| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/29/2010 01:26:49 PM · #26 |
Whatever they did with Mr. Williams, they have been doing some excellent work reporting. I was sickened by the reports they have been running on lobbying and shaping laws like the Arizona Immigration law. It seems the system is completely broken and all (dems and reps) are beholden to the corporate interests. If you didn't hear it this morning, I highly recommend a listen.
Shaping state law with little scrutiny
When the congress writes the laws for contributions and lobbying it's like the fox guarding the henhouse... |
|
|
|
10/29/2010 02:17:05 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Flash:
as long as NPR stays centrist (as many here claim they are) then they benifit from wide support - but when they veer too far left then they are at risk of following the likes of Air America. Soros 1.8 million donation isn't helping the centrist independents see NPR as "fair and balanced" - even if they are. |
Odd that support of NPR from such corporate mainstays as Bank of America, Farmers Insurance Group of Companies, Prudential Financial, all whom have given over a million dollars do not get much reaction except form the far left, who are perhaps rightly concerned that such support tends to skew the reporting towards the right. The folks who founded McDonalds and Kentuky Fried Chicken have given amounts that dwarf Mr. Soros' 1.8 million, yet it is Mr. Soros' gift that is evidence of a shift in their reporting? Really?
The fact that NPR is to many ears the only radio station that is not bought and paid for by commercial interests in 30 second segments might be why they seem so out of step with most of America's reportage. Their reporters aren't supposed to worry about pleasing the sponsors.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2010 02:25:38 PM · #28 |
|
|
|
10/29/2010 04:24:20 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Odd that support of NPR from such corporate mainstays as Bank of America, Farmers Insurance Group of Companies, Prudential Financial, all whom have given over a million dollars do not get much reaction except form the far left, who are perhaps rightly concerned that such support tends to skew the reporting towards the right. The folks who founded McDonalds and Kentuky Fried Chicken have given amounts that dwarf Mr. Soros' 1.8 million, yet it is Mr. Soros' gift that is evidence of a shift in their reporting? Really? |
Any reporting that isn't Faux News or sufficiently conservative is labeled "liberal media bias," and yet despite admittedly distorted reporting from the likes of Fox, we rarely hear the term "conservative media bias." The reason is quite simple: if multiple independent reports lend credence to a viewpoint that doesn't match one's personal beliefs, he can just claim the reports are biased in favor of the opposition. Not that they're wrong, mind you, just that they help the other side... which is demonstrably true. On the other hand, if a report is misleading or factually incorrect there's no need to claim bias. You just point out that it's wrong. Thus, some people believe revelations that the Shirley Sherrod story was distorted represents "liberal media bias" while others watch the whole tape and see it for themselves: the story wasn't conservatively biased, it was just plain deceitful.
Along comes the "outrage" over Juan Williams' dismissal from NPR. Conservatives raise the liberal media bias flag and declare that Williams was only speaking his mind. How dare they trample his right to free speech! It's political correctness run amok! Yeah. If Dan Rather declared in an interview that the sight of a black man on a subway car makes him afraid that he might be robbed, you know darn well that he'd be cleaning out his desk for such an outrageously insensitive and racist stereotype. Ah, but this is muslims we're talking about, and Fox has invested heavily in the fearmongering that drives such suspicion... even to the point of vilifying the leader of an islamic foundation who's part owner of their own company! Naturally, Williams was offered a $2 million job at Fox...
Sadly, this is all too common. We hear reports that President Obama was not a natural born American despite the fact that his mother had never been outside the U.S. until Obama was 6 years old. I got a mailer from a local Republican vilifying his congressional opponent for voting in favor of TARP despite the fact that he hadn't been elected yet when TARP became law. Another one on the radio claims that his opponent voted to provide free healthcare to illegal immigrants despite the fact that no such legislation has ever been proposed, let alone passed. Those who agree with these scenarios claim that contrary evidence is liberal media bias, while those who don't just say it's not true.
Misinformation runs riot in this year's elections. Tea Party members rail against the coming expiration of tax cuts for the wealthy, blissfully unaware that their namesakes fought the opposite scenario. I hear many candidates deride career politicians and boast that they're outsiders to politics... often the very same people who claimed that Obama didn't have enough political experience to be president. Duh. I had a conversation with one guy who claimed that Obama was ignorant of the constitution (Obama TAUGHT constitutional law at a university) and wanted to see constitutional champions like Christine O'Donnell get elected. Yikes!
One of my personal favorites are candidates who boast that they know how to create jobs because they ran a business. No, Mr. Politician, you know how to HIRE people because you ran a business, so unless you plan to start another business to hire millions that experience doesn't mean a whole lot. This ties into the popular conservative claim that FDR's New Deal didn't solve unemployment— WWII did. Sure it did... because the federal government hired soldiers and workers to fight the war and issued war bonds (debt) to pay for it. The only way to create jobs on a large scale is to innovate and create new industries. The computer, biotech, aerospace, nuclear, materials engineering and other technologies that came out of WWII military and NASA space research created entirely new fields to support formerly government-employed workers. With conservatives fighting against green energy and healthcare initiatives, what new industries could they turn to today to fill that role? I suspect border security, morality police and news manufacturing. :-/
Message edited by author 2010-10-29 16:25:19. |
|
|
|
10/29/2010 04:53:18 PM · #30 |
One of the things that scares me most about Fox news is their notion that facts are fungible and subject to point of view. That only elitist hold that educating yourself on a subject gives your opinon greater weight than "gut instict". That an informed and uniformed opinion should be given the same weight.
When future Nevada senator Sharron Angle says that she would not have voted to confirm Elena Kagan or Sonia Sotomayor because they do not understand the constitution, it is a sad statment on the way America values learning and for that matter truth. Facts exist independant of opinion, and should act as touchstones, not little projectiles to put in our pea shooters. Since we went to war to find the "weappons of mass destruction", it seems the truth is secondary to a really convincing narrative.
The truth is out there.....somewhere. But it seems less and less present on the opinon echo chamber that is the popular media today. |
|
|
|
10/29/2010 05:06:58 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
When future Nevada senator Sharron Angle says that she would not have voted to confirm Elena Kagan or Sonia Sotomayor because they do not understand the constitution, it is a sad statment on the way America values learning and for that matter truth. |
Right. An art teacher who doesn't think the constitution mandates the separation of church and state believes graduates of Yale, Princeton and Harvard law schools don't understand the constitution. It's amazing that such morons ever make it onto the ballot when statements like that scream incompetence. |
|
|
|
10/29/2010 05:58:30 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
When future Nevada senator Sharron Angle says that she would not have voted to confirm Elena Kagan or Sonia Sotomayor because they do not understand the constitution, it is a sad statment on the way America values learning and for that matter truth. |
Right. An art teacher who doesn't think the constitution mandates the separation of church and state believes graduates of Yale, Princeton and Harvard law schools don't understand the constitution. It's amazing that such morons ever make it onto the ballot when statements like that scream incompetence. |
Maybe she stayed at a Holiday Inn and believed the commercial?
|
|
|
|
10/29/2010 06:00:00 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
When future Nevada senator Sharron Angle says that she would not have voted to confirm Elena Kagan or Sonia Sotomayor because they do not understand the constitution, it is a sad statment on the way America values learning and for that matter truth. |
Right. An art teacher who doesn't think the constitution mandates the separation of church and state believes graduates of Yale, Princeton and Harvard law schools don't understand the constitution. It's amazing that such morons ever make it onto the ballot when statements like that scream incompetence. |
Even scarier that she might even win. :-( |
|
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: 08/27/2025 01:30:30 AM EDT.
