media bias

  • Thread starter Thread starter dmelosi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The bias is at its most obvious. The left wing media is ignoring the Rice uncovering. Is there anyone who does not see this?
 
commenter said:
In the 1960s, there were hundreds of locally owned, daily newspapers, TV and radio stations. Of course there was bias, but the many biases tended to even out. You had liberals and conservatives. There were regional variations, multiple ****different ****influences. Most newspapers or TV stations were owned by a family, and this family was different from that family. It was not perfect - obviously some people were underrepresented - but there was far more diversity of (name removed by moderator)ut, of views.

As a result of closings, mergers, etc, there now are a few giant corporations that control vast empires of media. They are generally concentrated in NY City and Los Angeles. For the most part, they seem to have identical views - pro liberal, pro secular. If you pick up a paper in California and compare it to a paper in New England, it will likely even have the same format, same priorities, with little variation besides traffic deaths and weather.
Click to expand...
👍
 
LeafByNiggle said:
The media is certainly under attack, and true believers in Trump are largely responsible for the shift in public opinion. It seems to me that this is exactly what Trump wants. If he can successfully discredit the media in the eyes of the public, then he can go on with his agenda without worrying about any media watchdogs, since his tweets will be equally respected, if not more so, than what the media says. It has been done before in history. It is not an original idea that Trump thought up.
Click to expand...
I think the problem is normalcy bias: each person assumes that what he or she thinks is fairly normal, in fact, possibly the center.

But the other day on NPR, I happened to hear a discussion about the NC transgender law. there were 3 or 4 people discussing it, *not one of whom had a clue as to why people might support the law. *There was *no one *who even explained why some people were concerned about the issue, much less anyone who espoused the idea that maybe allowing teenage boys into whichever bathroom or lockerroom they feel like going into is a bad idea.

There was an analysis done of the Diane Rheme Show: for every 27 guests, only 5 were conservative. The rest, 22, were liberal. While the study has been criticized, first, I would agree, based on my uncomprehensive but random experience with the show, and second, the controversy itself shows that each side has a different view of the spectrum and where the middle is and what determines a particular person’s position on the spectrum.

I think the problem many are having is that people who have been denigrated and marginalized are complaining. Trump does not have to tell me that the MSM is biased, I have been seeing that for years.

And for anyone who actually knows something about a particular topic, the bias is even more pronounced. A person I know was interviewed for several hours about a certain topic. The only clip played of him was so out of context that he seeked to be advocating what he was fighting against. Most Americans did not kniw much about that issue, and so the report might seem “balanced” to them. Only those who had more information about the issue and the views of those who were interviewed could see the bias.
 
If there is any doubt there is media bias against Trump, checkout all the leading stories, nothing but Trump bashing
 
dmelosi said:
The bias is at its most obvious. The left wing media is ignoring the Rice uncovering. Is there anyone who does not see this?
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about?

I am not entirely sure what you mean by “left wing media” but here are reports from CNN, Newsweek, th Atlantic, and CBS just from the past day or two:

cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/
cbsnews.com/news/source-intelligence-committees-made-trip-to-see-susan-rice-docs/
theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/trump-keeps-changing-his-story-about-wiretapping/522762/
newsweek.com/classified-reports-contradict-trumps-claim-obamas-national-security-advisor-582875
townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/04/12/cnn-gop-and-democratic-sources-both-say-unmasking-of-trump-officials-wasnt-improper-n2312571
 
 
dmelosi said:
Even you would have to admit that these are apologist articles for Rice.
Click to expand...
First you claim that the story is being ugnored. It is not.
Now you don’t like the stories because they are favorable to Rice.
🤷 is there an error in the stories linked?
 
dvdjs said:
First you claim that the story is being ugnored. It is not.
Now you don’t like the stories because they are favorable to Rice.
🤷 is there an error in the stories linked?
Click to expand...
Do these stories say what she did was not illegal by unnamed sources? There’s your error
 
dvdjs said:
First you claim that the story is being ugnored. It is not.
Now you don’t like the stories because they are favorable to Rice.
🤷 is there an error in the stories linked?
Click to expand...
The thread is about bias. That was also my post.
 
I work in the media and most of it is controlled by the Left and self-proclaimed Progressives who want to force others to believe in their ideas about progress. I also understand propaganda and how it works.

Media bias? Absolutely.

Ed
 
Here’s an example of media bias.

Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical
fair.org/home/five-top-papers-run-18-opinion-pieces-praising-syria-strikes-zero-are-critical/

“Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes. By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:” …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top