+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 249

Thread: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

  1. #31
    Champ daybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your time daybreaker2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by dawg80 View Post
    Well, did he? As his "meeting" with that one reporter is now history, did McCain bash obama?
    The point of my sarcastic comment was that McCain has been bashing Obama ever since his plane left the ground, breaking a long-held tradition of leaving politics at the border- a presidential candidate does not bash another one who is travelling abroad.


    Though, in answer to your overly literal interpretation of a sarcastic post, the sad truth is yes. Yes he did.
    I had the courage and the judgment to say that I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Senator Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.
    Yes, thats right. Obama wants to lose the war. Though it sure is politically convenient that McCain hasnt defined what "winning" is yet.
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

  2. #32
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Belief Growing That Reporters are Trying to Help Obama Win
    Monday, July 21, 2008

    http://rasmussenreports.com/public_c...help_obama_win

    The idea that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey, taken just before the new controversy involving the New York Times erupted, found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help the Democrat with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

    Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.

  3. #33
    Champ TYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    53,273

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by DogtorEvil View Post
    Belief Growing That Reporters are Trying to Help Obama Win
    Monday, July 21, 2008

    http://rasmussenreports.com/public_c...help_obama_win

    The idea that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey, taken just before the new controversy involving the New York Times erupted, found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help the Democrat with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

    Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.

    This says it all.




    Just one reporter, one photographer waiting for McCain as his plane landed in Manchester, NH, last night...

  4. #34
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist


    and strangely enough you don't hear Nancy Pelosi yapping about the "fairness doctrine" as it relates to the disparity in coverage that Barry Hussein Obama is getting vs. John Sidney McCain...

  5. #35
    Champ daybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your time daybreaker2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.c...p_timeline.php

    How odd... I thought CBS was part of the liberal media conspiracy? Why would they edit an interview, then, when McCain says something completely wrong, in order to take the incorrect part out to try and save McCain some embarrassment?
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

  6. #36
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    42,101

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    "I had the courage and the judgment to say that I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Senator Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign."

    That's not bashing. Oh, I forgot, anytime you so much as question a liberal's motives, ideas, etc... it is considered bashing.

    But by normal people's definition, that is stating an honest opinion. To save my having to explain it to those who don't understand, the segment "It seems to me...." makes it an opinion, i.e. an observation from a point-of-view.

  7. #37
    Champ daybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your time daybreaker2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by dawg80 View Post
    But by normal people's definition, that is stating an honest opinion. To save my having to explain it to those who don't understand, the segment "It seems to me...." makes it an opinion, i.e. an observation from a point-of-view.
    So, if I were to say "It seems to me you like putting peanut butter on your junk and letting your dog lick it off" wouldnt be bashing you at all, because it's just an opinion since I used 'it seems to me'


    It seems to me that if you claim Obama would want to lose the Iraq war just to further his political motives, then you are questioning his patriotism and loyalty- ie: bashing him.
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

  8. #38
    Champ Brian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond reputeBrian96 has a reputation beyond repute Brian96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    12,215

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by randerizer View Post
    I haven't paid much attention, but you should at least note the NYT editor's justification. Specifically, the editor says that Obama sent in his "editorial" and had it published before releasing some of the content in a speech. So the editorial basically represented some small segment of "you heard it here first..." Now, McCain's response was, according to the NYT, basically a restatement of long-known McCain views. In other words, it wasn't "newsworthy" by NYT standards.

    Again, I'm not really interested -- both candidates suck, and neither really deserve any media hooplah -- but I do think that is funny.
    It is unusual for a newspaper to request a rewrite for a celebrity op-ed submission. If that is all McCain wanted to say in response to Obama's comments, then I don't see why the editors shouldn't have let him, unless his comments otherwise violated editorial policy.

    As someone else noted, an opinion piece, and particularly one from a high-profile figure, is not a "news item" that should be sujected to newsroom-style editing.

  9. #39
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist


  10. #40
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist


  11. #41
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist


  12. #42
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...01702713742569

    Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1
    By WILLIAM TATE | Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT

    What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).

    Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.

  13. #43
    Champ daybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your timedaybreaker2 Ultimate jerk and not worth your time daybreaker2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by DogtorEvil View Post
    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...01702713742569

    Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1
    By WILLIAM TATE | Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:20 PM PT

    What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).

    Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.
    In other word, discounting the top two money raising Republicans, the Republicans only brought in $3,150....

    Riiight.... How about we see the same comparison, except remove Obama and Hillary. *Then* maybe it'll be fair.

    Thats like saying "The media is so unfair! Not counting stories about McCain, ALL the stories about presidential candidates are about Obama!!!"
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

  14. #44
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    Quote Originally Posted by daybreaker2 View Post
    In other word, discounting the top two money raising Republicans, the Republicans only brought in $3,150....

    Riiight.... How about we see the same comparison, except remove Obama and Hillary. *Then* maybe it'll be fair.

    Thats like saying "The media is so unfair! Not counting stories about McCain, ALL the stories about presidential candidates are about Obama!!!"
    okay then:

    The contributions add up to $315,533 to Democrats and $22,656 to Republicans — most of that to Ron Paul, who was supported by many liberals as a stalking horse to John McCain, a la Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos with Hillary and Obama


    That's a ratio of 14 to 1. Apparently that's not large enough for you to grasp that there might possibly be some media bias going on

  15. #45
    Champ DogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond reputeDogtorEvil has a reputation beyond repute DogtorEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    EPIC-ville, Tejas
    Posts
    9,235

    Re: Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist

    GOP losing the new-media war
    By JONATHAN MARTIN | 7/24/08 4:46 AM EST


    Republicans have no lack of would-be George F. Wills.

    But what they really need are some more Robert D. Novaks.

    The distinction between the two prominent conservative journalists isn't always obvious, but it's nevertheless important to understand: One almost exclusively writes opinion pieces, while the other offers reporting with a point of view.

    The same might be said of the emerging differences between the conservative presence on the Internet and the liberal one: The right is engaged in the business of opining while the left features sites that offer a more reportorial model.

    At first glance, these divergent approaches might not seem consequential. But as the 2008 campaign progresses, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the absence of any websites on the right devoted to reporting — as opposed to just commenting on the news — is proving politically costly to Republicans.

    While conservatives are devoting much of their Internet energy to analysis, their counterparts on the left are taking advantage of the rise of new media to create new institutions devoted to unearthing stories, putting new information into circulation and generally crowding the space traditionally taken by traditional media. And it almost always comes at the expense of GOP politicians.
    While online Republicans chase the allure of punditry and commentary, Democrats and progressives are pursuing old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting, in a fashion reminiscent of 2004. Back then, the Drudge Report and other lesser-known conservative portals played a key role in defining John Kerry and pushing back against criticism of George W. Bush, such as when conservative bloggers debunked documents purportedly related to the president’s Air National Guard service.

    rest of story here:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/12008.html

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts