| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/30/2007 04:30:22 PM · #1 |
Who are we listening to?
Thought I'd share that. Pretty scary. Here are a couple more, all from a sociology course I'm taking.
"liberal media"
press bias
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 04:40:19 PM · #2 |
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning!
Message edited by author 2007-05-30 16:41:20. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 04:43:25 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning! |
lol... my sentiments exactly. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 04:44:50 PM · #4 |
Monica, you might want to edit your original post to correctly title the middle one: "Illiberal Media" - your current post makes it sound the reverse of what it actually argues.
Message edited by author 2007-05-30 16:45:18.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 05:51:09 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Monica, you might want to edit your original post to correctly title the middle one: "Illiberal Media" - your current post makes it sound the reverse of what it actually argues. |
lol. well that's why i put the quotes around it, sort of sarcasm I guess. didn't realize there would be a misunderstanding. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 06:10:40 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning! |
Which are the fair and unbiased media outlets? Just curious.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 06:17:44 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning! |
Which are the fair and unbiased media outlets? Just curious. |
Fox news OOOBBBVIIIOUUUSLLYY! lol.
No? How about Stewart and Colbert? :D Honestly I am respecting these shows more and more each day. Obviously not the greatest factual sources but really nice social commentary. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:02:42 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
...No? How about Stewart and Colbert? :D Honestly I am respecting these shows more and more each day. Obviously not the greatest factual sources but really nice social commentary. |
I kind of have to agree, I don't watch news much (well part cause I only get the military networks and they show stuff at weird hours or I just don't want to watch them). I just caught one, I think John Stewart's, the other day where Al Gore basically said the same thing. That shows like Stewart's are actually better than the other news channels and he liked being on his show. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:07:15 PM · #9 |
| I agree with the posters in this thread (so far). Have also admired Joe Conason's book "Big Lies." But... since these political threads tend to run on and on with useless headbutting, I hereby avow that I will not read this one past the first page. :-) |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:08:54 PM · #10 |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:14:30 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning! |
The exact opposite of this is true, as well, I've found. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:21:23 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Left-bias in the media? Well even fair and unbiased media outlets look left biased to the far-right-wingers, LOL. Heck, if you're on the right wing-tip, *everything* looks like it's left-leaning! |
The exact opposite of this is true, as well, I've found. |
Yeah, I've seen that on many of the hard-left blogs.
FOX news, if no one has noticed, has actually gone center-left with the addition of 3 or four New York Times editors to their staff. They used to drudge up stuff to make liberals look bad, now they're just the same as all the rest.
It's not what they do report, it's what gets left on the editing room floor every day that's a travesty. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:27:33 PM · #13 |
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:46:49 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:51:55 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by sabphoto:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
...No? How about Stewart and Colbert? :D Honestly I am respecting these shows more and more each day. Obviously not the greatest factual sources but really nice social commentary. |
I kind of have to agree, I don't watch news much (well part cause I only get the military networks and they show stuff at weird hours or I just don't want to watch them). I just caught one, I think John Stewart's, the other day where Al Gore basically said the same thing. That shows like Stewart's are actually better than the other news channels and he liked being on his show. |
I watch both fairly regularly but if you view them as actual news source they are far worse than anything else out there. Talk about selective. Geez. They go with what's funny and ultimately what gets better ratings which ironically is probably what makes them closer to today's cable news than anything else.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:53:13 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
Yeah like the truth. :)
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:53:22 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't.
Message edited by author 2007-05-30 19:53:46. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:55:45 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't. |
thank you. that's exactly what I wanted to say but didn't know how to word it. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:57:42 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't. |
What Daryl said is still dead center on target. Whatever "spin" is put on the story, and however that is achieved (sins of omission are just one technique), if the slant is opposite your own, you'll be upset. I've never seen someone who agrees with the slant of a piece complain, however.
Just like I never hear submitters complain about "those spurious tens." |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 07:59:39 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't. |
Or a government could do what has been happening in Venezuela by Hugo Chavez, just turn the station off. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 08:01:13 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by sabphoto:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
...No? How about Stewart and Colbert? :D Honestly I am respecting these shows more and more each day. Obviously not the greatest factual sources but really nice social commentary. |
I kind of have to agree, I don't watch news much (well part cause I only get the military networks and they show stuff at weird hours or I just don't want to watch them). I just caught one, I think John Stewart's, the other day where Al Gore basically said the same thing. That shows like Stewart's are actually better than the other news channels and he liked being on his show. |
I watch both fairly regularly but if you view them as actual news source they are far worse than anything else out there. Talk about selective. Geez. They go with what's funny and ultimately what gets better ratings which ironically is probably what makes them closer to today's cable news than anything else. |
That's why I said social commentary. No way I call them my news sources. They never claimed to be is the point, of course they are for what's funny, they are on comedy central. However they do an awfully good job at pointing out media biases with their montages. Trying to find one now. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 08:01:39 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't. |
What Daryl said is still dead center on target. Whatever "spin" is put on the story, and however that is achieved (sins of omission are just one technique), if the slant is opposite your own, you'll be upset. I've never seen someone who agrees with the slant of a piece complain, however.
Just like I never hear submitters complain about "those spurious tens." |
Heh, I can't believe he voted this piece of crap a 10!!?!?! LOL |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 08:09:17 PM · #23 |
Ok... Ann Coulter... someone who is deserving of airtime with a fair an unbiased and educated view of the world? Heck no. It doesn't matter what side you are on, a person like her is a 3-ring circus that is there specifically to shake things up and get ratings. It's so rediculous that she gets so much face time on the "news" while highly educated peole that actually have something to say may never get the chance. And I would say the same of someone as far off in wacko land as her on the left as she is on the right.
I have to disagree with the sentiment that people don't mind when things are swung their way... I think they just don't notice it as much. I certainly would get upset because that leaves more room for it to be argued against by the other side. Might as well show it all fair and balanced so there is nothing to dig up afterwards and discredit the whole story. |
|
|
|
05/30/2007 08:12:42 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
I think the media always looks bias if they don't report exactly what you want to hear. |
BINGO! |
No, they look biased when you research the rest of the story and find out the parts they leave out. Whether it's a Katie Couric story or a John Stossel story, liberal or conservative. They all spin things and the easiest way to spin is to leave out things that you don't have to say. What's easier to believe, a clock that's five minutes off, or a clock that's 5 hours off?
It's not what they say, it's what they don't. |
What Daryl said is still dead center on target. Whatever "spin" is put on the story, and however that is achieved (sins of omission are just one technique), if the slant is opposite your own, you'll be upset. I've never seen someone who agrees with the slant of a piece complain, however.
Just like I never hear submitters complain about "those spurious tens." |
Heh, I can't believe he voted this piece of crap a 10!!?!?! LOL |
Hey I'm pretty neutral I give most photos a 5 or a 6. :P
|
|
|
|
05/30/2007 08:16:22 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Ok... Ann Coulter... someone who is deserving of airtime with a fair an unbiased and educated view of the world? Heck no. It doesn't matter what side you are on, a person like her is a 3-ring circus that is there specifically to shake things up and get ratings. It's so rediculous that she gets so much face time on the "news" while highly educated peole that actually have something to say may never get the chance. And I would say the same of someone as far off in wacko land as her on the left as she is on the right.
I have to disagree with the sentiment that people don't mind when things are swung their way... I think they just don't notice it as much. I certainly would get upset because that leaves more room for it to be argued against by the other side. Might as well show it all fair and balanced so there is nothing to dig up afterwards and discredit the whole story. |
Not disagreeing about the nature of Coulter, but I do believe she's a Cornell grad, and a JD from Michigan, with Honors. She's also a raving egomaniac and an intentionally inflamatory personality. But still, she's educated all right.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/14/2025 06:51:27 AM EDT.
