American News Media: Independent or Biased?

eire4

Swan Curry wrote: »

It's pretty entertaining to watch the right-wingers backpedal now that their golden boy's been revealed to be a racist.

What surprises me is that some pretty high profile Republicans and their media supporters really embraced this guy. I mean if they really paid attention to what he has been saying the fact that he is a racist should not come as a surprise.


What I find interesting in terms of the broader picture is how Bundy was been used as another prop to suggest the government is bad and the source of our problems. Sure because Comcast, Exon Mobil, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America etc have all shown themselves to be such good citizens and so much better at running things then the federal government.

Amerika

eire4 wrote: »

How do you know? In an earlier post you said you have never watched the channel.

The Arab Spring started in 2010. AJ didn’t acquire Current TV from Al Gore until 2013, so I couldn’t have possibly seen it here. But I also noted that I view and read a lot of news. Do you think it may have been reported elsewhere?

eire4

Amerika wrote: »

The Arab Spring started in 2010. AJ didn’t acquire Current TV from Al Gore until 2013, so I couldn’t have possibly seen it here. But I also noted that I view and read a lot of news. Do you think it may have been reported elsewhere?

So what your saying is you think Al Jazera is pro Muslin Brotherhood because another news outlet said so given that you have never watched Al Jazera itself.

sin_city

@Amerika

No matter what you link to or what evidence you provide there will mainly be responses such as..


"There's bias and lying there"
"what a joke"
"That article is trash"
"I am right"
"I honestly can't believe you posted this. It's so bad it's unreal."

Don't expect counter evidence to what you post....just strong statement without any back up.

Point here, don't bother posting links....I actually thought some people in here were wind up merchants...shocked to believe they are for real.

Brian?

sin_city wrote: »

@Amerika

No matter what you link to or what evidence you provide there will mainly be responses such as..


"There's bias and lying there"
"what a joke"
"That article is trash"
"I am right"
"I honestly can't believe you posted this. It's so bad it's unreal."

All perfectly reasonable responses to the nonsense article linked. It was a piece of trash. If he wanted serious responses he should have linked something worth responding to.

Don't expect counter evidence to what you post....just strong statement without any back up.

Point here, don't bother posting links....I actually thought some people in here were wind up merchants...shocked to believe they are for real.

The irony in this is hilarious.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

I was led to this entertaining piece from a liberal friend who usually questions if Breitbart is reliable, but in this particular article felt it was pretty good and had found merit in something against his sensibilities. I think it is a unique and thought provoking piece that gives readers some potential outcomes about current events from one point of view, and tackles situations currently being reported by the media (since the Bundy ranch topic has come up in this thread).

I don't see how anyone with any intelligence can take this "Breitbart" seriously.

Amerika

eire4 wrote: »

So what your saying is you think Al Jazera is pro Muslin Brotherhood because another news outlet said so given that you have never watched Al Jazera itself.

Yup. The fact that twenty-two journalists who worked for al jazeera quit in protest after being told by their bosses to support Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, kinda supports the reports. In addition other reports showing connections, including Egyptian prosecutors charging 20 al jazeera journalists with belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood lead credence to the reports.

Or are all news reports to be discounted because they don't come from al jazeera?

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

I don't see how anyone with any intelligence can take this "Breitbart" seriously.

So the reports in Briebart about Iran given a UN appointment to the Commission on the Status of Women are wrong?

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

So the reports in Briebart about Iran given a UN appointment to the Commission on the Status of Women are wrong?

I have no idea. Why would I spend any time on a site that publishes trash like the one you linked earlier.

Mjollnir

Brian? wrote: »

I don't see how anyone with any intelligence can take this "Breitbart" seriously.

No one w/any intelligence actually can.

sin_city

Mjollnir wrote: »

No one w/any intelligence actually can.

Proved my point....another statement/dig...backed by nothing.

Just trash talk really

Mjollnir

sin_city wrote: »

Proved my point....another statement/dig...backed by nothing.

Just trash talk really

How quaintly odd.

I've proven no point of yours, and I've only given my opinion, not dependent on anything you might have babbled or brayed, in the time you and I have been exchanging posts.

No 'trash talk', whatever that means.

Please try again, but try harder.

sin_city

Mjollnir wrote: »

How quaintly odd.

I've proven no point of yours, and I've only given my opinion, not dependent on anything you might have babbled or brayed, in the time you and I have been exchanging posts.

No 'trash talk', whatever that means.

Please try again, but try harder.

You don't understand what I mean by trash talk...How strange.

My opinion was that you were intelligent enough to get that but now my opinion is that you are dumb....

How bizarre....how bizarre.

UNI4MER

Brian? wrote: »

I don't see how anyone with any intelligence can take this "Breitbart" seriously.

Really why do you say that? The USA mainstream media which includes abc radio, most newspapers, cbs, nbc, cnn, msnbc, are all controlled by the left and get their talking points each day from the DNC and the White House. Most low information American voters get their news there and thus form their lock stop with the left opinions. Fox news, the Drudge report, Brietbart on the other hand report the news as it used to be reported as facts and, of course, are categorized as "right wing" biased. The left hides the facts and continues to bury stories about what is real news to protect their cause which is lap dogs for the Democrat Party. On the other hand the current leaders of the Republicans cannot understand why they continue to be a minority party as they keep shooting themselves in the foot by trying to be like the liberals and when most of the country leans conservative on most issues. We are a country in decline because of our slide away from our constitution and liberty and there is no current leadership to right this ship.

Jonny7

UNI4MER wrote: »

The USA mainstream media which includes abc radio, most newspapers, cbs, nbc, cnn, msnbc, are all controlled by the left

Controlled how and by whom exactly?

and get their talking points each day from the DNC and the White House.

Each day, when and how? and sources for this

PopePalpatine

UNI4MER wrote: »

On the other hand the current leaders of the Republicans cannot understand why they continue to be a minority party as they keep shooting themselves in the foot by trying to be like the liberals and when most of the country leans conservative on most issues.

How are the Republicans trying to emulate liberals?

Where is this alleged moral majority?

eire4

Amerika wrote: »

Yup. The fact that twenty-two journalists who worked for al jazeera quit in protest after being told by their bosses to support Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, kinda supports the reports. In addition other reports showing connections, including Egyptian prosecutors charging 20 al jazeera journalists with belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood lead credence to the reports.

Or are all news reports to be discounted because they don't come from al jazeera?

Well having watched Al Jazera myself I cannot say I have not noticed any pro muslin brotherhood bias myself. Not to say that there might not be a subtle or behind the scenes bias but I have not noticed any such bias having actually watched the channel myself.


As for other news reports I would say like anything the quality and veracity of any newsreports can vary depending on the source.

20Cent

You just gotta throw your hands in the air when anyone claims Fox news, the Drudge report or Brietbart as news resources. Some sort of data literacy and critical thinking needs to become part of the school curriculum or something since these fools have votes.

UNI4MER

You all should regularly visit this site:

since I am not allowed to post the link here it is manually

mrc.org

media research center

UNI4MER

Look at there stance on Illegals as just one example.

A small example of the moral majority

Sunday, April 13, 2014

More voters than ever would rather scrap the current Congress than to see it reelected. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just nine percent (9%) of Likely U.S. Voters think it would be better for the country if most incumbents were reelected this November. Seventy-two percent (72%) say it would be better if most of them were defeated instead. Nineteen percent (19%) are undecided.

Jonny7

UNI4MER wrote: »

You all should regularly visit this site:

since I am not allowed to post the link here it is manually

mrc.org

media research center

"The Leader in Documenting, Exposing and Neutralizing Liberal Media Bias"

"MRC’s sole mission is to expose and neutralize the propaganda arm of the Left: the national news media. This makes the MRC’s work unique within the conservative movement."

Oh deary deary me

sin_city

20Cent wrote: »

You just gotta throw your hands in the air when anyone claims Fox news, the Drudge report or Brietbart as news resources. Some sort of data literacy and critical thinking needs to become part of the school curriculum or something since these fools have votes.

How can you critically think about any article is you flat out disregard it as newsworthy before looking at it?


Drudge occasionally publishes Nielsen, Arbitron, or BookScan ratings, or early election exit polls that are otherwise not made available to the public.

Too bad for you, you don’t get to see this.

I am amazed to think that some people think it is only certain types of media that are biased.

Perhaps the news that seems unbiased fits the bias of a certain person.

I don’t get why people don’t look at everything and then make their mind up instead of making their mind up based on where the item comes from.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

You just gotta throw your hands in the air when anyone claims Fox news, the Drudge report or Brietbart as news resources. Some sort of data literacy and critical thinking needs to become part of the school curriculum or something since these fools have votes.

Looks like Fox News was right all along, that reports from the White House blaming the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi on an internet video was actually a cover up of their own policy failures. Guess you can’t have that sort of thing come out six weeks before an election now can you?

"to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/04/29/benghazi-emails-point-at-white-house/8471737/

Don’t you just hate it when that happens?

Mjollnir

Amerika wrote: »

Looks like Fox News was right all along, that reports from the White House blaming the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi on an internet video was actually a cover up of their own policy failures. Guess you can’t have that sort of thing come out six weeks before an election now can you?

"to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/04/29/benghazi-emails-point-at-white-house/8471737/

Don’t you just hate it when that happens?

Ah, the fetid stench of desperation.

Breaking: there's STILL no scandal involving Benghazi, no matter how hard the pathologically obsessed clench their tiny fists white in impotent rage.

Amerika

This was great this morning on MSNBC regarding the new revelations on Benghazi involving Jay Carney lying and double standards between how Republicans and Democrats are treated by the media. And the host calling out the print media hypocrisy was priceless.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/scarborough-unloads-on-co-hosts-apologizing-for-the-white-house-over-benghazi/

(watch the video at the bottom of the piece)

Jonny7

Didn't think Benghazi was actually still a thing.. what was it, 4 servicemen?

Odd how they didn't make this much noise when the predecessor sent 4,000 to their deaths on false intelligence

Amerika

Jonny7 wrote: »

Didn't think Benghazi was actually still a thing.. what was it, 4 servicemen?

Not quite, but I could understand your confusion when the media here gives far more investigative attention to 18 safety cones on a New Jersey highway than to a terrorist attack which resulted in the death of one of our ambassadors.

Mjollnir

Amerika wrote: »

Not quite, but I could understand your confusion when the media here gives far more investigative attention to 18 safety cones on a New Jersey highway than to a terrorist attack which resulted in the death of one of our ambassadors.

No, the media gave a lot of attention to Benghazi when the equivalent of show trials were being held in Congress, but it turned out there was no there there.

Why lie so transparently when you don't have to?

UNI4MER

Jonny7 wrote: »

Didn't think Benghazi was actually still a thing.. what was it, 4 servicemen?

Odd how they didn't make this much noise when the predecessor sent 4,000 to their deaths on false intelligence

Still a thing? If a conservative or Republican was in office during Benghazi how do you think the mainstream media here would cover it? What 4000 are you talking about?

sin_city

Can someone let me know more about Benghazi?

What is Washington's story and the opinion of people supporting the Washington's story?

What what is the alternative view?