Author Topic: Liberal Media Bias  (Read 167757 times)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #200 on: January 09, 2014, 03:06:30 PM »
Twink please - Christie mess is nothing compared to the Obama admin scandals

hey dipshit - when did I mention Christie ?

I'm just pointing out that it's repeatedly mentioned how Fox News gets all the ratings and that MSNBC has no ratings and that all the liberal radios shows are going off the air yet somehow your side still wants to pretend that their is a liberal medial that is influencing the electorate

You can't have it both ways

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39384
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #201 on: January 09, 2014, 03:07:48 PM »
hey dipshit - when did I mention Christie ?

I'm just pointing out that it's repeatedly mentioned how Fox News gets all the ratings and that MSNBC has no ratings and that all the liberal radios shows are going off the air yet somehow your side still wants to pretend that their is a liberal medial that is influencing the electorate

You can't have it both ways

so you didn't deny being a twink? 



Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #202 on: January 09, 2014, 03:08:40 PM »
so you didn't deny being a twink? 

I was trying to ignore your obvious gay pass you fucking queer

come out of the closet already and maybe you wont' be so angry all the time

temple_of_dis

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 886
  • togtfo
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #203 on: January 09, 2014, 03:30:53 PM »
everyone except fox is hard core democrat

it always amazes me how dems assume non fox is normal

whattt?

fox is not even really pro capitalism

a real tv channel would be advocating ending all welfare, ending public school, end ing wars, and end all pensions, ending unemplyment, and removing all restriction on house production, and allowing private trains and allwoing atomic power!

thats real freedom tv

jeesh

cut gov spending 50% today, lower taxes 50% today!

that kinda stuff see on real tv

everything poor kids hear is whiny commy crap save fox and maybe some am radio if they are too out there

amazing capitalism isnt a banned word by now

maybe the TV hides how pro freedom most people are

Archer77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14174
  • Team Shizzo
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #204 on: January 09, 2014, 03:44:55 PM »
I was trying to ignore your obvious gay pass you fucking queer

come out of the closet already and maybe you wont' be so angry all the time

No need to be homophobic.
A

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #205 on: January 09, 2014, 04:47:18 PM »
No need to be homophobic.

I've encouraged our resident self hating twink lover to come out of the closet many times

I think it's the source of a lot of his anger issues (not all of them though as I think there is also some other mental and emotional problems going on there too)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #206 on: January 17, 2014, 10:05:54 AM »
MSNBC Host O'Donnell Slams Christie in Personal Attack Ad
Thursday, 16 Jan 2014
By Cynthia Fagen

MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell aired a hard-hitting attack ad he penned about Chris Christie that takes aim at the New Jersey Governor's possible GOP presidential run, Politico reported Thursday.

"I wrote that ad in a few minutes," O'Donnell told viewers on Wednesday. "I was just sitting there listening to him, just grabbed those quotes and wrote it," he said, referring to Christie's mea culpa press conference a week ago regarding bridge-gate.

"I wrote this commercial while Chris Christie was actually still doing his press conference. You can do this at home, it’s easy."

The narrator of the O'Donnell commercial questions whether Christie could be trusted if he were to be elected president: "Chris Christie embarrassed and humiliated New Jersey, don't let Chris Christie embarrass and humiliate America."

Story continues below video.



In May 2012, five months before the presidential election, Fox News came under fire for producing a four-minute TV commercial attacking President Obama. Fox then issued a statement the video "was not authorized at the senior executive level."

MSNBC could not be reached for comment, Politico said.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/attack-ad-MSNBC-ODonnell/2014/01/16/id/547579#ixzz2qgEfSZsq

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #207 on: January 17, 2014, 10:38:21 AM »
Don't worry Bum, no one actually watches the liberal media.....remember?

The public will just have to depend Fox New bashing Christie so they will know what to think about him

RRKore

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #208 on: January 17, 2014, 02:30:56 PM »
everyone except fox is hard core democrat

it always amazes me how dems assume non fox is normal

whattt?

fox is not even really pro capitalism

a real tv channel would be advocating ending all welfare, ending public school, end ing wars, and end all pensions, ending unemplyment, and removing all restriction on house production, and allowing private trains and allwoing atomic power!

thats real freedom tv

jeesh

cut gov spending 50% today, lower taxes 50% today!

that kinda stuff see on real tv

everything poor kids hear is whiny commy crap save fox and maybe some am radio if they are too out there

amazing capitalism isnt a banned word by now

maybe the TV hides how pro freedom most people are

"Most" people?  Most people where? 

It may be that you speak for the folks that don't use punctuation, but that's not most people anywhere, as far as I know.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #209 on: April 01, 2014, 12:11:38 PM »
Report: Univision, Telemundo skew liberal
By HADAS GOLD | 3/31/14

The main U.S. Spanish-language nightly news programs skew liberal on domestic issues and spent most of their air times in the last few months covering the new health care law, immigration reform, and immigration law enforcement, the conservative-leaning media watchdog group Media Research Center found in a new study.

Ken Oliver-Méndez, Director of MRC’s new Spanish-language watchdog group MRC Latino, said in an interview that of the newscasts of Noticiero Univision and Noticiero Telemundo from November through February, 45 percent of stories on U.S. domestic policy issues tilted liberal, 49 percent were balanced or neutral and 6 percent skewed conservative.

According to the study, Univision’s stories tilted left 50 percent of the time, were balanced 43 percent and were perceived as conservative 7 percent of the time, while Telemundo’s stories tilted left 54 percent of the time, were balanced 40 percent of the time and tilted conservative 5 percent of the time.

The study also found that Democratic surrogates and liberal-leaning groups were featured on both networks more frequently than Republicans or conservative groups, but the group also faulted conservatives for not reaching out more to Latino media.

“The main thing is on domestic U.S. policy, the administration and their allies …are really dominating the narrative on major U.S. political stories,” Oliver-Méndez said. “So that points to a real need for conservatives to do a better job and for networks to do a better job including conservatives.”

MRC Latino took particular issue with both Univision and Telemundo’s participation in encouraging Obamacare signups, especially a joint a town hall the networks held last month featuring President Barack Obama.

“Self-respecting media outlets and journalists are careful to avoid being used as pawns of public relations or publicity campaigns, by either public or private-sector entities,” the study said. “Yet this is what largely appears to have happened at Univision and Telemundo in their coverage of ObamaCare.”

The study found that Univision and Telemundo featured liberal advocates of Obamacare in 116 stories versus the law’s conservative opponents in 24 stories.

On the topic of immigration reform, the study found Democratic politicians and “spokespeople aligned with left-leaning pro-reform organizations” appeared more than twice as often as Republicans and conservatives.   

On international issues however, such as the recent protests in Venezuela or the Catholic Church and Pope Francis, the study found both networks “maintained a more critical or balanced stance.”

(Also on POLITICO: CNN reviewing attempted WTC breach)

The study is part of the launch of MRC’s new Spanish-language media watch group MRC Latino, which is officially launching on Tuesday. Oliver-Méndez and MRC President Brent Bozell said they hope the study and MRC Latino will lead to more conservative voices in Spanish-language media and that they plan to meet with executives at the two networks to discuss the study.

“It’s going to be outreach that we’re going to do to hopefully sit down with some of the major players in the Latino media, go through these findings and try to see if we can have a constructive dialogue,” Bozell said. “I don’t believe in any suggestion that liberals shouldn’t have their world view presented, but a, conservatives need to have equal footing. And b, you can’t use your network to actively promote a political agenda.”

The study was a content analysis of 989 stories on of Noticiero Univision and Noticiero Telemundo from November 1, 2013 through February 28, 2014. The conservative or liberal orientation of politicians, advocates and organizations cited were counted, and the prevailing “tilt” of a story was determined “by tallying all statements from journalists and quoted sources that articulated either a recognizably liberal or conservative point of view on a given subject."

Update April 1, 10:15a.m.:

Univision spokesperson Jose Zamora defended the network's Obamcare coverage in an email Monday night, saying that part of Univision's responsibility as one of the most widely watched networks in Hispanic households is to ensure viewers have all the information necessary to "make informed decisions, regardless of their political views and affiliations."

"Hispanics are one of the largest uninsured demographics in the U.S. It is for that same reason, that Hispanics are one of the segments of the U.S. population that can benefit the most from the ACA," Zamora said. "When we report and inform on the ACA, as with any of the other issues that matter most to our audience, we are only focused on providing a public service to the Hispanic community, not a service to the Administration, conservatives, liberals or moderates."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/03/report-univision-telemundo-skew-liberal-186084.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39384
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #211 on: May 08, 2014, 10:17:20 AM »
Quote
Exactly. We constantly see the following, in the mainstream media, to describe the Right, but NEVER the Left. The double standard is sickening:
'Hard line conservatives'
'Hard-right politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the republican party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the republican party'
'Controvertial right wing politician'

When is the last time you saw the exact same terms used to descibe the other side of the aisle?
'Hard line liberals'
'Hard left politician'
'Radicals'
'Radical elements in the democratic party'
'Extremists'
'Extremist elements in the democratic party'
'Controvertial left wing politician'

The double standards are staggering, and it is done on purpose

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #212 on: July 02, 2014, 05:26:28 PM »
MSNBC Downplays Poll Showing Obama Worst Modern Prez; Hyped Same Poll When Bush Was Worst
By Jeffrey Meyer | July 2, 2014

A Quinnipiac University poll published on July 2 found that 33 percent of Americans view President Obama as America’s worst modern president compared to 28 percent who picked George W. Bush.

Following the release of the poll, Chuck Todd, NBC News Chief White House Correspondent, Political Director and host of “The Daily Rundown” dismissed the findings and argued “these great and worst lists, they’re terrible...because they always reflect the moment in time.” In contrast, MSNBC struck a much different tone in 2006 when Quinnipiac found that President Bush was rated America’s worst modern president. [See video below.] 

Appearing on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports Wednesday afternoon, Todd argued that “these great and worst lists, they are terrible whenever you poll them, they’re terrible poll questions because they always reflect the moment in time. The public isn't having, taking this historical -- you know, if you sat there and then said, here are the accomplishments and failures of each of these presidents, Nixon would come out on top, okay?” 

While Todd was certainly willing to downplay the significance of the 2014 poll, on June 2, 2006 NBC’s Norah O’Donnell called a similar Quinnipiac poll that ranked President Bush America’s worst modern president and a “devastatingly stark message to the president.”

Filling in as host on Hardball, O’Donnell proclaimed “a new poll shows that Americans now consider President Bush an even worse president than Nixon, who resigned from office of course in the wake of the Watergate scandal. President Bush has been badly hurt by Iraq and perceptions that he is too detached from the problems there or within his own administration.”

Later in the program O’Donnell asked MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough “Can he [President Bush] get anything done that he could have done without Iraq hanging over him? Joe, worse than Nixon?” Scarborough did not dismiss the polls findings and instead argued “if you have worse ratings from the American people than Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter, you`ve earned them.”

See relevant transcripts below.

CHRIS CILLIZZA: A new poll out today finds that President Barack Obama is viewed as the worst president we've had since World War II. These numbers come as Obama is ramping up his rhetorical fight with Republicans in Congress. Joining me now for our “Daily Fix” is Bloomberg News political reporter Gene Cummings and Chuck Todd, who has many titles, including NBC News Chief White House Correspondent, Political Director and host of “The Daily Rundown” here on MSNBC.

Okay, the poll is granted a snapshot in time but I do want to run through this. Quinnipiac University from the great state of Connecticut conducted this poll, they asked, who is the worst president since World War II? 33 percent Obama, 28 percent George W. Bush, 13 percent, Richard Nixon and 8 percent Jimmy Carter. Chuck what do you make of this? This is not in a vacuum, the president’s poll numbers more broadly, approval rating have been bad.

CHUCK TODD: These great and worst lists, they are terrible whenever you poll them, they’re terrible poll questions because they always reflect the moment in time. The public isn't having, taking this historical -- you know, if you sat there and then said, here are the accomplishments and failures of each of these presidents, Nixon would come out on top, okay? At the end of the day--

CILLIZZA: There’s a recency effect essentially.

TODD: Right there is some of that. So people just think of where it is in the moment in time. And by the way, when you look inside the numbers, it's a bunch of Republicans are saying this about Obama--

GENE CUMMINGS: Oh yeah. It’s so partisan.

TODD: And a bunch of Democrats saying are that about Bush.

CILLIZZA: And they did this is ‘06 and guess what George W. Bush was the president.

CUMMINGS: The scale of partisanship in this thing is 90 percent.

CILLIZZA: That may be the takeaway, which we know. There’s more partisanship than ever.
 
MSNBC
Hardball with Chris Matthews
June 2, 2006

Fill-in host NORAH O'DONNELL: But first, a new poll shows that Americans now consider President Bush an even worse president than Nixon, who resigned from office of course in the wake of the Watergate scandal. President Bush has been badly hurt by Iraq and perceptions that he is too detached from the problems there or within his own administration
...
O'DONNELL: Welcome back to "HARDBALL Hotshots" with Joe Scarborough, Margaret Carlson and Craig Crawford. Next up, ouch. A new Quinnipiac poll sends a devastatingly stark message to the president. Thirty-four percent say that he`s the worst president in history. Richard Nixon takes second place, followed by Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Can anything short of a major, unforeseen event save the Bush presidency? Can he get anything done that he could have done without Iraq hanging over him? Joe, worse than Nixon?

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well, first of all, I've just got to say, if you have worse ratings from the American people than Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter, you`ve earned them.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffrey-meyer/2014/07/02/msnbc-downplays-poll-showing-obama-worst-modern-prez-hyped-same-poll-#ixzz36MPgspJX

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #213 on: July 28, 2014, 09:14:06 AM »
Does not surprise me.

Leading liberal website falls for fake story about Michele Bachmann
The Daily Caller
By Chuck Ross
Published July 28, 2014

Think Progress, a website operated by the liberal Center for American Progress, failed to vet a phony story which claimed that Minnesota U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann proposed “Americanization” labor camps for Central American unaccompanied children.

“I’m calling on all of us, Obama and Congress and everyone, to chip in and build special new facilities…‘Americanization facilities,’ if you will,” Bachmann said, according to Think Progress, which has since corrected its embarrassing flub.

“And we’d send these kids to these facilities, in Arizona and Texas and wherever else. And we’d get private sector business leaders to locate to those facilities and give these children low-risk jobs to do. And they’d learn about the American way of life, earn their keep, and everyone wins in the end,” Bachmann continued, in Think Progress’ fantasy land.

Think Progress’ owner, the Center for American Progress, is populated with numerous veterans of the Clinton and Obama administrations.

Think Progress was snookered by a post at a website called KCTV 7, which presents itself as a news outlet based in Kansas City. A quick internet search reveals a number of online posts pointing out that KCTV 7 is a fake news site. It also shows no affiliation to major news networks. According to TV guide listings for the Kansas City area, channel 7 is not in use.

In its parody article, KCTV 7 claimed that Bachmann called for the work camps in an interview with Minnesota’s Twin Cities News talk radio host Jason Lewis. But the fake site merely linked to Twin Cities News’ website, not to an actual article or radio interview featuring Bachmann.

Think Progress published the erroneous story on Sunday but corrected it and issued an apology after another liberal website, the Raw Story, pointed out the massive hoax.

“The news site KCTV7 News is a parody. Rep. Bachmann (R-MN) never made the statement. We sincerely regret the error,” reads Think Progress’ correction.

But the Raw Story seemed to provide cover for Think Progress’ error in its headline, which read “Crazy racist Bachmann story so believable liberal websites fall for parody.”

The websites Crooks and Liars and Daily Kos are two other liberal outlets that fell for the fake story.

Bachmann, who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, is a big target for liberals, largely because of her religious conservatism.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/27/leading-liberal-website-falls-for-fake-story-about-michele-bachmann/?intcmp=latestnews

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #214 on: August 08, 2014, 10:15:03 AM »
Networks Avoid Scandal-Plagued Democratic Senator Exiting the Race
By Scott Whitlock | August 8, 2014

Despite a combined eight available hours of programming on Friday, all three networks avoided the news that a scandal-plagued Democratic senator from Montana dropped a reelection bid on Thursday. This move leaves the seat as a likely Republican takeover in the 2014 midterms. But viewers wouldn't know that on ABC's Good Morning America, NBC's Today and CBS This Morning. 

John Walsh left the race two weeks after the New York Times reported that the Democrat plagiarized extensive sections of his master's degree from the Army War College.  With the networks avoiding the story, it was left to CNN's New Day to offer a brief amount of coverage. John King wondered if the seat will "most likely" go to the GOP. Maggie Haberman of Politico retorted, "Oh, yeah...I mean, most Democrats that I talked to believe Montana is not winnable anymore." [See video below. MP3 audio here.]


What did the networks cover instead? GMA offered two minutes to the viral video of a bear walking upright. Today spent four minutes on how to be "50 and fabulous." This Morning devoted almost a minute to tourists in Britain retracing Abby Road, a street made famous by the Beatles 45 years ago.

The New York Times, despite breaking the story, relegated Thursday's revelation to page A12. Writer Jonathan Martin explained:

Monday is the deadline for Montana candidates to withdraw from the general election. The convention to replace Mr. Walsh on the ballot is expected to take place in Helena on Aug. 16.

Mr. Walsh, who had been set to face Representative Steve Daines, a Republican, was considered one of the most vulnerable Senate Democrats, and Republicans were quick to suggest that his move would not affect the race.

The Washington Post also opted not to feature the story on the front page. On A2, Sean Sullivan noted:

The New York Times reported last month that Walsh pulled a sizable part of a paper he submitted at the Army War College titled “The Case for Democracy as a Long Term National Strategy" from a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace document without attribution. The material was mostly used verbatim. Another chunk was pulled from a 1998 essay written by a Harvard scholar.

Thursday's evening newscasts also avoided the story.

Considering the media's obsession with flawed Republican candidates, such as Todd Akin, it seems only fair that journalists devote a little coverage to damaged Democrats.

A partial transcript of New Day's August 8 segment: 

JOHN KING: And out in Montana the appointed senator John Walsh has decided he will not run. He was appointed to the seat. He's involved in a plagiarism scandal right now and he's decided he will not to run. I think, does that add to the, most likely, a Republican seat there?

MAGGIE HABERMAN: Oh, yeah. I think it was already leaning that way. But there was a sense that Walsh was beginning to get a little bit of wind beneath his wings and was coming back a bit. This essentially takes that out unless Democrats can nominate somebody who is really very right for the state, who is the right fit. They are having a hard time getting anybody who actually wants to be the person who is the place holder because you're sort of running for a lost cause. I mean, most Democrats that I talked to believe Montana is not winnable anymore.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2014/08/08/all-three-networks-avoid-scandal-plagued-democratic-senator-exiting#ixzz39p0YSZqn

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #215 on: August 08, 2014, 10:29:03 AM »
BFD if the morning shows didn't cover the story about John Walsh.  Maybe they know their viewers would rather would rather see a video of a bear walking on it's hind legs.  A simple internet search shows that ABC, CBC, MSNBC all covered it yesterday in one way or another.  Also, the guy is stepping down so it's not like Todd Akin who made himself a story by not dropping out.   Just more conservative crybabies.   Shit I thought Fox News got all the viewers and I'm sure they covered it

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #216 on: August 08, 2014, 12:08:29 PM »
BFD if the morning shows didn't cover the story about John Walsh.  Maybe they know their viewers would rather would rather see a video of a bear walking on it's hind legs.  A simple internet search shows that ABC, CBC, MSNBC all covered it yesterday in one way or another.  Also, the guy is stepping down so it's not like Todd Akin who made himself a story by not dropping out.   Just more conservative crybabies.   Shit I thought Fox News got all the viewers and I'm sure they covered it

exactly.  Networks can cover anything they want.  VH1 can snub GN'R and just play Robert Palmer videos all day.  Its their choice, based upon their audience tastes.  People that watch FOX don't want to hear "Benghazi report clears obama!" just as people that watch MSNBC don't want to hear "Obama dips to 41% in gallup!"

There are different networks, with diff styles, covering different things.  it's how TV works.  Some naive people think otherwise, but that's cool.  the myth of journalistic integrity, well, it's cute but it's not real.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #217 on: August 13, 2014, 11:05:18 AM »
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/385185/hide-d-showcase-r-l-brent-bozell-iii

It is such common sense as to be undeniable that basic journalism requires a party label to be affixed to a story about an elected public official, the president excepted. It is the DNA of the “who” in a news report. “Senator Robert Byrd, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, died today.” Take out “Democratic” and try that sentence. It doesn’t work. “Mike Lee, GOP senator from Utah and God’s gift to mankind, coasted to reelection last night.” Ditto.

It follows that the rule applies to stories about political scandal, precisely because it’s just that — politics. But what happens when that cardinal rule is applied to one party but ignored for the other? Favoritism? Bias? No, it’s far worse than just that. It is a commitment to abide by the rules of journalism with one party and then a deliberate attempt to protect the other, even if it means violating the most basic rules of news reporting.

Now wait a minute, Bozell. What about another possibility? Why can’t it be an honest mistake? Cannot we believe that even if such an egregious violation is committed it might not just be an accident, a reckless, sloppy oversight? If it happened once, fine. Stunning but fine. Twice? I don’t believe in coincidences. The record, however, shows it is much worse than that.

On Friday, September 29, 2006, Representative Mark Foley of Florida resigned after ABC News exposed him for having sent explicit e-mails to male House pages. That evening and on the next day’s morning news shows, ABC, CBS, and NBC all tied Foley to the GOP. “This is more than just one man’s downfall,” Today co-host Matt Lauer solemnly declared on NBC. “It could be a major blow to the Republican party.”

On March 10, 2008, news broke that New York governor Eliot Spitzer had been linked to a prostitution ring. It took NBC News four nights to acknowledge Spitzer’s party affiliation. In its first two days of coverage, Matt Lauer’s Today show ran 18 segments on the scandal and never once identified him as a Democrat.

But what happens when a Republican elected official is linked to a prostitute? In July 2007, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana was revealed as a client in the phone records of the so-called D.C. Madam. Every broadcast network ran stories on the scandal and every story underscored that Vitter was a Republican.

The previous month, Senator Larry Craig of Idaho had been arrested at the airport in Minneapolis for the infamous toe-tapping men’s-room solicitation. When the news became public in August, the networks jumped on the story. Every morning and evening news show pointed out he was a Republican. On NBC’s Today, Lauer drilled further, tying him ideologically to conservatives. “Can the right wing withstand yet another scandal involving one of its own?”

On June 16, 2009, Senator John Ensign of Nevada admitted to an extramarital affair. In the following day’s reports, all three broadcast networks covered the scandal and all three reported that he was a member of the GOP. One week later they were back in action, this time giving major attention to the story that South Carolina governor Mark Sanford also had admitted to cheating on his wife. Again the perfunctory declaration that he was a Republican.

Four years later, after weeks of tumultuous scandal involving allegations of multiple cases of sexual harassment involving numerous women, on August 22, 2013, San Diego’s Democratic mayor (and former congressman), Bob Filner, finally resigned. All three networks covered the story in both their morning and evening broadcasts, but only CBS mentioned his party affiliation.

Still not convinced? Okay, so we’ll continue.




JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #218 on: August 13, 2014, 12:39:36 PM »
240's complete denial and ceaseless efforts to spin the obvious is really something else ;D

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #219 on: September 04, 2014, 01:11:58 PM »
Media Mum? DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz Implies GOP Gov. Scott Walker Beats Women
By Tim Graham | September 3, 2014

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz ramped up “War on Women” rhetoric to an accusatory new level. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports the Florida congresswoman said the Governor of Wisconsin is a domestic abuser: "Scott Walker has given women the back of his hand. I know that is stark. I know that is direct. But that is reality."

Wasserman Schultz added: "What Republican tea party extremists like Scott Walker are doing is they are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back. It is not going to happen on our watch." The Democratic candidate for governor there, Mary Burke, was backtracking:

Stephanie Wilson, Burke's press secretary, suggested in a statement that Wasserman Schultz's comments went too far.

"That's not the type of language that Mary Burke would use, or has used, to point out the clear differences in this contest," Wilson said.

Wilson added, "There is plenty that she and Gov. Walker disagree on — but those disagreements can and should be pointed out respectfully."

....Republican Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch said she was "shocked" that Wasserman Schultz used domestic violence language to discuss political disagreements.

"I think the remarks were absolutely hideous and the motive behind them was despicable," Kleefisch said Wednesday.

But in Washington, DNC flack Lila Adams was trying to come to the leader’s defense in Politico:

When asked about the chairwoman’s comments, a spokesperson for the DNC said Wasserman Schultz was not “belittling” the issue of domestic violence.

“Domestic violence is an incredibly serious issue and the Congresswoman was by no means belittling the very real pain survivors experience,” Lily Adams, deputy communications director for the DNC, said in an email. “That’s why Democrats have consistently supported the Violence Against Women Act and won’t take a lesson from the party that blocked and opposed its reauthorization. The fact of the matter is that Scott Walker’s policies have been bad for Wisconsin’s women.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/09/03/media-mum-dnc-chair-wasserman-schultz-implies-gov-walker-beats-women#ixzz3CNbL4Uj0


Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #221 on: September 29, 2014, 03:30:43 PM »
Networks Cover Liberal Bestsellers 2-1 Over Conservative
By Tianna DiMartino | September 24, 2014

In a fishy and yet unsurprising move the liberal newspapers bestsellers list banished David Limbaugh’s new book, “Jesus on Trial,” from it’s well-earned place on their list. The book should sit at this week’s number four spot, having sold “9,660 in its first week out … Instead, Henry Kissinger’s World Order, praised by Hillary Clinton in the Washington Post, is No. 4 despite weekly sales of 6,607.” In direct correlation, you haven’t seen David Limbaugh interviewed about his book on any major network either.

But a berth on the New York Time’s bestsellers list doesn’t guarantee conservative authors and books the attention of the wider media. CMI addressed this issue of imbalanced favoritism towards liberal bestsellers by the media networks in a 2009 special report titled Unmentionable: Best-Selling Conservative Books and the Networks that Ignore Them. The report found that, “Since the 1940s, authors whose works make the list have been assured of even more books sales and a shower of publicity.  But not when those authors or their books are conservative. In such cases, the three broadcast networks greeted them with silence at worst and skepticism at best.” The networks covered liberal books three times as often as conservative works. Spoiler alert: Not much has changed.

In 2014, between January and September there have been twenty conservative authors, a few with more than one title, making the bestseller list compared to just eight liberal authors who have made the list. The conservative authors have also enjoyed the spotlight for three times longer than the liberals. On average a book penned by a conservative has remained in the Top 15 for twelve weeks; a liberal title for an average of just four weeks. The numbers clearly show that public attention and interest favors the conservative although you would never know it based on who the major news networks gives attention to and whose books they choose to promote or ignore.

NBC, CBS and ABC have hosted five out of the eight liberal authors a respectable 62.5 percent, who have appeared on the New York Time’s bestselling list; majority of which only held a spot in the Top 15 for just one week- a combined total of just 26 weeks.

In comparison those same networks interviewed just six out of the twenty conservative authors, a pathetic 30 percent. Their books remained on the list for an average of nine weeks – a combined total of 55 weeks. Based on media attention one would think the numbers were reversed. And yet liberal media would have you believe they’re not biased.


Most people probably don’t have the New York Time’s Best Sellers list saved to favorites to be accessed weekly, at least not compared to the number of people who watch ABC’s “Good Morning America,” NBC’s “Today” and/or CBS’ “This Morning” –shows that interview the bestselling authors most frequently. But the shows act as gatekeepers, rarely allowing conservative books – and the ideas and perspectives they contain – broad public exposure.

 

Books Studied:

 Things That Matter- Charles Krauthammer

America- Dinesh D’Souza

One Nation- Ben Carson

UnPHILtered- Phil Robertson

The Way Forward- Paul Ryan

Blood Feud- Edward Klein

Killing Jesus- Bill O’Reilly

Clinton, Inc.- Daniel Halper

Special Heart- Bret Baier

Good Call- Jase Robertson

10% Happier- Dan Harris

Big Tent- Mallory Factor

The Women of Duck Commander- Kay Robertson

Not Cool- Greg Gutfeld

Duty- Robert M. Gates

My Age of Anxiety- Scott Stossel

The Loudest Voice in the Room- Gabriel Sherman

Miracles & Massacres- Glenn Beck

Happy, Happy, Happy- Phil Robertson

Si-Cology- Si Robertson

Killing Kennedy- Bill O’Reilly

Jesus on Trial- David Limbaugh

Off the Sidelines- Kirsten Gillibrand

Waking Up- Sam Harris

Diary of a Mad Diva- Joan Rivers

The Teacher Wars- Dana Goldstein

Hard Choices- Hillary Rodham Clinton

A Fighting Chance- Elizabeth Warren

Six Amendments- John Paul Stevens

HRC- Jonathan Allen & Amie Parnes

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tianna-dimartino/2014/09/24/networks-cover-liberal-bestsellers-2-1-over-conservative#sthash.0uQgnCTN.dpuf

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #222 on: October 27, 2014, 10:09:22 AM »
Unreal.

Stonewalled No More: Ex-CBS Reporter’s Tell-All Exposes Liberal Bias
By Melissa Mullins | October 26, 2014

Sharyl Attkisson used to be an investigative journalist for CBS News, but now finds herself making headlines as the whistleblower who blew the lid off CBS's blatant bias toward the president and his administration.

From a recent book review by the New York Post’s Kyle Smith, we learn that in her new book Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington, Attkisson exposes outright political corruption, and the media circus surrounding the Obama Administration; the constant praise and fawning over the president, the political bent on stories, and the decision to air “softer” news versus hard-hitting investigative reports that could potentially show the Obama Administration in bad light.

Attkisson cites many examples of liberal media bias in Stonewalled. When asking follow-up questions on scandals such as Benghazi or Fast and Furious, Attkisson has been viewed by many in the White House as being an “unreasonable” reporter. White House national security spokesman Tommy Vietor replied, “I give up, Sharyl . . . I’ll work with more reasonable folks that follow up, I guess.”

When she pressed Eric Schultz, White House Deputy Press Secretary, on Fast and Furious, Schultz screamed, “Goddammit, Sharyl!...The Washington Post is reasonable, The LA Times is reasonable, The New York Times is reasonable. You’re the only one who’s not reasonable!” Fast and Furious, though still unanswered, led to the resignation of a U.S. Attorney, and led President Obama to utilize “executive privilege” (for the first time), to minimize the amount of damaging information released.

For those in the White House who didn’t care for Attkisson’s reporting, they would oftentimes send her boss, CBS News President, David Rhodes, an inflammatory email, and to Ben Rhodes, who happens to be brother to David, a top national security advisor to President Obama. Attkisson writes that she has always focused her reporting on “getting the story in its entirety," not because of political party affiliation. Her 20 years at CBS provided just as many stories attacking Republicans as she did Democrats.  She describes herself as “politically agnostic.”

In her book, Attkisson describes how reporters are often turned into “casting agents.” “We need to find someone who will say . . .that a given policy is good or bad. We’re asked to create a reality that fits their New York image of what they believe.” She also gives this little tidbit of information: “One of her bosses had a rule that conservative analysts must always be labeled conservatives, but liberal analysts were simply “analysts"…And if a conservative analyst’s opinion really rubbed the supervisor the wrong way,” says Attkisson, “she might rewrite the script to label him a ‘right-wing’ analyst.”

Reporting on the total number of people who signed up for ObamaCare on the first day (six), Attkisson found it even more difficult to get her stories to air on CBS, mainly because of media bias. She writes, “Many in the media…are wrestling with their own souls: They know that ObamaCare is in serious trouble, but they’re conflicted about reporting that. Some worry that the news coverage will hurt a cause that they personally believe in. They’re all too eager to dismiss damaging documentary evidence while embracing, sometimes unquestioningly, the Obama administration’s ever-evolving and unproven explanations.”

Attkisson also discussed how CBS “suddenly” lost interest in her stories on the 2012 attacks on Benghazi. Unsurprisingly, the lack of enthusiasm from CBS on Benghazi coincided with the upcoming presidential election.  Her stories went from being televised on national air – to being buried on the website. At one time, “Benghazi” meant a city in Libya, but now, “the administration, with the full cooperation of the media, has successfully turned 'Benghazi' into a word associated with nutters, like 'Roswell' or 'grassy knoll'….the truth is that most of the damaging information came from Obama administration insiders. From government documents. From sources who were outraged by their own government’s behavior and what they viewed as a coverup.”

In 2004, a senior producer came to Attkisson asking her to do a piece on so-called documents that supposedly  showed President George W. Bush ducking his duties during the Vietnam War.  She looked at the documents and said, “They looked like they were typed by my daughter on a computer yesterday.”  No one bothered her after she refused another solicitation to do the same article, citing an ethics clause in her contract.  CBS  went with the story…and the rest is history. It was CNSNews.com reporter Robert Bluey who introduced us to “Rathergate” by uncovering the truth and controversy of the fake documents CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather reported on.

With her countless stories and personal experiences over the span of 20 years at CBS, Sharyl Attkisson’s book Stonewalled gives the public a glimpse on how the media operate, and their liberal biased reporting and the treatment of others. Attkisson is a modern-day whistleblower in the media world, but instead of reporting the news, she’s making it.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/melissa-mullins/2014/10/26/stonewalled-no-more-ex-cbs-reporters-tell-all-exposes-liberal-bias#sthash.Swmtns6z.dpuf

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39384
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #223 on: October 27, 2014, 10:16:30 AM »
180 falls in to this hook line ans sinker

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39384
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.