Media Bias

[borntohula]

does the media have a bias? if so, which direction does it lead?

[Ruettiger]

I think it leads to the first star on the left and straight on 'till morning!

[crazycanuck]

That's kind of a broad question. All of the media has bias, some more than others, and they can go either way. It all depends on the publication/outlet.

 

As a sidebar, there was a recent survey on the political views of journalists, and the vast majority are socially liberal/fiscally conservative.

[supercanuk]

The media definitely has a bias, all media has bias, to the left to the right, and you have to look at the owners of the media outlet to really get a good idea of it too. Media in general in both Canada and the U.S. is beyond corrupt and so useless now it

Edited December 5, 2005 by supercanuk

[ecnarf]

I hate the way people (see: conservatives) often accuse various media outlets of having a liberal bias when they don't praise the Glorious Conservative Cultural Revolution.

 

The Fraser Institute recently assigned the CBC responsibility for anti-American sentiments in Canada. What a load of crap. The U.S. government is responsible for anti-American sentiment in Canada.

[The_Rat_Who_Would_be_King]

I think it leads to the first star on the left and straight on 'till morning!

I ROFLed at that for hours, then went to the hospital.

 

And in addition to ecnarf's words, another thing responsible for the anti-American sentiment is what I see as the predominantly 'right wing' bias of American media, or maybe the lack of a middle grounds. Turning on CNN or any news show on a major network can be infuriating when you see the lack of journalistic responsibility in filling the role of 'fourth estate.'

[little miss sunshine]

The media definitely has a bias, all media has bias, to the left to the right, and you have to look at the owners of the media outlet to really get a good idea of it too. Media in general in both Canada and the U.S. is beyond corrupt and so useless now it

[borntohula]

i think the media has a conservative bias. seeing as how all the media outlets work within the big business frame of mind, you can't really avoid it.

 

take newspapers for example. newspapers like the new york times and the washington post frame peoples opinions because they only present certain views, which is a direct result of the fact that they are run by corporations. those corporations are solely concerned with getting advertisers, more companies that are not interested in actually reporting the news. also, these companies are very likely to have conservative views, as the conservatives cater to big-businesses. now, if those advertisers provide the means by which the papers exist, then they will obviously begin to dictate what the papers write. it is the same story with all forms of media.

 

also, notice when someone like bill o'reilly (who's obviously leaning to the right) tries to demonize a media source, they call it left-leaning, communist, etc, etc??? as far as the conservatives are concerned, there are no left-leaning tendencies in their writings whatsoever. but in liberal media, theres a mix of both left and right. yet, bill o reilly still calls them communists, even though they're more towards the middle.

[Moonlight_Graham]

In Canada, the CBC has a definate left-wing bias and it is also run and funded by the Canadian Government so obviously there is a bias there. I'm not a big fan of the idea of having Canada's biggest TV news corp. owned/run by the gov't. Talk about 1984.

 

CanWest/Global and the National Post and affiliated newspapers i find lean more conservative than the others in Canada.

 

CTV i find doesn't have a large bias either way, but i don't pay close enough attention.

[Are You for Scuba?]

That's pretty much how I view it, also.

[Dan #2]

Read Chuck Klosterman's essay on the subject, in Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs.

 

He explains it perfectly.

 

 

(i'll mail it soon enough, Mike haha)

[ecnarf]

I think it leads to the first star on the left and straight on 'till morning!

I ROFLed at that for hours, then went to the hospital.

 

And in addition to ecnarf's words, another thing responsible for the anti-American sentiment is what I see as the predominantly 'right wing' bias of American media, or maybe the lack of a middle grounds. Turning on CNN or any news show on a major network can be infuriating when you see the lack of journalistic responsibility in filling the role of 'fourth estate.'

What's even worse is the way people seem to equate "fair and balanced" with "showing both sides of the issue". PBS was recently mandated to have more conservative personalities in the name of balance.

 

That's just riduculous. Fair and balanced doesn't mean giving both sides of the issue equal air time, it means calling bullshit for what it is! If a news story is damaging to conservatives these days, it's impossible to escape being labeled as liberal because equal time wasn't given to the idiot who was sent out to lie and try to spin the story to the advantage of republicans. I won't try and be altruistic and say the media should report the "truth", but the fierceness to which republicans are willing to hold on to their fallacious beliefs is absolutely ridiculous, and they are unwilling to let anyone else go without knowing about how the recent explosions in Baghdad prove that democracy is on the march.

[borntohula]

what i find ridiculous is that dan rather had to retire early after the whole "rathergate" scandal. the memos he uses as being factual were forged in an attempt to make bush look bad. so the right used this as fodder for saying that there is some sort of liberal bias. yet bill oreilly lies on a daily basis, and we all know this, yet he still has a job. if that isn't a bias on part of the entire media, i don't know what is.

[no yu begin wher i end]

what i find ridiculous is that dan rather had to retire early after the whole "rathergate" scandal. the memos he uses as being factual were forged in an attempt to make bush look bad. so the right used this as fodder for saying that there is some sort of liberal bias. yet bill oreilly lies on a daily basis, and we all know this, yet he still has a job. if that isn't a bias on part of the entire media, i don't know what is.

Even the unauthenticity of those documents have been disputed, too, although it's never made its way to prominence.

[ecnarf]

The whole Rathergate was ridiculous, I think. In the first place, it was simply irresponsible of CBS to air the story without having an unimpeachable source on the other end. On the other hand, Republicans were just kidding themselves by pretending that George Bush served "honourably" in the National Guard and that it was John Kerry whose service should be called into question. I shit you not, I have seen comments on LittleGreenFootballs suggesting that Kerry should be tried for treason because of what he said during the election about his service. Yikes. It's plainly obvious that George Bush didn't show up for his national guard service, which he only went into to escape Vietnam without having to move to Canada. Kerry, on the other hand, put his life on the line out of a sense of patriotism by going to that war. Yes, the medals he won were probably awarded somewhat dubiously, but that's no fault of Kerry - it's because the U.S. Army has a nasty habit of dubiously handing out awards to commanding officers than rank and file troops.

 

People are idiots. That pretty much sums up my political beliefs.

[supercanuk]

Dear Supercanuk (and a bunch of other people),

 

Please, when you have lots to say, try to space your thoughts out into a paragraph. I am really intersted in what you have to say but cannot read stuff that looks like that.

 

Thanks,

sunshine

 

p.s - i say this with love :angry:

pffft, biatch i'll do what i waaant :angry: ;)

:angry: