Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The media is owned and managed by 10 huge corporations, all of which bring in revenues in the billions. Now the fact is that most of their revenue stems from other large, profit-driven corporations in the form of advertisements. Do you really think the decision makers at Disney, Viacom or News Corporation would really allow a pro-labor, anti-big-business, liberal agenda to be printed or broadcast under their watch? Not a chance... maybe socially liberal - but certainly not when it comes to wars, labor issues etc. The media doesn't have a liberal or conservative bias. What it has is a profit bias.
It just so happens that the motives-to earn as much money as possible-are far more aligned with conservative policies than liberal ones.
The fact that News Reporters donate more to the democrats doesn't mean a thing. They don't decide which stories are broadcasted and how they are edited.
As I've stated, it isn't so much how the media reports, but rather what they don't report. Some of it is just sheer laziness, such as the ridculous hyperbole over the lack of government involvement and responsibility in providing the nation with flu shots a couple years ago. Rememeber the absurdity of that one? Typical boo-hoo emotional pleas and how government is responsible for providing everything and anything on a whim, totally free when suddenly not everyone can retrieve their flu vaccine at their nearest McDonald's drive-thru.
Also when the media actually explores the track record and voting records of ANY presidential candidate, even local candidates...I mean beyond a "YEY" or a "NEY" on some bill filled with 500 earmarks, please notify me. I'll be quite aghast.
As I've stated, it isn't so much how the media reports, but rather what they don't report. Some of it is just sheer laziness, such as the ridculous hyperbole over the lack of government involvement and responsibility in providing the nation with flu shots a couple years ago. Rememeber the absurdity of that one? Typical boo-hoo emotional pleas and how government is responsible for providing everything and anything on a whim, totally free when suddenly not everyone can retrieve their flu vaccine at their nearest McDonald's drive-thru.
Also when the media actually explores the track record and voting records of ANY presidential candidate, even local candidates...I mean beyond a "YEY" or a "NEY" on some bill filled with 500 earmarks, please notify me. I'll be quite aghast.
That's the truth. It's far more important () we keep abreast of Paris Hilton and other airheads comings and goings etc. than what is going on in politics, which effects all of us in big and small ways. A lot of very important stories never make it to the news.
The most "liberal" news/comment show I can find is Loe Dobb's. He is not a liberal by any stretch. The rest of the news is hollywood trash or man bites bear claptrap.
O'Reilly doesn't care that bombs of off in Iraq and says that reporting such things is ant-American and just the liberal media trying to go after Bush...
yeah Billy, just like they went after that right winger Johnson in the 60's.
I know this is a no brainer, but there are those who will still argue the point, as well as those way out their in la la land that will argue that the media has been a cheerleeder for the Bush whitehouse! List of journalists taking sides - Politics - MSNBC.com
Beyond tech access, something else is driving Americans to sample different flavors of news: the sterile groupthink and homogeneity of our own Big Media. Even as of February, though a majority of Americans thought war an improper course without U.N. sanction, precious few outlets among major U.S. networks or newspapers bothered to break down the numbers, according to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR). "At a time when 61 percent of U.S. respondents were telling pollsters that more time was needed for diplomacy and inspections, only 6 percent of U.S. sources on the four networks were skeptics regarding the need for war," FAIR reported in its study of networks' on-air "expert sources."
The major media fully ignored gangbuster stories reported exhaustively overseas. Among them were: (1) a manifesto that prescribed the invasion of Iraq and pacification of the Mideast penned in 1998 by a think tank whose board included a raft of current administration hawks; (2) the use of retreaded, outdated and "cooked" information in Colin Powell's case for war presented to the United Nations' Security Council; (3) the U.S. bugging and hacking communications of Security Council delegates; (4) astonishingly vocal cadres of American intelligence officers saying the administration was using only select tidbits of information that supported its actions, ignoring voluminous data that didn't; and (5) a defecting Iraqi general who said Hussein had destroyed all unconventional weapons in the early 1990s - information that seems to be sadly telling in the war's aftermath.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) we keep abreast of Paris Hilton and other airheads comings and goings etc. than what is going on in politics, which effects all of us in big and small ways. A lot of very important stories never make it to the news.
