By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Bong Lover on 15 May 2013
Edit Thread
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
badgenome said:
Mr Khan said:
If Benghazi didn't stick during the election, it isn't going to stick now. The Republicans will back off when they realize they're spending all their political capital on something that's ultimately inconsequential to their agenda (e.g. when the budget fight kicks back in at the end of summer, Benghazi will melt away, at least until Clinton starts running for president)

Probably still not going anywhere in any meaningful sense, but it would actually be more likely to stick now because (a) there's more information available now, none of which is exculpatory for the administration, and (b) the media has less reason to run interference when there isn't an election looming. The press may be a little ticked about the AP thing, too, possibly even to the point of doing their jobs for a change just to fire a shot across the bow of the USS Obama.

It's funny how conservatives say that liberals are biased, yet several times, liberals have criticized some such direction or law, while the conservatives criticize every single thing. Maybe the liberals aren't so biased. Maybe we should be looking somewhere else to find the biases.

Fox would have me believe that the entire media is obama lovers, and biased shills. Occam's Razor would tell me that issues such as bengazi simply aren't a big deal to the press( or the majority of Americans for that matter; see: election 2012), and some other issues are.

Fox and Rush Limbaugh overplay it... but there is, and has been for decades a persistant liberal bias in the media, which has been shown time and time again in research studies.  This has been true since... like the 60's.

http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp

Possibly the most telling Reagan... 84% of reporters voted for Carter over him.... and 54% Mondale.... 54% doesn't seem like a lot until you look at the electoral map.

 

In general, news reporters are far more likely to self report to be democratic then the average public... and also have a far more "left  wing" view of what central is.  Suggesting that the numbers are worse then even what self reproting shows.  The Pew State of the Media polls tend to show that pretty well.

Hell, various reports tend to show liberal reporters outnumbers conservative ones by 3-4X... when in reality... conservatives... even today still outnumber self identified liberals.

If you think poltiical bias doesn't effect  how you see a story subconisously, i'd say your sorely mistaken... espiecally when it's been shown a LOT of reporters mistake where the middle ground even is.

 

Fox News has actually made this worse by more or less concentraiting all the rightwing into one little area that can be ignored, as opposed to the past where they were the minority, but spread out, so everyone had to read some opposition information. 

 

But hell,  compaired to MSBNC....

http://stateofthemedia.org/2013/special-reports-landing-page/the-changing-tv-news-landscape/

 

I mean... holy hell... If Fox news is barely a news network... who knows what the hell MSNBC is supposed to be.


To think there isn't ANY liberal bias in the media, is just extremely intellectually dishonest, even if you think the bias doesn't amount to anything big.  The REAL arguement is if said bias actually amounts to anything.

Not that this is going anywhere, but the liberal media bias thing is a huge red herring that conservastives would do well to reject as soon as possible. They won't and they will cling onto the liberal media monster to explain away everything under the sun.

In reality, there is no liberal media bias. It's true that more jourtnalists identify as liberals then conservatives, and this is where this ongoing myth always goes to the well. It's based on statments like "Their political views will subconciously slant coverage" to more outright claim of a grand liberal agenda to mislead the public.

Instead of going by this kind of meta information, look up the actual research that is done on the subject and one sees that the coverage is almost completely even. There is nothing in the data of actual coverage that shows any significant liberal bias in US media. It just isn't there.

So where does the myth come from? The liberal bias myth is itself an example of bias, in this case confirmation bias. It's a theory many people want to believe, so they will give much more weight to information that supports the theory then information that denies it. An example of this is on display in the quoted post where an article from the Media Research Center is presented as some sort of credible proof for a liberal media bias.