The whole CBS bullshit...

[sKratch]

I'm way too tired to write much about this, but I'm frankly very pissed at the media for how it's handling the CBS thing. The only reason it's such a big deal is because it's the only inident EVER where there appears to be a bias for the left. News is CONSTANTLY biased for the right, with consistent "selective editing" but I'll eat my hat if I hear MSNBC complain about it every 5 minutes. Am I right in being pissed off for this reason?

[wheelchairman]

I would agree with you, when I was in America I practically gave up watching the news because it was such a right-wing bias, it always amazes me how the right thinks that the left controls the media.

[sKratch]

Do you know what I'm talking about though? I don't know if anyone cares on a global scale. CBS made a report on 60 minutes about how Bush shirked his national guard duty. Several of the documents the report was based on were I think from a confidential source. The documents were never fully authenticated, leading to outrage. No, the documents weren't proven to FALSE, like say, the whole uranium from nigeria thing (which the media hicupped at and left alone). They just weren't fully authenticated. This means that they're not necessarily false. And because these several documents weren't authenticated, the media declares that it means Bush served honorably in the guard. By that logic, if I write a memo saying W. Bush is doing an excellent job in Iraq and send it to CBS, it will be a hard fact that Bush is doing a terrible job because a document saying otherwise wasn't authentic. OK that analogy sucks, but I hope you get what I mean.
So what's worse, using weak evidence to question Bush's service in the guard, or lying about why we should go to war in Iraq? Well I'll tell you which the media thinks is a bigger deal...

[wheelchairman]

Well actually I had no idea what you were talking about, but it didn't surprise me, we've had similar situations in Denmark.

I love the analogy that the media displays all signs of clinical hysteria.

[ReaganRevolution]

Just watch Fox News and read Ann Coulter's books instead.

[StayInTheHouseCarl]

its also evident when you turn on the radio. in LA, there are so many conservative talk radio shows, and seriously only one or two liberal.

[Dio]

Mmmmm...

I dunno, I like to watch CNN... It's pretty okay because they're usually fairly leftist, but also have some conservative personalities on some of the shows (like the Crossfire host)... Gives a slightly more complete picture of the political sides, when you get to see advocates of both of them on the same channel :)


By the way, I forget about CBS, isn't it partially government-sponsored? Or am I confusing it with PBS? :confused: Never watch CBS anyway, so not sure :P

[sKratch]

PBS = Public Broadcasting Station, that's the one you're thinking of. If I'm not mistaken, it's not government sponsored, but it has no corporate owner. It runs off donations and advertising revenue.
I used to think MSNBC sort of showed both sides but now I see they're all a bunch of tools too.

[lousyskater]

its also evident when you turn on the radio. in LA, there are so many conservative talk radio shows, and seriously only one or two liberal.
i always found that funny though because the majority of so cal is liberal.

[Dio]

PBS = Public Broadcasting Station, that's the one you're thinking of. If I'm not mistaken, it's not government sponsored, but it has no corporate owner. It runs off donations and advertising revenue.
I used to think MSNBC sort of showed both sides but now I see they're all a bunch of tools too.


You're right.... So hrm, what does CBS stand for? Like ABC = Aussie Broadcasting Company, CBC = Canadian ..., BBC = British ....?

[Dio]

Cunt Blocking Sluts?

[sKratch]

"...The claims that this controversy proves that CBS, or the media as a whole,
have a liberal or anti-Bush bias, are ludicrous. When CBS staffers got
caught taking shortcuts on a story critical of Bush, it cost them their
careers. By contrast, other reporters have received much less scrutiny
and punishment for offenses of far greater magnitude-- and with much more
significant consequences to society. The New York Times, for example,
published numerous allegations about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
that turned out to be false-- such as one source's claim that "all of Iraq
is one large storage facility" for WMD (9/8/02). Those stories, many of
which were splashed on the paper's front page, did a great deal to sell
the White House's bogus case for war against Iraq.

While the Times has admitted (5/26/04) that some of its WMD reporting was
"insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged," the reporter
most responsible for those stories, Judith Miller, was never sanctioned by
the Times-- and indeed still continues to report on Iraq for the paper.
Ironically, after MSNBC's Hardball finished its discussion of CBS and
journalistic responsibility on January 10, the show turned to a discussion
of Iraq featuring... Judith Miller."
www.fair.org

[SkunkIt]

but I'll eat my hat if I hear MSNBC complain about it every 5 minutes. Am I right in being pissed off for this reason?
Yeah, but eating your hat doesn't solve anything. :confused:

[Moose]

id say its about even, no one news station is in the middle, either to the right or left, i think there are more local news channels here in ny that are to the left, but more radio stations that are to the right...i think it evens out, but either way we never get the actual truth.

[sKratch]

Please, give me examples of news outlets that are to the left. Please.

[Dio]

Please, give me examples of news outlets that are to the left. Please.

CNN (more so) and ABC (less so). While they obviously got some right wing hosts, the majority of their newsmen are leftist.

... and that's only the network stations, there's hundreds of left-wing newspapers in the US.

[HornyPope]

The "left" you speak of, Dio, is only "leftist" on the American political specturm.

[Dio]

...which is better than, say, Saudi Arabian "leftist" political sectrum :P

[sKratch]

Um. I don't get it.

[Mota Boy]

Please, give me examples of news outlets that are to the left. Please.I only watch cable news, so I thought the idea of a left-leaning news program was a joke too until I watched Rather reporting one night. I was actually getting bug-eyed at some of the things they were saying (I forget the exact words, of course), but if you watch the three major network's nightly news programs you can ses a discernable leftward tilt.

But yeah, the whole CBS affair was handled horribly. It's another example of Republican's impressive ability at mobilizing propaganda and controlling the tone of public political debates.

[HornyPope]

...which is better than, say, Saudi Arabian "leftist" political sectrum :P

I don't think a politicial spectrum can be analyzed in terms of "better" or "worse". Each nation has its own. I just meant that American left is not equivalant to the "left" they percieve in France for example.

[wheelchairman]

I think most places in Europe, the American left would seem like the extreme right.

[Dio]

I think most places in Europe, the American left would seem like the extreme right.

Bullshit. Everyone in Europe loved Clinton and even Gore.

[wheelchairman]

They loved them because they weren't republican. If you took the policies of the democratic party, and applied them to any European government you would have a move to the right.

[Dio]

Maybe some *small* and socialist country. Not UK tho :P

[wheelchairman]

I think even in the UK, the Democratic party is certainly to the right of the Labour party, policy wise I would say the Democratic party is also to the right, however Tony Blair is certainly trying to catch up. It wouldn't surprise me if Democrats were close to the UK conservatives in many ways.