Why Most Journalist are Democrats (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


FirmhandKY -> Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 4:14:04 PM)

Why Most Journalists Are Democrats
By Barbara Oakley, Ph.D., P.E.
Created Aug 3 2009 - 2:49pm
Psychology Today


quote:

Unsurprisingly, self-selection plays an important role in choosing a job. People choosing to do work related to prisons, for example, commonly show quite different characteristics than those who volunteer for work in helping disadvantaged youths. Academicians have very different characteristics than CEOs—or politicians, for that matter. ... "Journalism, like social work, tends to attract individuals with a keen interest in bettering the world.” In other words, journalists self-select based on a desire to help others. Socialism, with its “spread the wealth” mentality intended to help society’s underdogs, sounds ideal.

...

Instead, because of their ideological biases, professors often emphasize that corporations are the bad guys, while unions and the government—at least the type of government that supports higher paychecks for social science professors and jobs for their students—are good. This type of teaching makes the Democratic Party and its increasingly socialist ideals seem naturally desirable, and criticism about how those ideals will supposedly be met less likely.

...

Journalists sometimes say conservatives and political independents don’t go into journalism because they’re more interested in money. The unspoken message, of course, is that conservatives are greedy bastards who don’t have a social conscience. But many conservatives go through college to become stay-at-home housewives—they’re hardly Gordon Geckos. More likely, conservatives are turned off by the propaganda dished out in their social science classes.

...

Professors in the humanities and social sciences are taken aback by the kinds of claims I’m making here. How could there possibly be such problems within a discipline—or multiple disciplines—without most academicians being aware of them? But, having worked among the Soviets, I know that large groups of very intelligent people can fall into a collective delusion that what they are doing in certain areas is the right thing, when it's actually not the right thing at all.

...

As far as investigating the dark side of the Major Issues, there’s a critically important concept that students of journalism are rarely taught. It’s easy to find any number of targets to write about in capitalist societies with an open press. But totalitarian governments are journalistic black holes. Journalists can tickle their self-righteous neurocircuitry every day (and many do), by exposing easy-to-find faults in democratic societies. But beyond their event horizon is the bigger story that often remains untold as it occurs—the horrific deaths of millions in totalitarian regimes like the former Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea and, yes, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

...

If you’re a journalist, want to help people and want to tell the truth, what truth are you going to tell? Why, the truth you think helps people, of course!

Technically, that’s the truth.

But it’s very different than the truth.

Interesting read, although a bit short. The links in the original article give a lot more substance to the author's arguments.

I think that many people will claim that "news" today is about corporatism, since most of the news agencies are owned by large corporations, and I think there is some truth to that.

However, on just about every bit of reporting there is, a reporter is going to include his own biases, and beliefs. It's almost impossible not to do so.

Which is where the "liberal bias" that we on the right so talk about, and that the left so loudly disclaims comes from.

Firm




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 5:15:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

Why Most Journalists Are Democrats
By Barbara Oakley, Ph.D., P.E.
Created Aug 3 2009 - 2:49pm
Psychology Today




Which is where the "liberal bias" that we on the right so talk about, and that the left so loudly disclaims comes from.

Firm


tl;dr (yup I apportion my time for reading links on an unbiased basis, lol)

There is so much empirical evidence of liberal bias of journalists/media that understanding the "why" and not just the "is" may be interesing but ultimately isn't necessary. (Except for those in denial about the studies and dismiss them because the measures of bias are too "subjective" (as if the choices regarding any study's criteria aren't ultimately subjective). Then additional support in the "why" is another nail in the coffin of denial. Which of course is why you posted it, and why it will be dismissed out of hand by the deniers.




Jack45 -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 5:19:21 PM)

The people who HIRE "journalists" hire their viewpoint, journalists are propagandists for their owners. Which is why heartland Americans get the shaft.




housesub4you -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 5:27:57 PM)

"I think that many people will claim that "news" today is about corporatism, since most of the news agencies are owned by large corporations, and I think there is some truth to that.

Here is the part that throws me.  I agree that all news is nothing more than corporatism, however it is the GOP that almost every large corporation supports with money.  You don't see the Dems giving big tax breaks to the wealthy and powerful. So the idea that they are all liberal makes no sense.  Large powerful corporations really only care about their own profit margin, so it would not make sense to have/own a news company that does not support your point of view. 






popeye1250 -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 5:54:41 PM)

Not to worry, another six months of shenanigans in Washington like the last six and they'll be jumping ship.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 6:02:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

"I think that many people will claim that "news" today is about corporatism, since most of the news agencies are owned by large corporations, and I think there is some truth to that.

Here is the part that throws me.  I agree that all news is nothing more than corporatism, however it is the GOP that almost every large corporation supports with money.  You don't see the Dems giving big tax breaks to the wealthy and powerful. So the idea that they are all liberal makes no sense.  Large powerful corporations really only care about their own profit margin, so it would not make sense to have/own a news company that does not support your point of view. 





Large corporations support both parties to cover their bases in most cases. It is only when there is a clear threat or a clear benefit from one party or the other do they "pick sides". And you certainly do see Democrats giving tax breaks to the wealthy...Clinton did it in capital gains reductions (an important cause of his being able to balance the budget along with raping the military), and Kennedy did it in overall tax structure where, as in the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, they benefitted everybody including the wealthy.




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/4/2009 10:46:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


.....as in the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, they benefitted everybody including the wealthy.



Honestly, do you live in a conservative fantasy world?

I can pull up at least a hundred sources without even trying hard that will show the Reagan and Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy almost exclusively.

Even most conservatives have stopped trying to argue the point, instead falling back on trickle-down economics to justify it.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 8:52:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


.....as in the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, they benefitted everybody including the wealthy.



Honestly, do you live in a conservative fantasy world?

I can pull up at least a hundred sources without even trying hard that will show the Reagan and Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy almost exclusively.

Even most conservatives have stopped trying to argue the point, instead falling back on trickle-down economics to justify it.



go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda. Your claim that they benefited the wealthy almost exclusively is a lie that is disproven in the numbers.

When you can come up with something in the data that you think shows that is true, post it, and I'll tear it down.




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 8:55:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda. Your claim that they benefited the wealthy almost exclusively is a lie that is disproven in the numbers.

When you can come up with something in the data that you think shows that is true, post it, and I'll tear it down.



No Willbeurr, I'm getting tired of this little game and doing research for you.

You made the original claim without any source, as always.

It's time you step up to the plate and start backing the bullshit you constantly throw out without documentation.









willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:03:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda. Your claim that they benefited the wealthy almost exclusively is a lie that is disproven in the numbers.

When you can come up with something in the data that you think shows that is true, post it, and I'll tear it down.



No Willbeurr, I'm getting tired of this little game and doing research for you.

You made the original claim without any source, as always.

It's time you step up to the plate and start backing the bullshit you constantly throw out without documentation.









No dear, you made the claim that they benefit exlcusively the wealthy. Back it up. Its your rules, play by them. If you need to learn how to analyze it first, start here

http://www.tax-news.com/archive/story/New_Study_Suggests_Bushs_Tax_Cuts_Didnt_Favour_Investor_Class_xxxx29734.html




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:25:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


No dear, you made the claim that they benefit exlcusively the wealthy. Back it up. Its your rules, play by them. If you need to learn how to analyze it first, start here

http://www.tax-news.com/archive/story/New_Study_Suggests_Bushs_Tax_Cuts_Didnt_Favour_Investor_Class_xxxx29734.html


Well Willbeurr, I really can't be your dear.
I'm unfortunately straight, but it is always so flattering to have anyone make a pass at me.  [sm=flowers.gif]

And the other unfortunate reality is you made this claim on this thread before I ever entered the discussion:

...as in the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, they benefitted everybody including the wealthy.

Then you proceeded to say:

...go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda.

Yet, the link you posted is not the tax data itself but an article written by those with an agenda.




servantforuse -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:25:58 AM)

The middle class gets a direct benefit when wealthy people spend money. They build houses, large obats and cars. They are also able to expand their business and employ more people instead of being taxed to the point of no return. Ask anyone in the trades. Trickle down does indeed help the middle class.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:28:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


No dear, you made the claim that they benefit exlcusively the wealthy. Back it up. Its your rules, play by them. If you need to learn how to analyze it first, start here

http://www.tax-news.com/archive/story/New_Study_Suggests_Bushs_Tax_Cuts_Didnt_Favour_Investor_Class_xxxx29734.html


Well Willbeurr, I really can't be your dear.
I'm unfortunately straight, but it is always so flattering to have anyone make a pass at me.  [sm=flowers.gif]

And the other unfortunate reality is you made this claim on this thread before I ever entered the discussion:

...as in the Reagan and Bush tax cuts, they benefitted everybody including the wealthy.

Then you proceeded to say:

...go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda.

Yet, the link you posted is not the tax data itself but an article written by those with an agenda.




The link was to show you HOW to analyze the tax data, not to offer any conclusions on what it will show. You need parameters to define what "benefitting the wealthy" means, the article gives the only logical parameters for analysis.

Now run along and do the work to support your claim.




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:31:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The middle class gets a direct benefit when wealthy people spend money. They build houses, large obats and cars. They are also able to expand their business and employ more people instead of being taxed to the point of no return. Ask anyone in the trades. Trickle down does indeed help the middle class.


Well. then we have the solution.

Let's eliminate all taxes on the top 10% and then we'll all be doing great.

There will be a Porsche in every garage and everyone will be swimming in trickle-down wealth.

I wonder why no one has thought of this before?








servantforuse -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:40:05 AM)

When are the democrats get over their class warfare ?. We should be cutting taxes for everyone, rich included. We would all have more money to spend buying cars, houses, boats and growing a business. Some out there believe that the government knows best on how to spend OUR money.




slvemike4u -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:41:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The middle class gets a direct benefit when wealthy people spend money. They build houses, large obats and cars. They are also able to expand their business and employ more people instead of being taxed to the point of no return. Ask anyone in the trades. Trickle down does indeed help the middle class.
Do you really want to do this servant...parroting this old discredited bullshit from the Reagan years.
You do realise this is pure propaganda dreamed up by the rich to mollify screwing the middle class...and telling us they do it for our own good
Trickle down economics has had its shot....and we find ourselves here....lets try the inverse ,lets try the trickle up theory...wherein working people get to keep more of what they earn...while the rich carry a little bit more of the burden in gratitude for all they have amassed while screwing the rest of us.
Money can't buy you happiness...was just a line coined by a rich guy to placate the poor!




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:44:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Then you proceeded to say:

...go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda



The link was to show you HOW to analyze the tax data, not to offer any conclusions on what it will show. You need parameters to define what "benefitting the wealthy" means, the article gives the only logical parameters for analysis.

Now run along and do the work to support your claim.


Nope, sorry Willbeur.

I've gotten tired of researching the facts you are too lazy to do.

You made the initial claim.

You set the ground rules, which your link does not adhere to.

So, I'll patiently wait for the actual tax data you said is the only reliable source.

Take your time, I'm in no hurry.









willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:48:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Then you proceeded to say:

...go to the tax data itself and skip the filters by those with an agenda



The link was to show you HOW to analyze the tax data, not to offer any conclusions on what it will show. You need parameters to define what "benefitting the wealthy" means, the article gives the only logical parameters for analysis.

Now run along and do the work to support your claim.


Nope, sorry Willbeur.

I've gotten tired of researching the facts you are too lazy to do.

You made the initial claim.

You set the ground rules, which your link does not adhere to.

So, I'll patiently wait for the actual tax data you said is the only reliable source.

Take your time, I'm in no hurry.








www.irs.gov wow that took a lot, i can see why you were so reluctant to find it




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:50:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The middle class gets a direct benefit when wealthy people spend money. They build houses, large obats and cars. They are also able to expand their business and employ more people instead of being taxed to the point of no return. Ask anyone in the trades. Trickle down does indeed help the middle class.


Well. then we have the solution.

Let's eliminate all taxes on the top 10% and then we'll all be doing great.

There will be a Porsche in every garage and everyone will be swimming in trickle-down wealth.

I wonder why no one has thought of this before?







you apparently have a limited understanding of "trickle down economics" and whether or not it has worked before. You can start here.

http://www.philosofiles.com/big/politics/blair-trickledownreagan.shtml

Its a good, non-technical start for a noob in economics.




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/5/2009 9:51:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

When are the democrats get over their class warfare ?. We should be cutting taxes for everyone, rich included. We would all have more money to spend buying cars, houses, boats and growing a business. Some out there believe that the government knows best on how to spend OUR money.


I'll get over it when we stop electing people like Reagan and Bush who put the tax burden on the middle class while cutting taxes for those who least needed it.




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875