Author Topic: Liberal Media Bias  (Read 167860 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #600 on: August 30, 2022, 04:45:19 AM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #601 on: September 19, 2022, 11:47:02 PM »
Why has fact-checking disappeared under Biden?
BY JOE CONCHA, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 09/18/22

Fact-checking under President Trump was a bustling business. Seemingly every day, and sometimes by the hour, the 45th president’s every word was scrutinized, which all comes with the job.

But under President Biden, fact checkers are enjoying what feels like extended vacations or have simply checked out in terms of scrutinizing the many ways that he is misleading the public.

Take CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale as a prime example of apathy around holding the current president accountable.

From June 2019 until November 2020, Dale appeared or was mentioned on CNN more than once per day, on average, according to Mediaite. Estimating conservatively,

that’s more than 500 appearances or mentions on a national network in the span of just 16 months.

But Dale has become the fact-checker version of Edward Snowden under Biden. He’s almost impossible to find these days. In fact, Dale has not conducted even one fact-check of the president since June.

Of course, Biden supporters will insist that Dale simply doesn’t have any material to work with. But that’s not true. In August, Biden declared that inflation in July was zero, despite the number being near a 40-year high at 8.3 percent.

Last week, Biden claimed the Inflation Reduction Act, which numerous studies have concluded will do almost nothing to reduce inflation, had already “helped reduce inflation at the kitchen table.” In a related story, food prices rose again in August, with the Consumer Price Index up 10.6 percent year-over-year.

There are many other examples from the summer, but you get the point: The most powerful man in the country needs to be held accountable for his words and actions, particularly in an election year, when each side is attempting to shape the narrative through the press. But fact-checkers at mainstream outlets refuse to do it.

The situation is worse when it comes to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. She has been fact-checked only once by Politifact since June.

This is the same press secretary who claimed earlier this month that people aren’t just walking into this country across the U.S. Southern border, when in fact it’s happening daily, per border agents and reporting on the ground. 

She also claimed the Biden administration is “doing a lot more [than the Trump administration] to secure the border.”

Yup. She claimed that the administration that halted border wall construction and ended the effective “Remain in Mexico” policy is doing more than the previous administration to secure the border.

In a related story, the numbers don’t lie: More than 2 million migrants will come into this country illegally this year, an all-time record. This is the easiest of fact-checks to make, but Politifact doesn’t seem interested. Why?

Overall, since taking over for Jen Psaki on May 13, Jean-Pierre has not been fact-checked at all by Factcheck.org, the Associated Press, Reuters, Washington Post or CNN. This is the equivalent of being a toll collector in an E-Z Pass lane, a job that doesn’t require, you know, actually working.

The perception of fact-checkers has taken a big hit as a result, at least among Republicans and independents. A Pew Research survey found that seven in 10 self-identified Republicans say fact-checkers favor one side, while nearly half of independents feel the same way.

The midterm elections are 50 days from now. The balance of power in Washington hangs in the balance. More than ever, words matter.

Hurricane Fiona and the impossible political situation in Puerto Rico
Russia’s intelligence agencies will be the scapegoats for the Kharkiv rout
Lies and half-truths must be called out. It shouldn’t matter if a Republican or Democrat occupies the Oval Office. Fact-checkers must hold lawmakers and other public officials accountable without favor to party.

But apparently fact-checkers are mostly on a four-year sabbatical at this point. And it’s pathetic.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3647706-why-has-fact-checking-disappeared-under-biden/

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #602 on: January 05, 2023, 06:08:30 AM »

Grape Ape

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22207
  • SC è un asino
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #603 on: January 05, 2023, 06:13:07 AM »
The funny thing is independent journalists like Weiss, Tabbai, etc are all being called sellouts by the left for just.........


..........showing the truth of what was going on at Twitter.
Y

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #604 on: January 05, 2023, 11:40:03 AM »
The funny thing is independent journalists like Weiss, Tabbai, etc are all being called sellouts by the left for just.........


..........showing the truth of what was going on at Twitter.

They even lied and called them conservatives.

Washington Post caught stealth-editing report that initially labeled Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss 'conservative'
Taibbi, Weiss have reported this month on Twitter files released by new CEO Elon Musk
By Joseph A. Wulfsohn | Fox News
Published December 13, 2022

https://www.foxnews.com/media/washington-post-caught-stealth-editing-report-initially-labeled-matt-taibbi-bari-weiss-conservative

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #605 on: May 15, 2023, 11:31:07 AM »
America’s state media: The blackout on Biden corruption is truly ‘Pulitzer-level stuff’
Opinion by Jonathan Turley, Opinion Contributor

This week, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) tried to do the impossible. After he and his colleagues presented a labyrinth of LLC shell companies and accounts used to funnel as much as $10 million to Biden family members, Donalds tried to induce the press to show some interest in the massive corruption scandal. “For those in the press, this easy pickings & Pulitzer-level stuff right here,” he pleaded.

The response was virtually immediate. Despite showing nine Biden family members allegedly receiving funds from corrupt figures in Romania, China and other countries, The New Republic quickly ran a story headlined “Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.”

For many of us, it was otherworldly. A decade ago, when then-Vice President Joe Biden was denouncing corruption in Romania and Ukraine and promising action by the United States, massive payments were flowing to his son Hunter Biden and a variety of family members, including Biden grandchildren.

Last year, I wrote a column about how the media were preparing a difficult “scandal implosion” to protect the Bidens and themselves from the backlash from disclosures of this influence peddling operation.

The brilliance of the Biden team was that it invested the media in this scandal at the outset by burying the laptop story as “Russian disinformation” before the election. That was, of course, false, but it took two years for most major media outlets to admit that the laptop was authentic.

But the media then ignored what was on that “authentic laptop.” Hundreds of emails detailed potentially criminal conduct and raw influence peddling in foreign countries.

When media outlets such as the New York Post confirmed the emails, the media then insisted that there was no corroboration of the influence peddling payments and no clear proof of criminal conduct. It entirely ignored the obvious corruption itself.

Now that the House has released corroboration in actual money transfers linking many in the Biden family, the media is insisting that this is no scandal because there is no direct proof of payments to Joe Biden.

Putting aside that this is only the fourth month of an investigation, the media’s demand of a direct payment to President Biden is laughably absurd. The payments were going to his family, but he was the object of the influence peddling.

The House has shown millions of dollars going to at least nine Bidens like dividends from a family business. As a long-time critic of influence peddling among both Republicans and Democrats, I have never seen the equal of the Bidens.

The whole purpose of influence peddling is to use family members as shields for corrupt officials. Instead of making a direct payment to a politician, which could be seen as a bribe, you can give millions to his or her spouse or children.

Moreover, these emails include references to Joe Biden getting a 10 percent cut of one Chinese deal. It also shows Biden associates warning not to use Joe Biden’s name but to employ code names like “the Big Guy.” At the same time, the president and the first lady are referenced as benefiting from offices and receiving payments from Hunter.

Indeed, Hunter complains that his father is taking half of everything that he is raking in.

None of that matters. The New York Times ran a piece headlined, “House Republican Report Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by President Biden.” That is putting aside evidence against all the family members around Joe Biden. It also ignored that other evidence clearly shows Biden lied about his family not receiving Chinese funds or that he never had any knowledge of his son’s business dealings.

The fact is that the Times may indeed be trying for another Pulitzer Prize. The newspaper previously won a Pulitzer for the now debunked Russian collusion story. It was later revealed that this story was based on a dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and placed in the media by Clinton officials. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Bob Woodward warned the co-winner The Washington Post that the story was unreliable but was ignored. The Pulitzer Committee refused to withdraw the award.

What Donalds fails to appreciate is that this is sometimes how Pulitzers are made. Roughly 100 years ago, New York Times reporter Walter Duranty won the Pulitzer for his coverage of the Soviet Union despite serving as an apologist for Joe Stalin. Duranty refused to report on actual conditions from mass killing to starvation in the “worker’s paradise.”

Thus, when the Soviets were starving to death as many as 10 million Ukrainians, the Times ran a Duranty story with the headline “Russians Hungry but Not Starving.” He not only spinned Stalin labor camps that killed millions but also attacked reporters who sought to uncover the truth.

Years later, Ukraine and various groups demanded that Duranty’s prize be rescinded, but the Committee insisted that there was no “clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deception.”

What is most impressive about this week is that all but a few outlets seem to be angling for the next Duranty Pulitzer.

In discussing modern Russian propaganda, researchers at the Rand Corporation described it as having “two distinctive features: high numbers of channels and messages and a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions.”

Sound familiar?

Today we are seeing a much more dangerous phenomenon. The coverage this week has all the markings of a state media. The consistent spin. The almost universal lack of details. The absurd distinctions.

It is the blindside of our First Amendment, which addresses the classic use of state authority to coerce and control media. It does not address a circumstance in which most of the media will maintain an official line by consent rather than coercion.

The media simply fails to see the story. Of course, it can always look to the president for enlightenment. Just before his son received a massive transfer of money from one of the most corrupt figures in Romania, Biden explained to that country why corruption must remain everyone’s focus. “Corruption is a cancer, a cancer that eats away at a citizen’s faith in democracy,” he said. “Corruption is just another form of tyranny.”

It is just a shame that no one wants to cover it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/america-s-state-media-the-blackout-on-biden-corruption-is-truly-pulitzer-level-stuff/ar-AA1b8TO1?li=BB141NW3

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20675
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #606 on: May 15, 2023, 11:49:47 AM »
America’s state media: The blackout on Biden corruption is truly ‘Pulitzer-level stuff’
Opinion by Jonathan Turley, Opinion Contributor

This week, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) tried to do the impossible. After he and his colleagues presented a labyrinth of LLC shell companies and accounts used to funnel as much as $10 million to Biden family members, Donalds tried to induce the press to show some interest in the massive corruption scandal. “For those in the press, this easy pickings & Pulitzer-level stuff right here,” he pleaded.

The response was virtually immediate. Despite showing nine Biden family members allegedly receiving funds from corrupt figures in Romania, China and other countries, The New Republic quickly ran a story headlined “Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.”

For many of us, it was otherworldly. A decade ago, when then-Vice President Joe Biden was denouncing corruption in Romania and Ukraine and promising action by the United States, massive payments were flowing to his son Hunter Biden and a variety of family members, including Biden grandchildren.

Last year, I wrote a column about how the media were preparing a difficult “scandal implosion” to protect the Bidens and themselves from the backlash from disclosures of this influence peddling operation.

The brilliance of the Biden team was that it invested the media in this scandal at the outset by burying the laptop story as “Russian disinformation” before the election. That was, of course, false, but it took two years for most major media outlets to admit that the laptop was authentic.

But the media then ignored what was on that “authentic laptop.” Hundreds of emails detailed potentially criminal conduct and raw influence peddling in foreign countries.

When media outlets such as the New York Post confirmed the emails, the media then insisted that there was no corroboration of the influence peddling payments and no clear proof of criminal conduct. It entirely ignored the obvious corruption itself.

Now that the House has released corroboration in actual money transfers linking many in the Biden family, the media is insisting that this is no scandal because there is no direct proof of payments to Joe Biden.

Putting aside that this is only the fourth month of an investigation, the media’s demand of a direct payment to President Biden is laughably absurd. The payments were going to his family, but he was the object of the influence peddling.

The House has shown millions of dollars going to at least nine Bidens like dividends from a family business. As a long-time critic of influence peddling among both Republicans and Democrats, I have never seen the equal of the Bidens.

The whole purpose of influence peddling is to use family members as shields for corrupt officials. Instead of making a direct payment to a politician, which could be seen as a bribe, you can give millions to his or her spouse or children.

Moreover, these emails include references to Joe Biden getting a 10 percent cut of one Chinese deal. It also shows Biden associates warning not to use Joe Biden’s name but to employ code names like “the Big Guy.” At the same time, the president and the first lady are referenced as benefiting from offices and receiving payments from Hunter.

Indeed, Hunter complains that his father is taking half of everything that he is raking in.

None of that matters. The New York Times ran a piece headlined, “House Republican Report Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by President Biden.” That is putting aside evidence against all the family members around Joe Biden. It also ignored that other evidence clearly shows Biden lied about his family not receiving Chinese funds or that he never had any knowledge of his son’s business dealings.

The fact is that the Times may indeed be trying for another Pulitzer Prize. The newspaper previously won a Pulitzer for the now debunked Russian collusion story. It was later revealed that this story was based on a dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and placed in the media by Clinton officials. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Bob Woodward warned the co-winner The Washington Post that the story was unreliable but was ignored. The Pulitzer Committee refused to withdraw the award.

What Donalds fails to appreciate is that this is sometimes how Pulitzers are made. Roughly 100 years ago, New York Times reporter Walter Duranty won the Pulitzer for his coverage of the Soviet Union despite serving as an apologist for Joe Stalin. Duranty refused to report on actual conditions from mass killing to starvation in the “worker’s paradise.”

Thus, when the Soviets were starving to death as many as 10 million Ukrainians, the Times ran a Duranty story with the headline “Russians Hungry but Not Starving.” He not only spinned Stalin labor camps that killed millions but also attacked reporters who sought to uncover the truth.

Years later, Ukraine and various groups demanded that Duranty’s prize be rescinded, but the Committee insisted that there was no “clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deception.”

What is most impressive about this week is that all but a few outlets seem to be angling for the next Duranty Pulitzer.

In discussing modern Russian propaganda, researchers at the Rand Corporation described it as having “two distinctive features: high numbers of channels and messages and a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions.”

Sound familiar?

Today we are seeing a much more dangerous phenomenon. The coverage this week has all the markings of a state media. The consistent spin. The almost universal lack of details. The absurd distinctions.

It is the blindside of our First Amendment, which addresses the classic use of state authority to coerce and control media. It does not address a circumstance in which most of the media will maintain an official line by consent rather than coercion.

The media simply fails to see the story. Of course, it can always look to the president for enlightenment. Just before his son received a massive transfer of money from one of the most corrupt figures in Romania, Biden explained to that country why corruption must remain everyone’s focus. “Corruption is a cancer, a cancer that eats away at a citizen’s faith in democracy,” he said. “Corruption is just another form of tyranny.”

It is just a shame that no one wants to cover it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/america-s-state-media-the-blackout-on-biden-corruption-is-truly-pulitzer-level-stuff/ar-AA1b8TO1?li=BB141NW3

Joe and his family are squeaky clean - No corruption  ;D :D ;D
The southern Boarder is secure - only 1 or 2 manage to get across a day
Hunter's lap top & his baby are Russian disinformation

And MSM isn't bought & paid for - & ignoring all things dodgy with Joe.


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #607 on: June 14, 2023, 12:13:10 AM »
Jake Tapper scolds CNN producers for showing Trump with Miami supporters: 'That is enough of that'
Trump greeted enthusiastic fans at Versailles restaurant immediately following his court appearance
By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News
Published June 13, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/media/jake-tapper-scolds-cnn-producers-showing-trump-miami-supporters-enough

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40746
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #608 on: June 14, 2023, 03:57:23 PM »
Jake Tapper scolds CNN producers for showing Trump with Miami supporters: 'That is enough of that'
Trump greeted enthusiastic fans at Versailles restaurant immediately following his court appearance
By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News
Published June 13, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/media/jake-tapper-scolds-cnn-producers-showing-trump-miami-supporters-enough

Jake Tapper should not be concerned. There weren't enough Trump supporters at the Versailles Cuban restaurant to get Trump elected as the Miami dog catcher.

Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5868
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #609 on: June 14, 2023, 04:01:29 PM »
Jake Tapper scolds CNN producers for showing Trump with Miami supporters: 'That is enough of that'
Trump greeted enthusiastic fans at Versailles restaurant immediately following his court appearance
By Lindsay Kornick | Fox News
Published June 13, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/media/jake-tapper-scolds-cnn-producers-showing-trump-miami-supporters-enough

That was hilarious.   :D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #610 on: June 17, 2023, 12:13:57 AM »
Nets Ignore Report Joe & Hunter Caught on Tape in Bribery Scandal
Kevin Tober
June 13th, 2023
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kevin-tober/2023/06/13/nets-ignore-report-joe-hunter-caught-tape-bribery-scandal

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #611 on: June 19, 2023, 12:50:46 PM »
Precisely why the indictment was announced when it was.  It worked.

Nets Spend 291 Minutes On Trump Indictment, 0 Seconds On Biden Burisma Bribery
Geoffrey Dickens
June 13th, 2023
 
On Thursday June 8, two massive political stories broke, but ONLY one of them got covered by the broadcast networks.

On June 8, former President Donald Trump was indicted by the Special Counsel in the classified documents case. That very same day it was reported that President Joe Biden had allegedly received $5 million dollars from an executive of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, the same company in which his son Hunter was involved.

Guess which one was exhaustively covered and which one was completely covered up by the networks?

Over four days (June 8-June 12) the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) broadcast networks predictably crammed their evening, morning and Sunday roundtable shows with a total of 291 minutes of coverage dedicated to the Trump indictment.

But how much did the Biden/Burisma alleged bribery scheme receive?

Zero seconds.

The double-standard is breathtaking.

George Stephanopoulos’s introduction, on the June 9 edition of ABC’s Good Morning America, was representative of the tone of network coverage of the Trump indictment. The moderator of ABC’s This Week, co-anchor of Good Morning America and former Bill Clinton hack, shamelessly greeted his audience this way:

The idea that no person is above the law is a bedrock principle of American justice. And it’s being tested never before now that Donald Trump is the first former president in American history to face criminal charges from the federal government. It’s in the latest in a litany of firsts for a former President; Impeached not once, but twice. Last month, found liable for sexual abuse in a civil trial, indicted in state court for paying hush money to a porn star. His company convicted of tax fraud. And Trump still faces two more possible indictments for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Another first? That former president, defeated for reelection once, is for now, at least the front runner for his party’s nomination. Our team is covering all the angles of this astonishing legal and political story.

A story that ABC or CBS and NBC didn’t have their team “covering all angles” on was the latest shocking development in the ongoing saga that is the Biden family corruption scandal. On June 8 FoxNews.com reported the following:

EXCLUSIVE: President Joe Biden was allegedly paid $5 million by an executive of the Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings, where his son Hunter Biden sat on the board, a confidential human source told the FBI during a June 2020 interview, sources familiar told Fox News Digital.

The sources briefed Fox News Digital on the contents of the FBI-generated FD-1023 form alleging a criminal bribery scheme between then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national that involved influence over U.S. policy decisions.

The FD-1023 form, dated June 30, 2020, is the FBI's interview with a “highly credible” confidential source who detailed multiple meetings and conversations he or she had with a top Burisma executive over the course of several years, starting in 2015. Fox News Digital has not seen the form, but it was described by several sources who are aware of its contents.

Make no mistake, the Burisma scandal story and its ties to Joe “Big Guy” Biden has legs. On June 12, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer claimed the FBI has additional informant documents that link then-Vice President Biden to an alleged multimillion-dollar bribery scheme. Also on June 12, Sen. Chuck Grassley relayed that there are audio recordings between the Burisma executive who allegedly paid then VP Biden and Hunter. 

Clearly the broadcast networks will continue to obsessively cover Trump’s indictment but to be fair and balanced they would also cover Biden’s scandals — something they (as exposed by NewsBusters) have been reluctant to do.

Special thanks to NewsBusters’ Curtis Houck, Alex Christy and Kevin Tober for contributing to this study.

(It should be noted that because the Trump indictment arrived after the East Coast versions of the June 8 evening shows aired, MRC analysts looked at the West Coast feed for those shows. Also due to live national sports events, the June 10 editions of CBS Weekend News, NBC’s Today and the June 11 edition of NBC’s Meet the Press and CBS Weekend News were preempted.)

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2023/06/13/nets-spend-291-minutes-trump-indictment-0-seconds-biden

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #612 on: June 20, 2023, 10:32:13 PM »
CNN's Presidential Fact Checker Hasn't Fact-Checked Biden in Months
Drew Holden
June 20, 2023
https://freebeacon.com/media/daniel-dale-biden-fact-checks/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #613 on: June 28, 2023, 11:28:08 AM »
New York Times ‘Buries’ The Lede, Confirms Hunter Biden Probe Whistleblower Claims
By  Daniel Chaitin
Jun 27, 2023   DailyWire.com
https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-buries-the-lede-confirms-hunter-biden-probe-whistleblower-claims

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #614 on: June 28, 2023, 11:37:31 AM »
Washington Post CEO Has Funneled Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars To Democrats
Patricia Stonesifer, who has praised the Post’s coverage of Trump, sent six-figures to Biden campaign alone
Alec Schemmel
June 23, 2023

https://freebeacon.com/media/washington-post-ceo-has-funneled-hundreds-of-thousands-of-dollars-to-democrats/

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15638
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #615 on: June 28, 2023, 11:43:34 AM »
CNN's Presidential Fact Checker Hasn't Fact-Checked Biden in Months
Drew Holden
June 20, 2023
https://freebeacon.com/media/daniel-dale-biden-fact-checks/

Most Biden "fact checkers" usually go like this anyway:


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #616 on: June 28, 2023, 12:54:56 PM »
Most Biden "fact checkers" usually go like this anyway:



Accurate.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #617 on: June 28, 2023, 12:55:48 PM »
ABC, NBC, CBS quickly move on from bombshell Hunter Biden's threatening 'sitting here with my father' message
'The text is so damning in its nature, it's not surprising the networks moved so quick off of it,' Geoffrey Dickens said
By Brian Flood | Fox News
Published June 28, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-nbc-cbs-quickly-move-bombshell-hunter-biden-sitting-here-my-father-message

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20675
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #618 on: June 28, 2023, 12:59:21 PM »
Most Biden "fact checkers" usually go like this anyway:



That's absolutely Brilliant & spot on.   ;D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #619 on: July 10, 2023, 08:01:03 AM »
Media’s Bias of Omission: Biden Scandals Get the Silent Treatment
Published 07/09/23
Joe Concha
https://themessenger.com/opinion/medias-bias-of-omission-biden-scandals-get-the-silent-treatment

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #620 on: July 12, 2023, 02:19:42 PM »
A lot of media bias is blatant.  Some is more subtle.  Like this.  Note how they refer to a "right-wing boycott," but do not describe Mulvaney as "left-wing."  The "right wing" but not "left wing" characterizations happen quite a bit.

CNN apologizes for misgendering trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney
BY BROOKE MIGDON - 07/12/23

CNN apologized Wednesday for misgendering transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in a segment aired this week touching on Mulvaney’s role in a right-wing boycott against Bud Light and its parent company, Anheuser-Busch.

. . .

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4094207-cnn-apologizes-for-misgendering-trans-influencer-dylan-mulvaney/

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40746
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #621 on: July 12, 2023, 03:23:52 PM »
A lot of media bias is blatant.  Some is more subtle.  Like this.  Note how they refer to a "right-wing boycott," but do not describe Mulvaney as "left-wing."  The "right wing" but not "left wing" characterizations happen quite a bit.

CNN apologizes for misgendering trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney
BY BROOKE MIGDON - 07/12/23

CNN apologized Wednesday for misgendering transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in a segment aired this week touching on Mulvaney’s role in a right-wing boycott against Bud Light and its parent company, Anheuser-Busch.

. . .

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4094207-cnn-apologizes-for-misgendering-trans-influencer-dylan-mulvaney/
IMO, you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Where is the relevance? How else should the media identify those who boycotted Bud Light? Do they have the names of the boycotters to identify them? Were these folks an organized group with a name?

A Newsweek article by BY MATTHEW IMPELLI dated 7/12/23 AT 2:29 PM EDT –( which is today), identifies the boycotters as "conservative voices". Is this a less biased term than right-wing? Does this suggest the names of the boycotters is still unknown?

I could find nothing that verifies Dylan Mulvaney is a left-wing, liberal or a Democrat. Assigning her stance as being left-wing is guesswork because this cannot be substantiated.

It is a mistake to assume all trans folks are left-wing or liberals. Just as it is an error to assume this about all LGBTQ folks. Have you heard of Gays for Trump? It is an American LGBT organization that supports Donald Trump and his administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gays_for_Trump

For example, Caitlyn Jenner - who ran for governor - has been widely known as a member of the Republican Party.  "I've always been more conservative, and I've always been on the Republican side, just because that expresses my views on the economy better," Jenner told PEOPLE last year. What's more Caitlyn Jenner initially supported Trump until 2018. https://people.com/politics/how-caitlyn-jenner-has-described-her-political-views/#:~:text="I%27ve%20always%20been%20more,legislation"%20to%20advance%20LGBTQ%20equality.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #622 on: July 12, 2023, 03:42:10 PM »
IMO, you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Where is the relevance? How else should the media identify those who boycotted Bud Light? Do they have the names of the boycotters to identify them? Were these folks an organized group with a name?

A Newsweek article by BY MATTHEW IMPELLI dated 7/12/23 AT 2:29 PM EDT –( which is today), identifies the boycotters as "conservative voices". Is this a less biased term than right-wing? Does this suggest the names of the boycotters is still unknown?

I could find nothing that verifies Dylan Mulvaney is a left-wing, liberal or a Democrat. Assigning her stance as being left-wing is guesswork because this cannot be substantiated.

It is a mistake to assume all trans folks are left-wing or liberals. Just as it is an error to assume this about all LGBTQ folks. Have you heard of Gays for Trump? It is an American LGBT organization that supports Donald Trump and his administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gays_for_Trump

For example, Caitlyn Jenner - who ran for governor - has been widely known as a member of the Republican Party.  "I've always been more conservative, and I've always been on the Republican side, just because that expresses my views on the economy better," Jenner told PEOPLE last year. What's more Caitlyn Jenner initially supported Trump until 2018. https://people.com/politics/how-caitlyn-jenner-has-described-her-political-views/#:~:text="I%27ve%20always%20been%20more,legislation"%20to%20advance%20LGBTQ%20equality.

You're protesting too much.  Go back and read this thread, slowly, and it will be clear as day.  You don't see it because you have confirmation bias and live in a bubble.  When you become open-minded, recognizing bias becomes much easier.  Don't give up hope.  I've heard it is possible to teach old dogs new tricks.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40746
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #623 on: July 12, 2023, 03:53:18 PM »
You're protesting too much.  Go back and read this thread, slowly, and it will be clear as day.  You don't see it because you have confirmation bias and live in a bubble.  When you become open-minded, recognizing bias becomes much easier.  Don't give up hope.  I've heard it is possible to teach old dogs new tricks.

-Not protesting at all. Just pointing out the fallacy in your example of media bias.

Do you consider yourself open-minded? Does anyone else think you are open-minded?

What is clear as day is calling the example you gave in that post media bias is a huge stretch.

Can you give me some examples of new tricks you have learned?

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63727
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #624 on: July 12, 2023, 04:00:38 PM »
-Not protesting at all. Just pointing out the fallacy in your example of media bias.

Do you consider yourself open-minded? Does anyone else think you are open-minded?

What is clear as day is calling the example you gave in that post media bias is a huge stretch.

Can you give me some examples of new tricks you have learned?

Yes I'm open-minded.  Everyone who knows me thinks I'm open-minded, including my liberal friends.  I think one of the things you struggle with is dealing an open-minded person who doesn't think like you and has strong convictions. 

The example I posted is one of the subtle examples of liberal media bias.  Like I said, you don't see it because they are speaking your language.

When I'm old like you I'll let you know what new tricks I learn.