maybe Rush Limpdick?
Face it guys you're in the minority. You spend your days whining about crap like this and forgetting about how badly your repub homies whacked shit up when they had full control.
Get the hell over it. Quit being Sorelosermans. We saw exactly how great your ideaologies played out and we're having to try and get over that.
You're pissed we get it and we really don't give a fuck. Do you ever do anything productive or just whine?

Calm down Scalli, your whining

[coplinb]

*sigh*

Hey, Scotty...when was your last hookah related post? Seems like you do nothing but troll the liberals with your right wing rhetoric.... Its getting rather old...

Can you either start contributing more than garbage, or kindly gtfo? kthxbai

Ouch.

[Hookie The Hookah]

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

Nah, most of us don't give a piss what rightwing nazi hacks think because that's an oxymoron anyways with special emphasis on the "moron"
So you boys get your news from.... let me guess....
that "fair and balanced" news outlet that former Bush spokesman Tony Snow come from? The one that head of was a former RNC chairman? Where GW's cousin is one of their program directors. Faux Noose? Or maybe Rush Limpdick?
Face it guys you're in the minority. You spend your days whining about crap like this and forgetting about how badly your repub homies whacked shit up when they had full control.
Get the hell over it. Quit being Sorelosermans. We saw exactly how great your ideaologies played out and we're having to try and get over that.
You're pissed we get it and we really don't give a fuck. Do you ever do anything productive or just whine?

Winner!

[Majid]

With respect, my advice to anybody interested in how their country is run is to turn off the TV and unplug the internetcable. People are getting so incredibly riled up due to warped, hypersensationalised media coverage doing exactly what it is designed to do. Limit your media intake and choose your sources wisely. Most people are intelligent enough to know when they are being pandered to or whipped into a frenzy but it feels too good to actually change the channel. Wisdom is in focussing on issues and practical solutions, not turning the issues into entertainment regardless of what it does to people.

[Click]

Rabble Rabble Rabble

[clibinarius]

We get it; MSNBC is left wing.

Joe Scarborough is the new Trotsky.

[gaia.plateau]

Breaking news: Liberal Bias from the global archetype of liberally biased news programs.

*SHOCKED*

Stayed tuned for a world exclusive: a pool of water in Britain found to be wet.


Edit: the American leftist media, without a doubt, is alarmist, sensationalist, hyperbolic, inappropriately emotional, and utterly biased. The only difference between it and the American rightist media is that MSNBC only embellishes and exaggerates, whereas Faux goes the extra step into actually making shit up from nothing. Edited August 28, 2009 by gaia.plateau

[ilikemyusername]

fuck it, i had something witty and clever to say about fox, but instead I will call fox a total dildo.

[Scalliwag]

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

Nah, most of us don't give a piss what rightwing nazi hacks think because that's an oxymoron anyways with special emphasis on the "moron"
So you boys get your news from.... let me guess....
that "fair and balanced" news outlet that former Bush spokesman Tony Snow come from? The one that head of was a former RNC chairman? Where GW's cousin is one of their program directors. Faux Noose? Or maybe Rush Limpdick?
Face it guys you're in the minority. You spend your days whining about crap like this and forgetting about how badly your repub homies whacked shit up when they had full control.
Get the hell over it. Quit being Sorelosermans. We saw exactly how great your ideaologies played out and we're having to try and get over that.
You're pissed we get it and we really don't give a fuck. Do you ever do anything productive or just whine?

Calm down Scalli, your whining

Unless you can counter my remarks by disproving them all you have is a lameass remark. Hell, the repubs got their asses beat, nothing to whine about here. I like to pour a little salt into rightwing wounds though

[Svaals]

Breaking news: Liberal Bias from the global archetype of liberally biased news programs.

*SHOCKED*

Stayed tuned for a world exclusive: a pool of water in Britain found to be wet.


Edit: the American leftist media, without a doubt, is alarmist, sensationalist, hyperbolic, inappropriately emotional, and utterly biased. The only difference between it and the American rightist media is that MSNBC only embellishes and exaggerates, whereas Faux goes the extra step into actually making shit up from nothing.

/win

That's why I dig on public news: Bill Moyers! He reports the news correctly, and without the hyper-sensationalism.

[clibinarius]

And of course your gonna rile up the Socialists... err Liberals here, that is also to be expected.

Nah, most of us don't give a piss what rightwing nazi hacks think because that's an oxymoron anyways with special emphasis on the "moron"
So you boys get your news from.... let me guess....
that "fair and balanced" news outlet that former Bush spokesman Tony Snow come from? The one that head of was a former RNC chairman? Where GW's cousin is one of their program directors. Faux Noose? Or maybe Rush Limpdick?
Face it guys you're in the minority. You spend your days whining about crap like this and forgetting about how badly your repub homies whacked shit up when they had full control.
Get the hell over it. Quit being Sorelosermans. We saw exactly how great your ideaologies played out and we're having to try and get over that.
You're pissed we get it and we really don't give a fuck. Do you ever do anything productive or just whine?

Calm down Scalli, your whining

Unless you can counter my remarks by disproving them all you have is a lameass remark. Hell, the repubs got their asses beat, nothing to whine about here. I like to pour a little salt into rightwing wounds though

First: You obviously care about what right wingers think or you'd never respond politically.
Second: Anyone who gets their news from any cable network and isn't aware of its limitations have their head up their asses.
Third: You like to pick on fat boy more than I do. Anyone who takes him seriously is an idiot. So stop taking him somewhat seriously. He has the power to reach a bunch of idiots who are OLD PEOPLE. That's right: Only old people listen to him. In ten years, he will have no audience if he isn't fired due to the fact the people backing him are bankrupt anyway.
Fourth: I'm not sure Republicans are as minority as you would like to believe; Democrats like Gene Taylor I don't think you'd agree with, and when you take away the Democrats you'd have a problem with, you're left with a minority. The Democrats are the registered majority still, but Obama's the first Democrat to win with a majority (as opposed to a plurality) since Jimmy Carter. Reagan, Bush and Bush all won at least one election with a majority. This isn't me saying "Democrats bad-"this is me saying "remember the nuclear option: People whine and bitch but come back."-forgetting Republicans are in the minority assumes they won't come out. There will be Republican majorities by 2014, I will guarantee that.
Fifth: I'm not sure what ideology George W. Bush had, and I'm not sure what ideology Barack Obama has. A lot of people are "over it" and have been for some time. What they're not over is they were promised a change in terms of openness and tone, let alone a legislative agenda, and they haven't received it. The Obama administration is at least as closed off as the Bush administration was to the public. This wouldn't be a problem, except that's the change EVERYONE-liberal or conservative-wanted; a transparent democracy.

I was going to avoid tirades and rants, but seriously, you challenged someone to debunk you. Well, I didn't. I think Fox News sucks, Rush Limbaugh is an idiot, and Bush sucked.

Of course, the comment that annoyed Scalli from someone else is equally as deplorable: First, you have a bunch of people calling people socialists, irrationally, without knowing what it means, or able to explain why exactly socialism is bad aside from dumb idiots saying "Obama is a socialist" without knowing what it means and thus, liberals are socialists. Second, explain to me what Obama intends to do that's socialist; a healthcare reform you say? And Medicare Part D doesn't fit the bill as a socialist program that was passed by...gasp...the Republicans? The problem with Medicare Part D wasn't that its socialist anyway, its that its SHITTY. A valid argument might be that consistently socialist programs are shitty (I would disagree that socialist programs are inherently shitty anyway, but some are). But until you hacks stop using the word "Socialist" and actually come up with legitimate reasons to bash Obama, I'm not interested. You sound like people who called George W. Bush a terrorist. Is that what this is about anyway? The right wingers trying to treat Obama as they feel Bush was treated? If so, that's a great motivation: hate the future, not the deeds.

[Scalliwag]

I agree that Rush is an idiot but you should never underestimate an idiot. All the nutcases that are hanging on his every word take him seriously. Nutcases change history. Lee Harvey Oswald. Timothy McVeigh. So for you to make out people like Rush cannot have an impact just because only a fraction of the society listens to him is not very accurate according to history.
And I really don't care about what rightwingers think. I just think their words should not go uncountered. There are lurkers that watch arguments and form opinions sometimes based on the arguments they witness. Naive yes, but no need to sit idley by and let rightwingers screaming at town halls appear to be right. Call them bitches out on the carpet.

[clibinarius]

I agree that Rush is an idiot but you should never underestimate an idiot. All the nutcases that are hanging on his every word take him seriously. Nutcases change history. Lee Harvey Oswald. Timothy McVeigh. So for you to make out people like Rush cannot have an impact just because only a fraction of the society listens to him is not very accurate according to history.
And I really don't care about what rightwingers think. I just think their words should not go uncountered. There are lurkers that watch arguments and form opinions sometimes based on the arguments they witness. Naive yes, but no need to sit idley by and let rightwingers screaming at town halls appear to be right. Call them bitches out on the carpet.

Well, I agree for a change to an extent-except on Demographics: Ignoring Rush Limbaugh might be the best way to get rid of the problem as its a rapidly declining population and increasingly difficult to fund his nonsense. Blowback's a bit of a bitch; besides, if someone does something nutty, its not Rush's fault in my opinion as much as the fact they're already nuts. So I'm not afraid of him, and if he's left alone, he'll go bye-bye...his only worth is the fact he gets people immersed in the controversy. If he's left alone, he will scream and shout more and eventually go away. Mind you with all networks-if people stopped taking the personalities seriously, they might report on the news and less on the personalities...

Polls consistently show that people want change of healthcare overwhelmingly, and some show people want more government involvement. These shouting people haven't accomplished anything towards their cause and only will serve to alienate moderates from the GOP in 2010. The Democrats should stop saying Astroturf and start saying "This is the Republican Base" and answer it by campaigning about it...

[Sonthert]

Sorry. I have to laugh.

I am a loyal, pro-constitution, liberal, patriotic American. I have voted for the most liberal candidate in every election for 20 years.

I don't know why you people keep talking about the media like it has a left-wing bias. BBC? Thats a liberal bias. Those cable news programs are a lot more right wing than left wing, so much so, I don't watch the crap. Just because you don't like it and you call it liberal bias doesn't make it so. In terms of the politics of the race of man, from 1-10 (1 being the most liberal) PBS runs about a 4, BBC a 3, Al Jazeera a 2, CNN a 6, Fox a 9, MSNBC an 8. The UN runs around a 3 as well. I'm about a 3.5-4.

Instead of assaulting us with polarized propaganda about the screwed up American Media, look at other News sources in the world and get an idea of where the American Media really stands. I listen to idiotbox conservatives bitching about liberal bias in the media, getting angry, yelling about it and in terms of the rest of the world, there is nothing to support their point.

It was mused in a book of the leadership of Nazi Germany that I have that Adolf Hitler accused Herman Goering of being a pacifist. Does that mean Goering was a pacifist in terms of the rest of humanity? Not at all. It means Hitler was an asshole and Goering was slightly less of one...it doesn't put Goering in line for a Nobel Peace Prize or at a rally for World Peace.

So when somebody says the US Media has a liberal bias, I have to laugh. Its Hitler calling Goering a liberal. Give me a break people. The US Media is not the entire spectrum of political thought in the World. It may not even be the most important. Look at the political spectrum of human thought and then look at the US Media and stop clogging my ears with elephant dung.

I am even more confused the more I think about this...since when did the conservatives stop representing big money? Since when did the US Media stop being big money? I know what the next responses are..."Al Jazzera doesn't count...BBC socialist blah bah blah...". Again, you don't get to throw out what you want out of the Spectrum of Human Thought and then decide that you see a bias in what's left over.

Lets put it another way, I have read numerous articles and watched crackpot documentaries from both sides of the spectrum. There is a lot less room between Fox and the conservative crackpots than there is between MSNBC and the liberal crackpots. Did you guys ever see Zeitgeist2? They "introduced" the concept of Utopian Communism? Watch it some time and then tell me MSNBC has a liberal bias.

I should just add, the reason that Scalli and I are laughing at this conversation (and a couple of others) is that we remember the Media in 1980 or so. Yep. Back then, the Media was certainly more fair, more balanced (before the conservatives salvoed the Fairness Doctrines in the FCC Regulations). It was a lot more liberal then, more like a 4-5 on my 1-10 scale. What you guys see as the Media we see as a far more conservative body than it was 30 years ago. Thats why we don't see liberal bias...we see conservative bias. There were also only three networks and no cable "newz" programs. (Calling them news seems a little unfair).

I agree with your statements about 60%, gaia. You've been to Cuba...can you really see a liberal bias in the US Media? I guess if you want to define a liberal media as one that upsets people and a conservative media as one that quells people, I guess I agree. I think the distinction is deeper, however, I think conservative Media tends to report what they are told, champion the Status Quo, Militarism, and social control while the liberal media investigates news, champions change, human rights, and pacifism. They are similar, but my definition is slightly more expansive.

The most liberal politicians in the United States are often the targets of bashing by the Cable Newz programs, while the most conservative politicians are pretty much left alone. The Media is quite content to ride around in helicopters now, while the media in 1970s would walk around Vietnam, taking pictures of combat and trying to uncover stories. The conservatives in the Bush Administration decided letting journalists walk around getting information that might make the Iraq war unpopular was a bad idea, so they let them ride around in the helicopters. The Media didn't seem all excited to go out and get exciting and sensational news that would tend to call the war into question. Certainly seems conservative. Not challenging the government or the status quo...reporting the limited amounts that were cleared and approved. Maybe there was information that questioned the war...they didn't make it on the cable newz programs though. AL Jazzera's reporting the number of children US bombing was killing, the US Media is erroneously reporting how accurate smart bombs were minimalizing civilian casualties. The cable news was lock-stepped into reporting the war was good and going well, something straight out of Orwell.

[Sonthert]

With respect, my advice to anybody interested in how their country is run is to turn off the TV and unplug the internetcable. People are getting so incredibly riled up due to warped, hypersensationalised media coverage doing exactly what it is designed to do. Limit your media intake and choose your sources wisely. Most people are intelligent enough to know when they are being pandered to or whipped into a frenzy but it feels too good to actually change the channel. Wisdom is in focussing on issues and practical solutions, not turning the issues into entertainment regardless of what it does to people.

Yeah, I agree. The US Media is crap. It lacks news content.

I believe Wikipedia calls them "Weasel Words"...the bread and butter of the Cable News.

[Svaals]

Well said, Eric!!

NPR and PBS are about as close to actual news as you're going to get in this country. I think both of the outlets are pretty unbiased. They report the news, and maybe have one EXPERT panelist giving an opinion or sharing research. "Newz" outlets often editorializing before they even announce the headline, and they have the same contributors every single day. I don't want to hear opinions from the same people everyday. I want to hear from people that know what they're talking about!

I think the people in this country have forgotten how to distinguish between editorials and news. Most people probably wouldn't have any idea what to think about news if they heard it.

[kdkhookah]

Well said, Eric!!

NPR and PBS are about as close to actual news as you're going to get in this country.

Agreed.

I also think it's a good idea to watch other countries' news programs to see what our government is really doing and what the rest of the world thinks about it. You can't watch MSNBC, Fox, or CNN anymore because they are televised news channels. They have to report on something 24/7 and make it seem interesting enough to get people to watch. They are corporately funded, which forces them to extremely care about ratings. They have to create something out of nothing, to stir up controversy, and start conspiracy theories in order to make boring ass events seem interesting.

Now NPR and PBS, privately funded, are boring as shit, but at the same time 20 times better because you can actually get the news and sometimes a few expert opinions. Oh and what's best about these programs is that they aren't yelling at each other trying to make the topic overly dramatic.

[clibinarius]

The Media is quite content to ride around in helicopters now, while the media in 1970s would walk around Vietnam, taking pictures of combat and trying to uncover stories.

Actually, I have to disagree with you here. I've had a bit of a pedigree around the media. Its not that they're content in helicopters, its that they have televisions all over the place and don't do any reporting at all. Helicopters would assume that they're still going somewhere. That's rare. Its even dumber than the description you paint in reality.

Back in 1980, in Ronald Reagan's day, my dad said Reagan would just sit at a table when running for president reaching out towards people and saying "Hello, I'm Ronald Reagan and I'm running for president"-he also mentioned Bill Clinton was the same way back in 1992. Something very wrong has happened to the culture of the country since then in which you aren't even allowed to interview people in the media anymore. Of course, the media has no genuine interest in interviewing people either these days...as I keep saying, its not liberal, and its not conservative. I'm not sure what it is. Of course, everybody thinks its the "evil" ideology, but...no, this is a very strange cultural shift.

A couple of months ago I was having a conversation with someone at a red carpet event on the carpet, who clearly didn't want to be on the carpet isolated from people he knew and wanted to talk to. Since I'm not in the media, I asked: Why do you tolerate such shabby treatment, being closed off from the people by bars, not able to talk to them as they pass by? If people don't treat the media right-stage a media blackout. Refuse to cover events. Ideas such as these seemed very strange to the reporters, who think this is the way it should be. Of course, they had no good questions to ask. I was joking around with one of the guests, and the reporters were demanding to interrupt us (which really angered the person on the carpet) and there was a genuine look of shock that you could treat a famous person as if you didn't give a shit he was on a red carpet.

That's what's wrong with the media more than the fairness doctrine. Besides, the fairness doctrine would only apply to dead mediums-cable news is dead (but would be exempted), radio is dead, network TV is moribund. It would've made a difference 20 years ago, but the audiences are too old by this point. That's the big thing people don't understand about the media: These cable networks are fighting over a pool of 1 million senior citizens. Big deal. How does this effect the real world? Maybe if they actually did some reporting, they'd have an audience of more.

Ted Turner's recently made some very interesting comments about why CNN has turned into the pile of shit it is today and has suggested firing everybody working on the network, not because of bias, but because of utter incompetence. And among the old guard of the media, there's a strong sense that if you want to improve journalism, get rid of the televisions where people work.

[Sonthert]

Check out "Orwell Rolls in his Grave" its a hard-hitting critique of the News Media, with a lot of content from Charles Lewis, former 60 Minutes Producer. As he points out, the Media has some hard boundaries, but reporters who would indict the Media System aren't employed as reporters, they're weeded out quite early in their careers. Thats why there is a distinct line between coffee house paper reporters and major media outlet reporters. The documentary pumps several rounds of buckshot right between the shoulder blades of big Media and talks about the transition and what legal steps had to be taken to get the media to the point its at. The big one was overturning the Fairness Doctrine. Fox News wouldn't legal in the early 80s. It couldn't exist. The Fairness Doctrine prescribed that if an opinion was offered on the air, there had to be an equally qualified person to offer the opposing opinion. I would go so far as to say if the Fairness Doctrine was still in force, we wouldn;t have gone to war in Iraq. Its easy to sway public opinion when the news outlets are in lockstep giving the opinions that are in the interests of big business.

Another pregnant point is that the accusation of liberal bias in the media exists to paint Americans into a conservative corner. If the Media has a liberal bias, where does a person stand who has a more liberal opinion than the Media? They are a crackpot...a radical. That means the media can move to the right and sweep the moderates over to the right as well. At least in theory.