NationStates Jolt Archive

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:

Awesome, man. I love yellow journalism. [/false idiocy]

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:
Proof?

How is that behavior liberal? Don't they do that sort of thing to every president? Hell, remember the media circus that followed the Clinton presidency?

Doesn't prove that they are leftist though. Just that they don't like Bush.

Bush is not the sole archetype for being right-wing.

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:
Damn. They're not even trying for subtlety anymore, are they?

Proof?

DUH!

How is that behavior liberal? Don't they do that sort of thing to every president? Hell, remember the media circus that followed the Clinton presidency?

One huge difference ... it's wasn't prompted by the media! :P

Damn. They're not even trying for subtlety anymore, are they?

No need to now. They couldn't unseat President Bush, so now all the gloves come off. :( :headbang:

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:
your kidding right?

summary: so?


if a single quote labels the major media to be left leannig, the ENTIRE FOX news labels it far right wing

boo
yah

You know what? Thats a good story. We where inaguarating a president who campaigned on a war he started, and the inaguaration was going to be themed on the mission of that war. If there where soldiers that where being buried that day that would be a good counterpoint to the rara coverage of talking heads.

The medias job is not to suck the administrations dick. If anything, it's to call him (so far its been all hims)on his crap. Sounds to me like they where actually being journalists and trying to find something other than whats been spoonfed to them. Heaven forbid. I know it's been a while since they got off the tit so this seems all freaky, but I welcome it.

One huge difference ... it's wasn't prompted by the media! :P
Read the book Blinded by the Right. It's written by David Brock, who wrote for American Spectator and Washington Times. There was a huge media movement to dig up dirt on Clinton. Even to the point of paying for Clinton stories from obviously bad sources.

You know what? Thats a good story. We where inaguarating a president who campaigned on a war he started, and the inaguaration was going to be themed on the mission of that war. If there where soldiers that where being buried that day that would be a good counterpoint to the rara coverage of talking heads.

The medias job is not to suck the administrations dick. If anything, it's to call him (so far its been all hims)on his crap. Sounds to me like they where actually being journalists and trying to find something other than whats been spoonfed to them. Heaven forbid. I know it's been a while since they got off the tit so this seems all freaky, but I welcome it.

While that's sort of true, you never heard them soliciting for this kind of information to throw at a Dem.

While that's sort of true, you never heard them soliciting for this kind of information to throw at a Dem.
Look up.

While that's sort of true, you never heard them soliciting for this kind of information to throw at a Dem.
See my post above.

Ok there are a few fallacies in your argument. ABC News is not "The Media" they are just a single albeit large media outlet. This is no evidence for some widespread left wing conspiracy. Also last time I checked reporting the fact that people are killed in a war that the president being inaugurated started is bad journalism. They were asking for a counterpoint to the arguments being layed out for the war from people directly affected by it. I would hope that the news would do that with any administration. The fact that no one else wants to question the president makes them poor journalists, it doesn't make ABC crazy commie leftist pinkos.

The media has indeed taken a sharp turn left. Man. The media sucks.

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:

This really has nothing to do with being "left-leaning" and everything to do with sensationalizing. Just reporting how pretty the first lady's dress was isn't sensational - it isn't all that interesting. However, if you juxtapose a big party with a funeral, now *that* is sensational!

While that's sort of true, you never heard them soliciting for this kind of information to throw at a Dem.

I suppose you've never bothered to look up the Tet Offensive. Huge military victory for the U.S. Huge P.R. disaster for LBJ.

This really has nothing to do with being "left-leaning" and everything to do with sensationalizing.
This is true. I'd still acknowledge a "leftist spin" more than a genuine agenda.
Fox News exists to counterbalance the spin in favor of the right. Right wingers, please don't try to tell me that Fox doesn't have a conservative agenda.

Anybody else go back through news archives from different presidencies to compare how media sources treated liberal, conservative, Democrat, and Republican leaders? The answer was generally that they loved to dig for dirt, no matter who was in power.

Does anyone else remember that in 2003 such 'liberal bastions' as NY Times and CBS supported the war in Iraq?

The media will always be biased, because generally people like to here reporters espouse what they already believe. It makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Kill All Humans! :p

This is true. I'd still acknowledge a "leftist spin" more than a genuine agenda.
Fox News exists to counterbalance the spin in favor of the right. Right wingers, please don't try to tell me that Fox doesn't have a conservative agenda.

There may be somewhat of a liberal spin in some of the news outlets, but is generally subtle. I haven't seen anything, for instance, to parallel Fox's memo explicitly stating that nothing can be said that is not in support of Bush and that only words that make his policies sound warm and fuzzy can be used.

There may be somewhat of a liberal spin in some of the news outlets, but is generally subtle. I haven't seen anything, for instance, to parallel Fox's memo explicitly stating that nothing can be said that is not in support of Bush and that only words that make his policies sound warm and fuzzy can be used.
Agreed. That's not even bias, that's a clear-cut, full-scale political agenda.

you know what i havent had in awhile?




...big league chew.

Anybody else go back through news archives from different presidencies to compare how media sources treated liberal, conservative, Democrat, and Republican leaders? The answer was generally that they loved to dig for dirt, no matter who was in power.

Does anyone else remember that in 2003 such 'liberal bastions' as NY Times and CBS supported the war in Iraq?
I agree with you. Like somebodey said in a different thread, the media is still not above capitalism.

One thing that really irks me is that more often than not, the media seems to think that people are stupid.

yep, if you're against Bush and War you must be leftist. Or just not an idiot. I've met several onto it right wing people...

I just wanted to add:

Armstrong Williams: Paid nearly a quarter of a million from the Education Department to plug No Child Left Behind.

Maggie Gallagher: Paid a $21,500 contract from the Health and Human Services Department to promote marriage.

Yeah, these journalists are so left-wing the Republican controlled government pays them to say what they want. </sarcasm>

DUH!

I imagine you've had a lot of practice emitting that particular sound, Forrest.

I suppose you've never bothered to look up the Tet Offensive. Huge military victory for the U.S. Huge P.R. disaster for LBJ.
Just as leftist however.

Yeah, these journalists are so left-wing the Republican controlled government pays them to say what they want. </sarcasm>
The fact that they have to pay journalists to do it is an indication that they aren't exactly right leaning. Besides, wasn't someone paying Kos for his blogging efforts?

Read the book Blinded by the Right. It's written by David Brock, who wrote for American Spectator and Washington Times. There was a huge media movement to dig up dirt on Clinton. Even to the point of paying for Clinton stories from obviously bad sources.
This is the same David Brock who admits to making up stories and being a bad journalist. He justifies it by saying "the right made me do it" but fundamentally it is a lack of character and you should take everything he says with a shaker of salt.

This is the same David Brock who admits to making up stories and being a bad journalist. He justifies it by saying "the right made me do it" but fundamentally it is a lack of character and you should take everything he says with a shaker of salt.
He names people, gives dates and places, and provides evidence that there really was a media conspiracy against the Clintons. Read the book then judge for yourself. I'm sure you can track down a copy.

Just to explore this "the media are left-wing" thing for a bit: if it is true, what is the explanation? I can think of a few. Let me know if anyone agrees with any, some or all of them.

1) Right-wingers are largely illiterate and/or disinterested in current affairs, so only left-wing opinions sell;

2) Right-wingers are largely illiterate and/or disinterested in current affairs, so the vast bulk of journalists capable of stringing together more than a few basic grunts and squeaks tend to be left-leaning;

3) All news corporations are owned by left-wingers, and no right-winger has been able to summon enough basic gumption to set up their own media outlet;

4) The bilious right-wing vomiting that masquerades as "talk radio" is secret leftie propaganda;

5) Fox News is actually drama (there's a disclaimer at the end of each bulletin that reads "This news is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are either products of the journalists' imaginations or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental");

6) The whole world is controlled by a vast left-wing conspiracy, who occasionally let comedy right-wing caricatures like Dubya "take charge" to keep the righties in the dark and happy;

7) The people who claim that "the media is left-wing" are either not very observant, or not very smart, or not very concerned with objective criticism, or some combination thereof.

Anyone got any more?

The media's only bias is spelled with a '$' instead of an 's'.

There were craploads of newpapers and journalists offering to pay for dirt on Clinton, just as there were on Kenedy and Johnson.

Or have you never hear, "If it bleeds it leads" before?

This is just more of the same old, "Boo hoo I'm conservative and soo picked on, I am just as much a victim is everyone else, see?" bull-shit.

And you call liberals whiny?! Jesus H!

If ever there was evidence for the major media leaning left ...

"For a possible Inauguration Day story on ABC News, we are trying to find out if there any military funerals for Iraq war casualties scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 20. If you know of a funeral and whether the family might be willing to talk to ABC News, please fill out the form below." --ABCNews.com

SIGH! :( :headbang:


Just curious, but how is this enherently left leaning? After all, do not the majority of military families lean to the right and so the subject would have the opportunity to extole the virtues of the Persident during this interview?

I mean, this story could go either way. A statement against the President or a statement of support for his mission. The quote you noted gives no indication of the slant to be presented.

And, more to the point, since when has ABC News equated to "the media" as a whole?

the media is dominated by rightwing liars which makes Air America such a refreshing breath of fresh air thats gaining in popularity daily

Oh look! Another 'liberal' media person who was paid by the Bush government to promote Bush policies! I'm starting to think that maybe the media isn't liberal after all. (more sarcasm, in case you missed that)

Michael McManus, conservative author of the syndicated column "Ethics & Religion," received $10,000 to promote a marriage initiative.


Some of you appear to have missed the point that journalists are supposed to report - not promote. And they're certainly not supposed to be paid by the government (or any other organization) to write a piece. That's advertising, not journalism.

Those of you who say "They must be liberal if they have to be paid to write a piece from the conservative perspective" are missing the point. This is unethical. Worse yet, it's government propaganda masquerading as thoughtful journalism.

We rightly condemned it when communist Russia controlled media sources like Pravda. We should continue to call it for what it is when in happens in the democratic West.

Just to explore this "the media are left-wing" thing for a bit: if it is true, what is the explanation? I can think of a few. Let me know if anyone agrees with any, some or all of them.

1) Right-wingers are largely illiterate and/or disinterested in current affairs, so only left-wing opinions sell;

2) Right-wingers are largely illiterate and/or disinterested in current affairs, so the vast bulk of journalists capable of stringing together more than a few basic grunts and squeaks tend to be left-leaning;

3) All news corporations are owned by left-wingers, and no right-winger has been able to summon enough basic gumption to set up their own media outlet;

4) The bilious right-wing vomiting that masquerades as "talk radio" is secret leftie propaganda;

5) Fox News is actually drama (there's a disclaimer at the end of each bulletin that reads "This news is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are either products of the journalists' imaginations or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental");

6) The whole world is controlled by a vast left-wing conspiracy, who occasionally let comedy right-wing caricatures like Dubya "take charge" to keep the righties in the dark and happy;

7) The people who claim that "the media is left-wing" are either not very observant, or not very smart, or not very concerned with objective criticism, or some combination thereof.

Anyone got any more?

8) The media is owned, and controlled by Jews. Jews are greedy and money grubbing, therefore they advocate liberal, anticapitalist policies.