yeah, we all know that outside of certain fox news anchors, the media in general is eavily liberal....

my question is why are all the networks going crazy over obama's trip to the middle east when john mccain has already gone there three times ?>?>>> they are sending anchors and large contingents with him.

can, at least for a little while, the media act nuetral or at least portray it? at least until the election is over.

obama isnt doing anything groundbreaking here, its been done.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

they will never be neutral. the media is there to make a big deal about their candidate. sorry, that's just how media is today. they will give their candidate the limelight and attempt to swing the votes.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

its a shame, becasue these two idiots are going to battle out an election where half the actual facts are either going to be lied about of simply not stated.

again, this trip is the 4th made by a candidate so far, and obama's first. no big deal

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

If the media has a liberal agenda, they failed at making anything come out of it for the past 8 years. But let's be honest, Obama is a little more interesting. The media covers what's more "interesting."

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

and if they can dramatize it up a bit...got to have IMPACT...

It's not so much the talking heads you see reading the prompters...it's the producers and the news directors that decide what gets aired and how it's going to be written/read...

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[QUOTE=thesightless;625979]yeah, we all know that outside of certain fox news anchors, the media in general is eavily liberal....

my question is why are all the networks going crazy over obama's trip to the middle east when john mccain has already gone there three times ?>?>>> they are sending anchors and large contingents with him.

can, at least for a little while, the media act nuetral or at least portray it? at least until the election is over.

obama isnt doing anything groundbreaking here, its been done.[/QUOTE]

I think you hit it by stating the liberal is largely liberal. They love Obama because he's a Democrat, young(in Presidential terms) and the first black nominee for President.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

The only way it will be be fair is is the "Fairness Doctrine" was re-introduced. That will do away with the Rush Limbaugh's and COmpany

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

^ ha. seriously.

Clearly, the "Fairness Doctrine" you're talking about is not about being 'fair'. It's about silencing dissent.

But this isn't suprising coming from such 'philosophical' persuasions...

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

Yep. But this is no surpirse. Liberals are all about silencing oppositition. They don't want to win an argument... Just silence any dissent, or tilt the voting population in their favor by legalizing 12+ million illegals.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

^ as are neoconservatives. but that doesn't warrant them being silence.

The way to eradicate false beliefs is to show the evidence.

While it may not be the 'best' way to eliminate these atrocious ideas, it is the most essential way.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

all I'm saying is that you shouldn't be able to have one view drilling ideals in your head for hours everyday.. I hate Rush is what I was trying to get across and wished him and Bill O'reilly would be booted off the air.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

^nobody is forced to listen to him. There is a dial. Everyone has a choice.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote=runningman;626901]all I'm saying is that you shouldn't be able to have one view drilling ideals in your head for hours everyday.. I hate Rush is what I was trying to get across and wished him and Bill O'reilly would be booted off the air.[/quote]

Well then lets look at your argument in light of having one view drilling ideals in your head. Here are some numbers to chew on:

Audience reach and circulation statistics illustrate the liberal domination of the five major information media, two of which have no conservative sources:

Broadcast TV news, millions/day Liberal 42.1 Conservative 0 Top 25 newspapers, millions/day Liberal 11.7 Conservative 1.3 Cable TV news, millions/month Liberal 182.8 Conservative 61.6 Top talk radio, millions/week Liberal 24.5 Conservative 87.0 Newsweeklies, millions/week Liberal 8.5 Conservative 0

*for more info check out [URL]http://mason.gmu.edu/~atabarro/MediaBias.doc[/URL]

So, if there are any ideals being drilled into the head, its obviously the liberal ideals that are really being drilled (though I doubt you actually have a problem with that). Ironically, it's the liberal ideals that stand to loose the most from the "Fairness" Doctrine. So, would the "Fairness" Doctrine increase or reduce discussion about public policy issues? History says speech would be curtailed. When the "Fairness" Doctrine was in effect, talk radio avoided controversial topics. Most stations programmed only general talk and advice. Politicians repeatedly have used the "Fairness" Doctrine to chill speech. John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson both used the "Fairness" Doctrine to stifle criticism, suppress the speech of political adversaries, and force radio stations to provide free air time. Today, efforts by liberal politicians to restore the "Fairness" Doctrine bring to mind the worst moment of Israel’s King David (I'm not much of a christian, but there are some interesting stories in the bible). David was not satisfied with his many wives and concubines; he also had to have the beautiful Bathsheba, the only wife of one of his soldiers. American liberals already dominate four of the five most important news and information media, and they are determined to take over the fifth medium as well. America has so many sources of news and information available that no federal regulation of broadcasting content can possibly be justified on the grounds of public interest. The Fairness Doctrine has an ugly history of political abuse directly intended to restrict the free exchange of ideas. And why should Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Rielly be booted from the air? I get it, you think that only Liberal ideals should be discussed and that nobody with conservative ideals should have a voice (how very Soviet of you). How about having Bill Moyers and Anderson Cooper booted off the air too? Oh, wait they are Liberal voices and they have the only right to be heard. In all actuality, none of these people should be booted off the air. This is America, where freedom of speech is a right. As my fellow Libertarian Mariner88 stated, if you don't like the shows, then turn that dial or change the channel. Otherwise move to Cuba, Mynmar, or Venezuela where "fairness" doctorines thrive. Oh wait, your already in Canada....

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote=88Mariner;626927]^nobody is forced to listen to him. There is a dial. Everyone has a choice.[/quote]

Spot on.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[QUOTE=thesightless;625979] my question is why are all the networks going crazy over obama's trip to the middle east when john mccain has already gone there three times ?>?>>> they are sending anchors and large contingents with him. [/QUOTE]

Ironically, I honestly think that part of the reason is that because the folks on the right made such a big deal over the fact that Obama hadn't been yet, it inevitably became more newsworthy when he did go. The RNC ran a ticker on its homepage showing how long it had been since Obama had been to Iraq -- now he's there, and so far it looks to be a net positive for him. Be careful what you wish for, IMO.

And by the way, it is not a foregone conclusion that the media has this liberal bias that everyone speaks of. The media has a pro-media bias, and will run whatever stories keep people watching and listening, period. At different times over the course of an election cycle, that manifests itself by reporting that looks to favor one candidate or the other, most often the one that is behind, because viewers are more interested in a close race than a blowout.

I frankly am just not buying the media bias study cited by Kiff (and I couldn't help notice that there are quite a few commentators that take a similarly dim view of the methodology). The way it is set up, it ignores obvious displays of bias, like when a reporter editorializes about a situation, and it also attaches what I view as artificial significance to what "think tank" is cited by members of congress and news outlets. This debate will rage on forever, but attempting to quantify something like this in an empirical way is like herding cats, IMO.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote=toasty;626980] The media has a pro-media bias, and will run whatever stories keep people watching and listening, period. [/quote]

Very good point.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[IMG]http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/07/21/gal.obamapetraeus.cnn.jpg[/IMG]

[COLOR=#808080](Photo credit: SSG Lorie Jewell, US Army) Gen. David Petraeus flies with Sens. Barack Obama and Chuck Hagel from Baghdad International Airport to the International Zone.

[COLOR=Silver]Great pic here.[/COLOR] [/COLOR]

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote] Ironically, I honestly think that part of the reason is that because the folks on the right made such a big deal over the fact that Obama hadn't been yet, it inevitably became more newsworthy when he did go. The RNC ran a ticker on its homepage showing how long it had been since Obama had been to Iraq -- now he's there, and so far it looks to be a net positive for him. Be careful what you wish for, IMO.[/quote]

Very true. The Conservatives fussed and fretted over this issue and it looks to be biting them. The thing here is that if the "lack of experience" argument about Obama is true, then this is a big deal because he is going out and getting some "experience" and for once not depending on pretty speeches with empty rhetoric or race baiting. So yeah, this turns out to be a positive for him. [quote]And by the way, it is not a foregone conclusion that the media has this liberal bias that everyone speaks of. The media has a pro-media bias, and will run whatever stories keep people watching and listening, period. At different times over the course of an election cycle, that manifests itself by reporting that looks to favor one candidate or the other, most often the one that is behind, because viewers are more interested in a close race than a blowout[/quote]. Yes the media is pro-media, but when most of the media is owned by liberals and employs liberally leaning reporters then it becomes pro-liberal by default. The same goes for media outlets like Fox on the other end of the spectrum. However in this case, Obama is leading and getting the attention while McCain is trailing, so the argument that "media favors the one trailing" really doesn't hold water, and lets face it, this election will be a blowout in favor of Obama.

[quote]I frankly am just not buying the media bias study cited by Kiff (and I couldn't help notice that there are quite a few commentators that take a similarly dim view of the methodology). The way it is set up, it ignores obvious displays of bias, like when a reporter editorializes about a situation, and it also attaches what I view as artificial significance to what "think tank" is cited by members of congress and news outlets. This debate will rage on forever, but attempting to quantify something like this in an empirical way is like herding cats, IMO.[/quote]

I don't expect run-of-the-mill left wingers (or right wingers for that matter) to really buy the study because they consider opinions on blogs, wikipedia, or candidate websites as gospel over accredited institutions or specialists in the field. They tend to ignore or dispute valid studies no matter what they reveal (whether its this liberal media bias or global warming, etc). Even though this study does have its flaws, I have yet to see a valid study that shows no liberal bias in media.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[QUOTE=Kiff;627105] Yes the media is pro-media, but when most of the media is owned by liberals and employs liberally leaning reporters then it becomes pro-liberal by default. The same goes for media outlets like Fox on the other end of the spectrum. However in this case, Obama is leading and getting the attention while McCain is trailing, so the argument that "media favors the one trailing" really doesn't hold water, and lets face it, this election will be a blowout in favor of Obama. [/QUOTE]

Well, this particular span of a few days where Obama is abroad might not be the best example of "media favors the one trailing," but in general, I think that still holds true. For evidence, consult the coverage throughout the entire primary season.

[QUOTE=Kiff;627105] I don't expect run-of-the-mill left wingers (or right wingers for that matter) to really buy the study because they consider opinions on blogs, wikipedia, or candidate websites as gospel over accredited institutions or specialists in the field. They tend to ignore or dispute valid studies no matter what they reveal (whether its this liberal media bias or global warming, etc). Even though this study does have its flaws, I have yet to see a valid study that shows no liberal bias in media.[/QUOTE]

My, don't we have a heightened sense of self-importance? Thanks for stripping away the bullshit so that we, the unwashed, stupid masses, can see what's really going on. :roll:

The reason I don't put much stock into this study is that it is attempting to measure empirically something that inherently evades empirical analysis. When I hear Chris Matthews talk about how listening to Obama sends a tingle up his leg or watch Fox doctor photos of NYT reporters, I don't need a scientist to explain to me that there's bias at work. Of course, these and what most people would consider the most egregious examples of media bias wouldn't be captured in this study because they have nothing to do with any "think tanks."

You clearly believe there is an overwhelming liberal bias in the media and you've found a study that validates that belief for you, congratulations. Creationists are able to find studies that purport to support their positions as well. When you're dealing with things that are inherently touchy-feely and subjective, though, you're never going to find a study that carries any weight with me, which is why I'm not even going to bother to try to find an opposing study. It's an absurd discussion to have.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote=Kiff;626934]Well then lets look at your argument in light of having one view drilling ideals in your head. Here are some numbers to chew on:

Audience reach and circulation statistics illustrate the liberal domination of the five major information media, two of which have no conservative sources:

Broadcast TV news, millions/day Liberal 42.1 Conservative 0 Top 25 newspapers, millions/day Liberal 11.7 Conservative 1.3 Cable TV news, millions/month Liberal 182.8 Conservative 61.6 Top talk radio, millions/week Liberal 24.5 Conservative 87.0 Newsweeklies, millions/week Liberal 8.5 Conservative 0

*for more info check out [URL]http://mason.gmu.edu/~atabarro/MediaBias.doc[/URL]

So, if there are any ideals being drilled into the head, its obviously the liberal ideals that are really being drilled (though I doubt you actually have a problem with that). Ironically, it's the liberal ideals that stand to loose the most from the "Fairness" Doctrine. So, would the "Fairness" Doctrine increase or reduce discussion about public policy issues? History says speech would be curtailed. When the "Fairness" Doctrine was in effect, talk radio avoided controversial topics. Most stations programmed only general talk and advice. Politicians repeatedly have used the "Fairness" Doctrine to chill speech. John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson both used the "Fairness" Doctrine to stifle criticism, suppress the speech of political adversaries, and force radio stations to provide free air time. Today, efforts by liberal politicians to restore the "Fairness" Doctrine bring to mind the worst moment of Israel’s King David (I'm not much of a christian, but there are some interesting stories in the bible). David was not satisfied with his many wives and concubines; he also had to have the beautiful Bathsheba, the only wife of one of his soldiers. American liberals already dominate four of the five most important news and information media, and they are determined to take over the fifth medium as well. America has so many sources of news and information available that no federal regulation of broadcasting content can possibly be justified on the grounds of public interest. The Fairness Doctrine has an ugly history of political abuse directly intended to restrict the free exchange of ideas. And why should Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Rielly be booted from the air? I get it, you think that only Liberal ideals should be discussed and that nobody with conservative ideals should have a voice (how very Soviet of you). How about having Bill Moyers and Anderson Cooper booted off the air too? Oh, wait they are Liberal voices and they have the only right to be heard. In all actuality, none of these people should be booted off the air. This is America, where freedom of speech is a right. As my fellow Libertarian Mariner88 stated, if you don't like the shows, then turn that dial or change the channel. Otherwise move to Cuba, Mynmar, or Venezuela where "fairness" doctorines thrive. Oh wait, your already in Canada....[/quote]

WORD!

and there is a huge liberal bias in the media...

Its just getting worse too, thats why I think ratings for the networks and newspaper subscription is down...

Give us the facts, not your opinion...

If your giving us your opinion then make it clear, like Rush or anyone in talk radio does..

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[QUOTE=In-SighT;627645] Its just getting worse too, [B]thats why I think ratings for the networks and newspaper subscription is down... [/B] [/QUOTE]

Another reason might be that people from our generation turn to the internet and other non-traditional sources for our information. I get offered a subscription to the local paper every time I go to a baseball game, and I'm always thinking, "Why the hell would I pay for you to fill my house with excess paper with news that is already a few hours old when I get it?"

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

[quote=In-SighT;627645]WORD!

and there is a huge liberal bias in the media...

Its just getting worse too, thats why I think ratings for the networks and newspaper subscription is down...

[B] Give us the facts, not your opinion... [/B]
If your giving us your opinion then make it clear, like Rush or anyone in talk radio does..[/quote]

Isn't this site about giving your opinion?? Liberal, Conservative who gives a shit really.. I don't like to classify myself as either.

Re: just an honest question regarding media and election

^ what, pray tell, would you classify yourself as?