American News Media: Independent or Biased?

Black Swan · 11-04-2014 8:05pm

Gallup tracking polls show an increase in media distrust "when it comes to reporting the news fully, accurately, and fairly," illustrating a trend breaking the half-way point late 2005, with growing distrust to 60% late 2012. Republicans showed the most distrust, closely followed by Independents.

**Caution should be exercised when interpreting these polling results given that they were based on telephone interviews only that may exclude those subjects with call blocking, call screening, national no-call list, etc., or have experienced the negative effects of survey saturation. Furthermore, Gallup cautions: "In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls."

Brian? · 13-04-2014 4:29pm

Amerika wrote: »

Okay I guess. I agree that at a minimum a sawtooth graph divider (indicating there is a gap between top and bottom) would have made all the difference in the world, and headed off this huge firestorm of an outcry, because people are too ignorant to look at the numbers instead of the size of the bars.

Personally though, I think the misrepresentation of the number of ObamaCare "enrollees" is a far more serious matter as the majority of the media simply reports these things from the White House without providing the viewers or readers warnings that the numbers shouldn’t be looked at as real "enrollment." That they do not discount people who signed up and didn’t pay, those who had other insurance before enrolling, the high number of sick people that are signing up and the low number of healthy that aren’t, the alarming number of young who aren’t signing up which is needed to make ObamaCare "affordable." By the media touting the success of the administration hitting some arbitrary number gives the viewers a misleading impression that things are going as desired. Not that the numbers are misrepresentative of the real figures needed to keep the rates down – "affordable." That even with hitting the 7.1 million number your rates could still double or triple next year.

But what can you really expect when you accept that the majority of the media seems to be merely scribes for White House talking points.

So you think it's ok to use misleading graphics and show obvious bias once you're leaning the right way ?

Amerika · 14-04-2014 8:46pm

Brian? wrote: »

So you think it's ok to use misleading graphics and show obvious bias once you're leaning the right way ?

I looked at the numbers, as the numbers are the most important part of the graphic to me. The bar graph wasn't such a big deal. Now if they would have put a zero on that graph as the starting point, then I would be in solidarity with you wanting them tarred and feathered and run out of town.

20Cent · 14-04-2014 10:20pm

Amerika wrote: »

I looked at the numbers, as the numbers are the most important part of the graphic to me. The bar graph wasn't such a big deal. Now if they would have put a zero on that graph as the starting point, then I would be in solidarity with you wanting them tarred and feathered and run out of town.

It is a deliberate effort to mislead the viewer. Personally I wouldn't want to get news from a source that is behaving in such a way.

sin_city · 15-04-2014 1:17pm

Has anyone seen what happened on the Cliven Bundy ranch?

One way the media can have bias is by not actually reporting stuff.

Meanwhile news on the missing plane is still going on.

Permabear · 15-04-2014 1:42pm

This post has been deleted.

Amerika · 15-04-2014 7:31pm

20Cent wrote: »

It is a deliberate effort to mislead the viewer. Personally I wouldn't want to get news from a source that is behaving in such a way.

A good read from a liberal who worked for Fox News in the past and now is a CNN contributor and columnist for The Daily Beast, and was a regular guest on MSNBC.

"My time at Fox News was marked by meeting and working with some of the kindest, smartest, and most talented people I've had the pleasure of meeting in life."

So, can FN can now be guilty of brainwashing in addition to behaving badly?

http://news.yahoo.com/learned-liberal-talking-head-fox-news-143013301--politics.html

Jonny7 · 15-04-2014 8:51pm

sin_city wrote: »

Has anyone seen what happened on the Cliven Bundy ranch?

One way the media can have bias is by not actually reporting stuff.

Meanwhile news on the missing plane is still going on.

The media is not an homogenous unit

Stories generally make it to the front pages due to their newsworthiness and our demand for them

On a side note, I'd argue that recognised and reputationally strong outlets, e.g. the BBC carry a certain responsibility to bring internationally significant reports

The hijack, loss, and search for the Malay plane is highly newsworthy and in large demand - bombs in Baghdad are the opposite

If a news report was to cover all world events fairly it would probably be several hours long and the Bundy story wouldn't make it

Jonny7 · 15-04-2014 8:53pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

True, but we as consumers as just as much, if not more so, to blame for bad reporting

Jonny7 · 15-04-2014 8:59pm

Amerika wrote: »

A good read from a liberal who worked for Fox News in the past and now is a CNN contributor and columnist for The Daily Beast, and was a regular guest on MSNBC.

"My time at Fox News was marked by meeting and working with some of the kindest, smartest, and most talented people I've had the pleasure of meeting in life."

So, can FN can now be guilty of brainwashing in addition to behaving badly?

http://news.yahoo.com/learned-liberal-talking-head-fox-news-143013301--politics.html

She is remarking on the people at Fox News, their kindness and qualities

I'm sure the people at CCTV, Press TV and Russia's major stations are lovely too

Amerika · 15-04-2014 10:21pm

Jonny7 wrote: »

She is remarking on the people at Fox News, their kindness and qualities

Don't forget "smartest."

20Cent · 15-04-2014 10:23pm

Amerika wrote: »

Don't forget "smartest."

Their chart wasn't very smart.

Permabear · 16-04-2014 12:25am

This post has been deleted.

sin_city · 16-04-2014 1:08am

Jonny7 wrote: »

The media is not an homogenous unit

Stories generally make it to the front pages due to their newsworthiness and our demand for them

On a side note, I'd argue that recognised and reputationally strong outlets, e.g. the BBC carry a certain responsibility to bring internationally significant reports

The hijack, loss, and search for the Malay plane is highly newsworthy and in large demand - bombs in Baghdad are the opposite

If a news report was to cover all world events fairly it would probably be several hours long and the Bundy story wouldn't make it

Cenk Ungar from the Young Turks was getting great ratings on MSNBC but was later let go. According to Ungar, MSNBC President Phil Griffin had called him into his office in April and told him that he had been talking to people in Washington and that they did not like Uygur's tone. His YouTube news channel now has more than 2 BILLION views. So, what you were saying about newsworthiness?

Also, Noam Chomsky highlights the fact that though the massacres that went on in Cambodia and East Timor were very similar, only Cambodia was highlighted in Western Press at the time. Indonesia had been buying large amounts of weapons at the time from the US.
Do you think this was bias? Chomsky doesn’t. I don’t agree with everything he says but I choose Chomsky over you Jonny in this instance.

The Bundy story has more to it than just a rancher. It goes very deep and involves a cover up of senator Harry Reid.
Please look at this video which has nearly 250K views in one day....Don’t you think that this story is newsworthy now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFiosLqjoQQ&list=UUEHsSWvrGVSIA63OV3J6vhA

If you don’t look at the video, please do not comment.

Jonny7 · 16-04-2014 8:59am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

and I'd strongly argue, certain people want certain news, e.g. left leaning may buy the Guardian, more right leaning may go with the Telegraph

Some want junk news - The Daily Mail, tabloids

Others want more indepth

Others want specific, e.g. the Financial Times

Other's want bias confirmation - ALex Jones, Natural News, etc

Demand drives the diversity but also the concentration of that diversity

The average age of a Fox News viewer is 60+, ultimately they drive what the station puts out

Jonny7 · 16-04-2014 9:18am

sin_city wrote: »

So, what you were saying about newsworthiness?

Newsworthiness comprises many factors

There are corrupt politicians and situations like the Bundy ranch happening all over Africa, Asia and S America - we don't hear about them either

Permabear · 16-04-2014 10:24am

This post has been deleted.

sin_city · 16-04-2014 1:31pm

Jonny7 wrote: »

Newsworthiness comprises many factors

There are corrupt politicians and situations like the Bundy ranch happening all over Africa, Asia and S America - we don't hear about them either

If the occupy wallstreet protesters had the backing of an armed militia perhaps they would not have been forceably removed so easily.

This is a big deal. Americans are losing freedom more and more since the PAtriot Act and this is the first time a large group have stood up to the federal government and forced them back.

Anyway, forget the ranch...what about you two other points from the previous post?

You disagree with Chomsky on what I said?

Jonny7 · 16-04-2014 5:36pm

sin_city wrote: »

If the occupy wallstreet protesters had the backing of an armed militia perhaps they would not have been forceably removed so easily.

Many protested for months. Arranging and organising a march is one thing.. camping on streets for weeks/months on end is another

In the process they made themselves more unpopular with the public than just about anyone else

Not sure what armed militia backing? what, like the Michigan militia? they would have been dealt with very swiftly

You disagree with Chomsky on what I said?

I don't have enough info on US reporting on Cambodia/Indonesia x decades ago to make an informed opinion either way

sin_city · 17-04-2014 12:39am

Jonny7 wrote: »

Not sure what armed militia backing? what, like the Michigan militia? they would have been dealt with very swiftly

No, like the militia that pushed back the Feds on the ranch...that type of militia. The one that was Jefferson spoke of and the one that relates to the second amendment of the US constitution. That's what I mean.

Jonny7 wrote: »

I don't have enough info on US reporting on Cambodia/Indonesia x decades ago to make an informed opinion either way

I expect you have heard more of Pol Pot than you have of any Indonesian mass killers?

Right?

Enough said.

Jonny7 · 17-04-2014 8:07am

sin_city wrote: »

No, like the militia that pushed back the Feds on the ranch...that type of militia. The one that was Jefferson spoke of and the one that relates to the second amendment of the US constitution. That's what I mean.

I'm not up on the exact wording but I believe the 2nd amendment relates to individuals not militias

The right to bear arms is subject to reasonable limits and the law - e.g. children cannot bear arms, people cannot have anti-aircraft guns on their front lawn and so on

I'm not familiar with that particular case, but a group of people not obeying the law and arming themselves to the teeth when the courts don't rule in their favour is generally illegal in most parts of the world, I presume that includes the US

sin_city · 17-04-2014 12:23pm

Jonny7 wrote: »

I'm not up on the exact wording but I believe the 2nd amendment relates to individuals not militias

The right to bear arms is subject to reasonable limits and the law - e.g. children cannot bear arms, people cannot have anti-aircraft guns on their front lawn and so on

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

You're not up on the wording....but what the heck, you'll continue.

The militia is intended to prevent the state from doing things like it did in Nazi Germany(see The 1938 German Weapons Act). You mentioned law. This was law in Germany in 1938. Jews were forbidden from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms. I guess the law is the law for people like you.....too bad 6 million jews.

Jonny7 wrote: »

I'm not familiar with that particular case, but a group of people not obeying the law and arming themselves to the teeth when the courts don't rule in their favour is generally illegal in most parts of the world, I presume that includes the US

You're not familiar with the case....but what the heck, you'll continue....love it.

I suggest you learn more about the case....then we can discuss opinions....I wouldn't have a strong opinion on something I know nothing about.

I'd rather you didn't presume and use terms like generally when you are not informed of the details....for me, this is silly

Jonny7 · 17-04-2014 4:49pm

sin_city wrote: »

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Well it's now seen as the individual's right to bear arms

Again, I'm no expert on the in's and out's, I'm sure someone here knows it much better, but to quote wiki

"The question of a collective right versus an individual right was progressively resolved with the Fifth Circuit ruling in United States v. Emerson (2001), along with the Supreme Court's rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago (2010). These rulings upheld the individual rights model when interpreting the Second Amendment. In Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right.[156] Although the Second Amendment is the only Constitutional amendment with a prefatory clause, such constructions were widely used elsewhere.[157]"

I suggest you learn more about the case

Well I've now read about it and it's pretty close to what I presumed. Mr Bundy lost each of the cases and has multiple rulings and huge fines against him

Instead of challenging the law first, he broke the law first, and then repeatedly.. not exactly the best course of action. Now himself and his supporters are heavily armed and refusing to face justice

Doesn't really set a great precedent.. decide the law suddenly doesn't apply, then hide behind a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment

sin_city · 18-04-2014 3:14am

As I said Jonny...6 million Jews

Amerika · 18-04-2014 4:40pm

Pretty shameful and evidence of media bias IMO when Jay Carney, President Obama’s press secretary acknowledges the toughest interview President Obama got in 2012, when he was running for reelection, came from Jon Stewart of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show.

JAY CARNEY: I remember we had some discussion during 2012 about well, is it appropriate for the president, the sitting president and candidate, to give interviews with Jon Stewart and others. And the answer was yes, again because the young voters we were trying to reach are more likely to watch The Daily Show than some other news shows. But also, I think if you look back at 2012 and the series of interviews the sitting president of the United States gave, probably the toughest interview he had was with Jon Stewart. Probably the most substantive, challenging interview Barack Obama had in the election year was with the anchor of The Daily Show.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/17/carney_the_toughest_interview_obama_did_was_with_jon_stewart.html

Brian? · 18-04-2014 6:56pm

Amerika wrote: »

Pretty shameful and evidence of media bias IMO when Jay Carney, President Obama’s press secretary acknowledges the toughest interview President Obama got in 2012, when he was running for reelection, came from Jon Stewart of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/17/carney_the_toughest_interview_obama_did_was_with_jon_stewart.html

Exactly how does this display bias?

To me it shows very good campaign management by the Obama camp. They avoided tough interviews. The Romney campaign did the exact same thing.

Brian? · 18-04-2014 6:58pm

sin_city wrote: »

As I said Jonny...6 million Jews

The holocaust happened because private citizens had lost the right to bare arms ?

Amerika · 18-04-2014 8:01pm

Brian? wrote: »

Exactly how does this display bias?

To me it shows very good campaign management by the Obama camp. They avoided tough interviews. The Romney campaign did the exact same thing.

He still had interviews with other media outlets, but only he got softball questions thrown at him with the others. Perhaps we should call it "bias by omission." That has a much more pleasant ring to it, don't you think?

Mjollnir · 18-04-2014 10:35pm

sin_city wrote: »

Cenk Ungar from the Young Turks was getting great ratings on MSNBC but was later let go. According to Ungar, MSNBC President Phil Griffin had called him into his office in April and told him that he had been talking to people in Washington and that they did not like Uygur's tone. His YouTube news channel now has more than 2 BILLION views. So, what you were saying about newsworthiness?

Also, Noam Chomsky highlights the fact that though the massacres that went on in Cambodia and East Timor were very similar, only Cambodia was highlighted in Western Press at the time. Indonesia had been buying large amounts of weapons at the time from the US.
Do you think this was bias? Chomsky doesn’t. I don’t agree with everything he says but I choose Chomsky over you Jonny in this instance.

The Bundy story has more to it than just a rancher. It goes very deep and involves a cover up of senator Harry Reid.
Please look at this video which has nearly 250K views in one day....Don’t you think that this story is newsworthy now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFiosLqjoQQ&list=UUEHsSWvrGVSIA63OV3J6vhA

If you don’t look at the video, please do not comment.

LOL! No, it simply doesn't involve Harry Reid.

It has to do with a mooching, welfare-cowboy grifter thinking he's owed something, not pay legally mandated fees, thumbing his nose at federal court decisions for over 20 years and 'not recognizing' the US gov't.

Please leave the tinfoil conspiracist nonsense off the forum.

sin_city · 19-04-2014 4:29am

Brian? wrote: »

The holocaust happened because private citizens had lost the right to bare arms ?

I really don't know...Is it easier to kill people that are armed or unarmed?

Why do you think the Nazis created the law to unarm the Jews?

American News Media: Independent or Biased?

Comments