RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (Full Version)

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



Message


kdsub -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:03:56 AM)

Firm

I was assuming that most Republicans call most Democrats liberal...and most Democrats call most Republicans conservative. In this case the Gallup poll labeling is not in line with most Americans that according to the poll vote as a majority Democrat.

I should have used the labels Democrat and Republican rather than liberal and conservative.

Liberal has become a dirty word over the last 10 years and is now associated with far left fanaticism. Funny how words like far left and religious right creep into politics.

Butch




popeye1250 -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 10:58:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Firm

I was assuming that most Republicans call most Democrats liberal...and most Democrats call most Republicans conservative. In this case the Gallup poll labeling is not in line with most Americans that according to the poll vote as a majority Democrat.

I should have used the labels Democrat and Republican rather than liberal and conservative.

Liberal has become a dirty word over the last 10 years and is now associated with far left fanaticism. Funny how words like far left and religious right creep into politics.

Butch




KD, perhaps that's why some "Liberals" like Al Franken "changed labels" and are trying to call themselves "progressives." Whatever (that) means.
Funny thing is they still believe in the same flawed policies so it's just basically a "name change."
They don't change their thinking or adopt any new policies.
Smoke and mirrors.
As for the "religious right" I don't know how they can be considered "conservative." They're "deists." They try to inject their "Gods" into political situations where it has no bearing.
"Everyone needs to spin around in a circle and speak in tongues three times before eating." And that will solve the deficit problem how?
It seems that we have a bunch of idiots with their own "agendas" trying to use politics as a vehicle to force (their) agendas on The People.
This is why I favor *hiring* a manager to be "President." Someone anonymous and impartial with *no constituencies* to please.
Politics in this country has gotten to such a state that we can't get anything done without buying off "special interests." Corruption is rampant.
Give them a two year contract and if they do a good job another two year contract.
To see grown men and women "fawning" over Obama or any other public servant is actually sickening in a way.
Makes you think to yourself; "Man, I wonder which one of those guys would actually fellate Obama if he asked them to in private?"




slvemike4u -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 11:07:27 AM)

First off Popeye...how are you feeling?
If your up to it you might want to check out the definition of deistism...there is very little there that connects with the religious right as it is practiced in this country.As a matter of fact Deists reject most of what is written in the Bible as well as the Qu'ran.Hell Deists,as I understand it,have very little use for organised religion in its entirety




Arpig -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 12:05:03 PM)

quote:

That's one way to avoid a debate, by claiming you are right and there is nothing to debate.

I think any journalist, just being human, is going to have a certain unavoidable bias.

Journalistic ethics require that the bias be ignored, but often still comes through.
What is there to debate? You yourself admit that the journalists bias often comes through. Now, from experience alone, I would say that most serious journalists seem to be left leaning, therefore whatever bias creeps in will tend to be a leftward bias. Thus there really is nothing to debate, to claim that there is no left bias in the media is simply to argue against the obvious. Now do not read into this that I am in anyway outraged by this bias, in fact being generally a lefty myself, I tend to approve of it and the stances taken by the majority of the media outlets.
quote:

But how do you say Fox can be a counter-balance when they make absolutely no effort to try to maintain any journalistic integrity?

The bias is blatant.

I nowhere said that Fox was any sort of a counter-balance to anything, what I said was the management saw a basically untapped market share, that of the right wing, religious/conservative groups who were not being given their spin on the major networks, so they set out to do just that, to give the right its own major network news outlet. And yes, the bias is blatant, and unappologetically so, that is the whole idea.
quote:

I was watching it last night and the entire focus was not on Clinton freeing the two reporters but on wild speculation that Clinton and Obama had to give some concession to North Korea.

Is this journalism or rumor-mongering?

A little bit of both actually. But all the networks are guilty of this "speculation disguised as commentary" sort of programming. It is used to fill time on the 24 hour news feeds...unfortunatly it is very expensive to actually send reporters around the world to investigate unknown stories, it is much cheaper to bring in an "expert" to give his opinion on a story that has already been broken, often they end up discussing the media coverage of a story as if it were the story itself. This goes for all the networks, not just Fox.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 2:56:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife


But how do you say Fox can be a counter-balance when they make absolutely no effort to try to maintain any journalistic integrity?

The bias is blatant.




The bias of Fox hosts is blatant, agreed. It is also blatant at MSNBC, CNN and NBC.

However of the 4 only 1 is meticulous about having opposite viewpoints represented on every controversial issue...and its the only one without a C in its nickname.




DomKen -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 3:30:10 PM)

Yeah I'm sure the opposite viewpoint gets across. Between O'Reilly shouting over or simply ordering microphones turned off his show is always a bastion of balance. Or maybe you mean Glenn Beck, who rarely if ever has a guest who disagrees with him and lies at a phenomenal rate on every subject. Or maybe you mean Hannity who has finally dumped that fool Colmes and no longer even bothers with the pretense of balance, although he must have gotten a new video editing booth for christmas considering the various hack jobs he's shown the last few months. Or maybe you mean the actual news broadcasts with their blatant attamepts at spin like manufacturing a controversy over some guy flying a tattered flag so they wouldn't have to cover health care or President Clinton returning from NK with the formerly jailed reporters?




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 4:11:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yeah I'm sure the opposite viewpoint gets across. Between O'Reilly shouting over or simply ordering microphones turned off his show is always a bastion of balance.


AFAIK thats happened twice..Barney Frank and I forget the other time. And I guarantee you the oppostie viewpoint gets across, because if it was so fucking obscure I wouldnt be throwing my shoe at the TV as frequently.




popeye1250 -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 4:51:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

First off Popeye...how are you feeling?
If your up to it you might want to check out the definition of deistism...there is very little there that connects with the religious right as it is practiced in this country.As a matter of fact Deists reject most of what is written in the Bible as well as the Qu'ran.Hell Deists,as I understand it,have very little use for organised religion in its entirety



Sheesh! I mention "felating Obama" and looks who shows up!
I'm doing better slavemike, it takes a while to heal from major surgery. And how are you doing?




slvemike4u -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 5:16:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

First off Popeye...how are you feeling?
If your up to it you might want to check out the definition of deistism...there is very little there that connects with the religious right as it is practiced in this country.As a matter of fact Deists reject most of what is written in the Bible as well as the Qu'ran.Hell Deists,as I understand it,have very little use for organised religion in its entirety



Sheesh! I mention "felating Obama" and looks who shows up!
I'm doing better slavemike, it takes a while to heal from major surgery. And how are you doing?
Okay,I'm just going to write off the "felating Obama"comment to over-medicating....lol.
I'm doing fine Popeye ,glad to hear your coming along...heal quick and heal well.




DomKen -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 5:45:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yeah I'm sure the opposite viewpoint gets across. Between O'Reilly shouting over or simply ordering microphones turned off his show is always a bastion of balance.


AFAIK thats happened twice..Barney Frank and I forget the other time. And I guarantee you the oppostie viewpoint gets across, because if it was so fucking obscure I wouldnt be throwing my shoe at the TV as frequently.

http://crooksandliars.com/2007/07/26/oreilly-cuts-halls-mic-to-get-the-last-word-about-billoreillycoms-hate-comments
http://crooksandliars.com/2007/04/02/why-does-bill-oreilly-hate-our-troops-and-american-values/
http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2007/03/billo-cuts-off-his-partners-microphone.html
http://mediamatters.org/research/200508170010 (documents several instances)




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 7:55:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

And perhaps, just maybe, your biases are in play here?

You condemn Fox for the same things that many on the "right" have condemned the "mainstream" media for all the time.

On MSNBC for example, the bias is blatant. I see it all the time. I think it sucks, is distraction and poor journalism. That is my bias.

I suspect you find MSNBC "fair and balanced"?

The difference between us is that I realize that I have my biases. You seem to believe that your biases are the "correct ones" and the way that the world should be.

Firm


Absolutely MSNBC is biased.

MSNBC was basically the liberal answer to Fox's over-the-top conservative bias.

But to compare either of these entertainment channels to legitimate news networks is ridiculous.




Arpig -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 8:02:09 PM)

quote:

But to compare either of these entertainment channels to legitimate news networks is ridiculous.
What would you consider a legitimate news network? Myself I would vote for CBC and BBC. All the US ones are pretty much infotainment




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 8:46:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

What is there to debate? You yourself admit that the journalists bias often comes through. Now, from experience alone, I would say that most serious journalists seem to be left leaning, therefore whatever bias creeps in will tend to be a leftward bias. Thus there really is nothing to debate, to claim that there is no left bias in the media is simply to argue against the obvious. Now do not read into this that I am in anyway outraged by this bias, in fact being generally a lefty myself, I tend to approve of it and the stances taken by the majority of the media outlets.


Except you left out the main point of what I said.

While everyone has their views and biases there is a code of journalistic ethics that any reporter or commentator with a sense of integrity tries to adhere to.

I keep hearing about this liberal bias but I never see any concrete examples.

Any to offer? 


quote:

I nowhere said that Fox was any sort of a counter-balance to anything, what I said was the management saw a basically untapped market share, that of the right wing, religious/conservative groups who were not being given their spin on the major networks, so they set out to do just that, to give the right its own major network news outlet. And yes, the bias is blatant, and unappologetically so, that is the whole idea.


Which is fine, if it were a genuine news network with somewhat of a conservative view.  But what I see is an absolute sham.

The other night Hannity had a three person panel discussing Clinton and the freed hostages.  Two of the three were trying to make the case that there was a hidden agenda and Clinton and Obama gave concessions to North Korea.  Hannity, instead of even pretending to be an impartial moderator in the discussion, constantly shouted down the third person who tried to put the focus on the two reporters who were freed.

I saw another segment on Fox where one of the anchors was interviewing an author who wrote a book on the current economic crisis touting conservative economic policy.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out as planned.

The author refused to say that Bush's policies were not to blame as the interviewer constantly kept probing for the answer he wanted and grew almost comically frustrated when the author held his position.

Let's face it, Fox is just a propaganda mouthpiece created by Ruoert Murdoch to advance conservative Republican policy and attack anything and anyone Democratic. 

quote:

A little bit of both actually. But all the networks are guilty of this "speculation disguised as commentary" sort of programming. It is used to fill time on the 24 hour news feeds...unfortunatly it is very expensive to actually send reporters around the world to investigate unknown stories, it is much cheaper to bring in an "expert" to give his opinion on a story that has already been broken, often they end up discussing the media coverage of a story as if it were the story itself. This goes for all the networks, not just Fox.


No, it's not the same.

Spend a portion of a day watching Fox and you will see how little of their entire programming is hard news.

Even when they do present the news, more often than not they blend commentary and bring in experts to give it the desired conservative spin.

Just as I said with Clinton and North Korea.  The fact two reporters who were facing more than a decade in a North Korean prison were freed was all but ignored.

The whole focus was how to attack the Democratic former President who helped free them and how the story could be spun into a negative for the current administration.




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 8:58:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

And perhaps, just maybe, your biases are in play here?

You condemn Fox for the same things that many on the "right" have condemned the "mainstream" media for all the time.

On MSNBC for example, the bias is blatant. I see it all the time. I think it sucks, is distraction and poor journalism. That is my bias.

I suspect you find MSNBC "fair and balanced"?

The difference between us is that I realize that I have my biases. You seem to believe that your biases are the "correct ones" and the way that the world should be.


Absolutely MSNBC is biased.

MSNBC was basically the liberal answer to Fox's over-the-top conservative bias.

But to compare either of these entertainment channels to legitimate news networks is ridiculous.


So I guess my question is why is Fox News such a cause célèbre for you and almost every other liberal on this site? I seriously doubt that any political thread of any length doesn't contain some snide remark about the news channel from the "left" side.

You'll occasionally see someone on the "right" mention MSNBC, but usually only in response to the constant claims that Fox is the only "biased" network out there.

Personally, it appears to me that Fox enrages liberal true believers because it challenges their world view, and by Gawd!, anything and anyone who doesn't hew to their beliefs must be evil facist nazis!

("Strung 'em up! Then shoot them! Then rape their fathers! Cut the mothers' throats!")

Firm




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:01:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

But to compare either of these entertainment channels to legitimate news networks is ridiculous.
What would you consider a legitimate news network? Myself I would vote for CBC and BBC. All the US ones are pretty much infotainment


CNN has gone downhill somewhat to compete with the other 24 hour networks but it has retained its basic integrity.

I mean, really, flip back and forth between CNN, HLN, and Fox at any time of the day or night and see how often each is actually offering news as compared to Fox's constant, direct attacks on Obama or the Democratic Party.

Turn it on right now for that matter, I can almost guarantee that is what you will find.




Arpig -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:04:02 PM)

quote:

Even when they do present the news, more often than not they blend commentary and bring in experts to give it the desired conservative spin.
Name one US news network that doesn't do this sort of thing.




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:08:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

But to compare either of these entertainment channels to legitimate news networks is ridiculous.
What would you consider a legitimate news network? Myself I would vote for CBC and BBC. All the US ones are pretty much infotainment


CNN has gone downhill somewhat to compete with the other 24 hour networks but it has retained its basic integrity.

I mean, really, flip back and forth between CNN, HLN, and Fox at any time of the day or night and see how often each is actually offering news as compared to Fox's constant, direct attacks on Obama or the Democratic Party.

Turn it on right now for that matter, I can almost guarantee that is what you will find.



"I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don't know. They're outside my ken. But sometimes when I'm in a theater I can feel them." - Pauline Kael

Firm




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:19:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

So I guess my question is why is Fox News such a cause célèbre for you and almost every other liberal on this site? I seriously doubt that any political thread of any length doesn't contain some snide remark about the news channel from the "left" side.

You'll occasionally see someone on the "right" mention MSNBC, but usually only in response to the constant claims that Fox is the only "biased" network out there.

Personally, it appears to me that Fox enrages liberal true believers because it challenges their world view, and by Gawd!, anything and anyone who doesn't hew to their beliefs must be evil facist nazis!

("Strung 'em up! Then shoot them! Then rape their fathers! Cut the mothers' throats!")

Firm


It enrages me because of its blatant bias and blatant lies.  Hannity said the other night that 77% percent of the country opposes health care reform. 

And then those blatant lies get passed around as fact, and regularly show up on this board.

It enrages me because it panders to what its listeners want to hear while pretending to be objective.

It enrages me because it is probably the foremost cause of the deep political divide that has grown in this country.

But most of all, it enrages me that a person like Murdoch is buying up media sources to promote his own views.

And it is nauseatingly apparent in almost everything on Fox that the employees are given guidelines to follow that not only require them to adhere to those views but to tailor every story and coax every guest into agreeing with those views.




rulemylife -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:22:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

Even when they do present the news, more often than not they blend commentary and bring in experts to give it the desired conservative spin.
Name one US news network that doesn't do this sort of thing.


CNN




FirmhandKY -> RE: Why Most Journalist are Democrats (8/6/2009 9:52:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

It enrages me because of its blatant bias and blatant lies.  Hannity said the other night that 77% percent of the country opposes health care reform. 

And then those blatant lies get passed around as fact, and regularly show up on this board.

It enrages me because it panders to what its listeners want to hear while pretending to be objective.

It enrages me because it is probably the foremost cause of the deep political divide that has grown in this country.

But most of all, it enrages me that a person like Murdoch is buying up media sources to promote his own views.

And it is nauseatingly apparent in almost everything on Fox that the employees are given guidelines to follow that not only require them to adhere to those views but to tailor every story and coax every guest into agreeing with those views.


rulemylife ... I don't wish to personally insult you at all, but you are a good example of exactly what I am saying, and exactly what the result is of the self-selection that the article in the OP is talking about.

Your world view comports well with the majority of US journalist.

Therefore, you think they are "correct". You see little or nothing wrong with their news, because you would report the exact same way, and the exact same things.

But the majority of Americans do not share all of that world view.

We have sat through years of silence and disagreement, and we have seen what we believe mocked and belittled. We have seen events shaped and reported in ways that define some of our core and basic beliefs as evil and "out of the mainstream".

Both the rise of the Internet and the revoking of the Fairness Doctrine have finally opened up avenues for us.

And it's driving journalist crazy. And it's driving the left crazy.

Their tiny, insulated, self-reinforcing ways of doing things, and beliefs are being seriously challenged for the first time, and they react with the rage you admit to, and display.

Most of your above complaints are ones that "we" have had, and that we have had to experience over the years:

It enrages us because of its blatant bias and blatant lies.

And then those blatant lies get passed around as fact, and regularly show up on this board.

It enrages us because it panders to what its listeners want to hear while pretending to be objective.

It enrages us because it is probably the foremost cause of the deep political divide that has grown in this country.

And it is nauseatingly apparent in almost everything on ABC, CBS, etc that the employees are so stuck in their ideology, that it is as if they are given guidelines to follow that not only require them to adhere to those views but to tailor every story and coax every guest into agreeing with those views.


Firm




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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