Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 249
  1. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    I work in the media. Radio/TV and now Print. I was a part time host on a twice weekly radio show.
    it is ultimately all about making money. I could say the sky is blue, and depending on who you are, and what your views are, I could be a leftist, liberal or a person just right of H.i.t.l.e.r., it is all perspective.
    Media should be neutral, however, where stories are just that, people complain. it is a loose loose thing for the press.
    Remember, even if a reporter only reports the facts, someone out there, will feel that it was slanted because the reporter didnt look at something they thought was important.
    A reporter *should* only report the facts, without slant. Leave the spin for the rest of us, but give us a baseline, for goodness sake.

    And H1tler was left, btw, so your example of views was redundant.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    A reporter *should* only report the facts, without slant. Leave the spin for the rest of us, but give us a baseline, for goodness sake.

    And H1tler was left, btw, so your example of views was redundant.
    Even if they report facts, they can show bias by which stories they don't cover, what facts are included, what is considered to be "a fact", etc.
  3.    #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    Even if they report facts, they can show bias by which stories they don't cover, what facts are included, what is considered to be "a fact", etc.
    That's something i haven't thought of, and you're absolutely correct.

    But can they at least be less obvious about their inclinations?
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    That's something i haven't thought of, and you're absolutely correct.

    But can they at least be less obvious about their inclinations?
    I think they should be MORE obvious, and just state where they are coming from.
  5.    #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    I think they should be MORE obvious, and just state where they are coming from.
    I don't think news outlets should "come from" anywhere. If they want to come from certain politcal angles, they shouldn't be called or call themselves "news outlets". They are more like political magazines.

    It should be separate entities.
  6. #46  
    It's worth noting that MSNBC, most (but not all) of whose *commentators* are progressive-leaning, explicitly bills itself as "the place for politics." As opposed to strongly right-leaning Fox, that calls itself "fair and balanced." {Jonathan}
    Prof. Jonathan I. Ezor
    Writer, PreCentral
    Past Palm Real Reviewer
    @webOSquire on Twitter
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    I don't think news outlets should "come from" anywhere. If they want to come from certain politcal angles, they shouldn't be called or call themselves "news outlets". They are more like political magazines.

    It should be separate entities.
    They are humans, so they all come from a perspective. that was my original point.
  8.    #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    They are humans, so they all come from a perspective. that was my original point.
    I understand that they're human, but i don't think it's very professional for "news reporters" to be biased.

    Don't you want a waiter to just bring you your food? Or do you really need to hear what he recommends.

    Is it a surprise when he recommends something prepared from the very same restaurant that he's serving you from?


    (This is probably a horrible anaolgy, lol)
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    No. I won all the arguments.
    Welcome to Fantasy Island, Herve.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    I understand that they're human, but i don't think it's very professional for "news reporters" to be biased.

    Don't you want a waiter to just bring you your food? Or do you really need to hear what he recommends.

    Is it a surprise when he recommends something prepared from the very same restaurant that he's serving you from?


    (This is probably a horrible anaolgy, lol)
    One would guess that the Fox News followers would not validate any journalism as being balanced before they came along. Murrow, Mike Wallace...were there any great journalists before Fox News, or did they invent the right way to do it? Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite, Frank Reynolds....all socialists, right?



    And do you really think that there is that there is no difference between Richard Engle and Bill O'Reilly?
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    I understand that they're human, but i don't think it's very professional for "news reporters" to be biased.

    Don't you want a waiter to just bring you your food? Or do you really need to hear what he recommends.

    Is it a surprise when he recommends something prepared from the very same restaurant that he's serving you from?


    (This is probably a horrible anaolgy, lol)
    what I'm saying is that people bring a point of view with them to everything because they are human. the key is to recognize it and be open about it.

    you really need to read that book I mentioned earlier. for example, he mentions a survey of journalists that showed something like 90% see themselves as moderate/middle of the road.

    the certainly believe that, but I think we all know that the press hasn't been "middle" on anything in decades. very few people think of themselves as being on an extreme, but they often are.

    I don't think anyone wants to make the argument that the average journalist covering politics is aligned with most americans (by definition the statistical middle). but those journalists certainly think they are aligned. bias is almost impossible to see in the mirror.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    ...

    And H1tler was left, btw, so your example of views was redundant.
    ??!!!????
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    ??!!!????
    speaking of a liberal journalist that thinks he is unbiased and moderate, here is one now! nothing with that, unless he claims that isn't the case...
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by solarus View Post
    I'd have a lot more respect for Fox and MSNBC if they just came out and said "we're the conservative news network" or we're the "liberal news network."
    I agree with that 100%.

    They are both wildly biased. Which one is more biased just depends on whether you ask a liberal of a conservative, but they're probably the two worst.

    If they'd just admit it, they'd be so much more respectable. As it is, Fox claims to be "Fair and Balanced" while MSNBC just spends 1/3 of their time on air arguing with Fox.
    Quote Originally Posted by VeeDubb65 View Post
    It is as if you said that the result a dog and a cat mating was a giraffe. It's so completely wrong, that it's difficult to argue with someone who believes it to be true.
  15. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #55  
    If course, we can holler about left-leaning MSN or the Fox and talk radio right-wing bias all we want but there's a good reason these guys are in business... us, the audience! They survive on ad revenue and the shows that get the most viewers get the most ad revenue. We're not complaining about the news agencies, we're complaining about each other and ourselves.
  16. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    One would guess that the Fox News followers would not validate any journalism as being balanced before they came along. Murrow, Mike Wallace...were there any great journalists before Fox News, or did they invent the right way to do it? Huntley, Brinkley, Cronkite, Frank Reynolds....all socialists, right?
    The point is whether or not they're reporting fairly, or not; Both sides on the issues, not whether or not they're socialists. It doesn't matter.

    Cronkite left me guessing for years, btw. He finally came out and confirmed he was liberal, in the end. One could argue that his coverage of Vietnam, in hind sight, was definitely of liberal bend - and some say led to the losing of the war.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    we (and the media) are all biased to some extent. The key is to recognize what they are and be up front about it.

    It can show up in what isn't reported as well as what is. There was an excellent book about that by Bernard Goldberg called "Bias" that explains how and why bias exists on both sides.

    Worth grabbing at the library or getting for the kindle app (on your PC since there isn't a kindle reader for webOS...)
    Good book...already read it...
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    ??!!!????
    Hi Barye. Let me help. I'll paste something I found on Wikianswers that pretty much covers it:

    His party was called "National Socialist". Clue is in the name.

    More:
    In terms of American politics, he was more left wing than right. Hi4ler advocated socialist policies including universal access to healthcare, cradle to grave welfare, government control of virtually ever aspect of citizens' lives etc. While he had some traits in common with conservatives, including nationalism (love for ones country), and a large military, most of his policies were indeed left wing.

    In terms of world politics, his ideas were also left wing. His views and the views of Joseph Sta1in are remarkably similar, including a tight control of the media, mass genocide, and extremely powerful government. Hi4ler disliked Communism because he believed that there was "Jewish influence" on Communism, due to the fact that the author or the "Communist Manifesto" and the creator of Communism in general was Jewish. However, his policies were indeed similar to the 20th century Communist policies, which are extreme leftist regimes.
    Does that clear it up for you?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Hi Barye. Let me help. I'll paste something I found on Wikianswers that pretty much covers it:



    Does that clear it up for you?
    lol...way to get under the "lefts" skin!...
  20. #60  
    btw, the labels "left/right" and "conservative/liberal" don't help with clarity because they are used interchangeably.

    Historically "conservative" meant resistant to change (keep to tradition) and liberal meant promoting change (traditions were the problem).

    Given that this country has been on a steady march to social programs and entitlements for more than 50 years, one could argue that the "conservatives" are actually the ones demanding change - by changing back to the way things were before the New Deal.

    But, Left and Right don't necessarily line up with those - especially around the world.

    Someone should google the most oppressive regimes, dictators, and revolutions and see which are spoken of as "left" or "right"...
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions