Extracted: Bias, and why my news is better than your news

[Ishmael]

Thanks for the poitive comments on my post (enigma). Isnt it interesting how most armed forces enthusiasts and soldiers choose the conservative ideology instead of the liberal one. just food for thought. thanks again

I guess I'm the exception that proves the rule then. I spent 6 years USN and my specialty was precision-guided anti-sub & anti-ship weapons systems. I also may or may not have worked on weapons I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of. But then, I have also visited Hiroshima & Nagasaki & drive by Trinity site about once a month.

I find it intersting that my previous summary stands unrefuted by my conservative friends on this board. Ahh, the curse of being a historian.

[loynokid]

Thanks for the poitive comments on my post (enigma). Isnt it interesting how most armed forces enthusiasts and soldiers choose the conservative ideology instead of the liberal one. just food for thought. thanks again
I guess I'm the exception that proves the rule then. I spent 6 years USN and my specialty was precision-guided anti-sub & anti-ship weapons systems. I also may or may not have worked on weapons I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of. But then, I have also visited Hiroshima & Nagasaki & drive by Trinity site about once a month.

I find it intersting that my previous summary stands unrefuted by my conservative friends on this board. Ahh, the curse of being a historian.

Ahh yes, another liberal. I would be interested to know how many of your friends and comrades shared your liberal ideology when you were in the Navy. There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues. Also i want an honest answer from you. Do you think Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton ran a better admin? And also which one do you think provided more funding and support to our armed forces?

[Tchocky]

Ahh yes, another liberal..........There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues.
Explain that please. The "misinformed" bit.
I don't really know what you mean.

You're probably right about conservatives spending more on the military. It naturally follows that those in the military have a vested interest in voting that way.

[Subnuts]

Ahh yes, another liberal. I would be interested to know how many of your friends and comrades shared your liberal ideology when you were in the Navy. There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues. Also i want an honest answer from you. Do you think Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton ran a better admin? And also which one do you think provided more funding and support to our armed forces?

Well, maybe you could start by telling us about your glorious military record. Oh, and the Fighting Keyboardists don't count. Sorry.

[loynokid]

Ahh yes, another liberal..........There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues.
Explain that please. The "misinformed" bit.
I don't really know what you mean.

You're probably right about conservatives spending more on the military. It naturally follows that those in the military have a vested interest in voting that way.

It is my firm belief that most liberals in America have the ideological point of view that they do because they are misinformed from scources ranging from our unbelievebly left leaning media, to other ways of getting info such as liberal news analysis programs to radio talkshows. Also much of the printing press is left biased too. Most of the media gives you the left point of view but not the counter-point. A couple exeptions are the fox news channel, and Rush Limbaugh (completely the opposite)... lol ;)

[loynokid]

Ahh yes, another liberal. I would be interested to know how many of your friends and comrades shared your liberal ideology when you were in the Navy. There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues. Also i want an honest answer from you. Do you think Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton ran a better admin? And also which one do you think provided more funding and support to our armed forces?
Well, maybe you could start by telling us about your glorious military record. Oh, and the Fighting Keyboardists don't count. Sorry.

I have no glorious military record because i am not even old enough to join the military. I will not disclose my age for the sake of privacy. my Father and grandfather both served in the navy. My father in vietnam, and my grand father in WWII. They are both Steadfast conservatives. It may also interest you that the former drummer in my band now is an MP with the Washington DC Police force. he has just recently informed me that about 94 percent of his unit shares a conservative ideology. If you want to attack me more personally that is fine but you have to understand that i only say what i know. Every thing i have ever said on these forums is backed up by hard physical evidence.

[Tchocky]

There is no single media bias, as you've proved in your post. Every outlet has a different agenda, be it Rush, the NYT or the New York Post.
The only universal slant I've seen in the US media (it's a plural, worth keeping in mind) is an undue reverence for authority.
There are enough slanted outlets for everyone. Everyone can find a nation-wide network of biased news organisations that works against their own political beliefs.

[loynokid]

There is no single media bias, as you've proved in your post. Every outlet has a different agenda, be it Rush, the NYT or the New York Post.
The only universal slant I've seen in the US media (it's a plural, worth keeping in mind) is an undue reverence for authority.
There are enough slanted outlets for everyone. Everyone can find a nation-wide network of biased news organisations that works against their own political beliefs.


What you speak of is true, however there is far far far more left leaning media outlets than right ones. Look at ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, all of the tribune company owned newspapers, All Franken and the Leftist Radio Talk show crew. The List goes on and on. Heres the list for conservative leaning media outlets. Rush limbaugh and Conservative leaning talk show crew. there really is no other nation wide conservative media outlets (i consider fox as fair and balanced and not conservative leaning as many liberals would say) There you have it. That is just all there is to it

[Tchocky]

What you speak of is true, however there is far far far more left leaning media outlets than right ones. Look at ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, all of the tribune company owned newspapers, All Franken and the Leftist Radio Talk show crew. The List goes on and on. Heres the list for conservative leaning media outlets. Rush limbaugh and Conservative leaning talk show crew. there really is no other nation wide conservative media outlets (i consider fox as fair and balanced and not conservative leaning as many liberals would say) There you have it. That is just all there is to it You keep proving me right :)

I could go on about conservative talk radio, the New York & Washington Post, Clear Channel et etc, but it wouldnt get me anywhere.
The point is, with a media market as large as the US, talk of a single slant is ridiculous and self-defeating.
It's not 'all there is to it', not by a long shot.

The problem I see is a press that still lies down and lets itself be abused. There is an absolute refusal to question power, see Bush's conference last week. A question was put to him about sworn testimony on the Libby trial, he said he wasnt going to answer it, and the reporter shut up. What the hell? Same goes for Wolf Blitzer interviewing Dick Cheney.

And it's not just Jim Webb; it's some of your good Republican friends in the Senate and the House are now seriously questioning your credibility, because of the blunders and the failures. Gordon Smith…
CHENEY: Wolf, Wolf, I simply don't accept the premise of your question. I just think it's hogwash.

And Blitzer let this go?! Disgraceful, in my mind. You can't use "I dont accept the premise" in reaction to the truth,, and then get away with it. Shame.

I'm trying to keep personal politics out of this, because proper journalism isn't a political issue, whereas poor journalism usually is.

[loynokid]

What you speak of is true, however there is far far far more left leaning media outlets than right ones. Look at ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, all of the tribune company owned newspapers, All Franken and the Leftist Radio Talk show crew. The List goes on and on. Heres the list for conservative leaning media outlets. Rush limbaugh and Conservative leaning talk show crew. there really is no other nation wide conservative media outlets (i consider fox as fair and balanced and not conservative leaning as many liberals would say) There you have it. That is just all there is to it You keep proving me right :)

I could go on about conservative talk radio, the New York & Washington Post, Clear Channel et etc, but it wouldnt get me anywhere.
The point is, with a media market as large as the US, talk of a single slant is ridiculous and self-defeating.
It's not 'all there is to it', not by a long shot.

The problem I see is a press that still lies down and lets itself be abused. There is an absolute refusal to question power, see Bush's conference last week. A question was put to him about sworn testimony on the Libby trial, he said he wasnt going to answer it, and the reporter shut up. What the hell? Same goes for Wolf Blitzer interviewing Dick Cheney.

And it's not just Jim Webb; it's some of your good Republican friends in the Senate and the House are now seriously questioning your credibility, because of the blunders and the failures. Gordon Smith…
CHENEY: Wolf, Wolf, I simply don't accept the premise of your question. I just think it's hogwash.

And Blitzer let this go?! Disgraceful, in my mind. You can't use "I dont accept the premise" in reaction to the truth,, and then get away with it. Shame.

I'm trying to keep personal politics out of this, because proper journalism isn't a political issue, whereas poor journalism usually is.

you know what if you flip on a random news channel and guess if it will have a left or right leaning slant, i think that it will have a 9 out of 10 chances to be left leaning, i say this from past experience.

[Tchocky]

you know what if you flip on a random news channel and guess if it will have a left or right leaning slant, i think that it will have a 9 out of 10 chances to be left leaning, i say this from past experience.
Thanks again. Do you mean left/right as related to your own political beliefs, or an objective standard? That said, left/right have become almost useless as terms of description.

edit: so we're drifting off-topic. my bad.

Gizzmoe/Tak - Possible to split?

[Ishmael]

Ahh yes, another liberal. I would be interested to know how many of your friends and comrades shared your liberal ideology when you were in the Navy. There are always some people in the world that are misinformed about ideological issues. Also i want an honest answer from you. Do you think Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton ran a better admin? And also which one do you think provided more funding and support to our armed forces?[/quote]

OK, I'll address your points one-by-one.

1. At the time I joined in 1972, quite a few shared my ideology. The Vietnam war was winding down and the Draft Lottery had been going strong for 4-5 years with no deferments. So those people who were
1. burdened with a low lottery number &
2. had a modicum of intelligence,

joined the Navy to avoid slogging through a rice paddy. Among the guys in my sonar gang were a 3-year law student from Cal Berkeley, a classical violinist, and at least 8 others with 2 or more years of college. Consider also that the Ford Admin. cut the funding for a bonus promised to myself and 30,000 other guys in the Advanced Electronics and Nuclear Power fields prompting a class-action lawsuit against the Navy that cost the govt. more than had they paid us the bonuses as originally promised(they lost anyway).

2.Bill Clinton. Consider the record. Reagan cut & ran from Lebanon after Hezbollah bombed the Marine Barracks there. Reagan's term also brought us El Salvador and death squads from Messers Negroponte, Abrams, Secord etc. the first two now hold positions in the Bush admin. Reagan's people brought us arming and training fundamentalist Muslims in Afghanistan leading to the Civil war there and rise of the Taliban. Also, we musn't forget Iran/Contra where Reagan's people, despite all denials, traded arms to Iran for hostages and used the money to illegally fund the Contras after Congress cut funding with the Boland amendment. This was an impeachable offense and Reagan pardoned everybody. As far as the Soviet Union goes, they had been slowly imploding for years and was slated to fall apart in that time frame no matter who was in office. Oh, I forgot about the, at that time, huge budget deficits that weren't addressed until the Clinton admin. Yeah, did I mention the Savings & Loan scandals or the abolition of the Fairness doctrine allowing increasing concentration of media ownership by fewer & fewer corporations? Reagan's term also began the largest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the very wealthy that wasn't equalled or surpassed until Bush.

3. While it's true that Reagan spent lots more money in real terms on Defense, much of that went into boondoggles like Star Wars that never worked or programs like the DIVAD and the Osprey which still doesn't work. In other words, most of the money went into Corporate welfare for defense contractors while military readiness and training remained stagnant. As I remember, Wasn't Jim Webb Reagan's Secretary fo the Navy and quit over readiness issues? While it's true that Somalia occured on clinton's watch, he actually had it dumped on him by the Bush 41 admin. Clinton & Nato did intervene in Kosovo, but it did lessen and eventually wnd the violence there. His term saw the North Korean Nuclear negotiations that actually brought monitoring and inspections and is virtually a carbon copy of the new treaty Bush is ballyhooing. Remember, it was Bush who abrogated that agreement, not the North Koreans.

But I will add some things that Clinton failed to do. Clinton failed to start a war of choice for oil. Clinton failed to abrogate international treaties and flout international law. Clinton failed to deconstruct the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, failed to sanction Torture and renditions and had weekly meetings with his national security staff once the al-qaeda threat became known. The one terrorist attack on US soil that occurred on his watch, the first WTC bombing was solved by law enforcement in record time and the perpetrators brought to justice. Where is Osama Bin-Laden & Ayman al-Zuwahiri now?

What Clinton did do was preside over the largest peacetime economic expansion in the history of the Republic. As I recall, the economy didn't start going south again until Bush 43 took office. Despite all this, the Republican Party and the right-wing noise machine spent millions to try to drive him from office and impeached him for lying about having consensual sex with another adult. No one died from those lies. How many have died from Bush & Cheney's?

Regarding the so-called liberal media, there's a great series on how the Bush admin ran the runup to the Iraq war on Frontline you should look at. The "liberal" media were, in almost every case, turned into the defacto Republican Ministry of Propaganda, not to be confused with, by Rupert Murdoch's own admission, the dejure Republican Ministry of Propaganda known as Fox News. Anyone who questioned their statements were smeared and all but called traitors. Now that it has been shown irrefutably that all of their reasons for going to war were lies, that they had cherry-picked intelligence and threatened analysts in the CIA who didn't agree with their conclusions(Thank you Mr. Bolton and Mr. Cheney) and forcibly retired people like Gen. Shinseki who told the truth.

So my question to you is this. After all of the demonstrable and certified lies this admin. has told, why would you believe anything they say at all?

[Takeda Shingen]

Gizzmoe/Tak - Possible to split?

Your wish is my command.

*POOF*

[Takeda Shingen]

What you speak of is true, however there is far far far more left leaning media outlets than right ones. Look at ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, all of the tribune company owned newspapers, All Franken and the Leftist Radio Talk show crew. The List goes on and on. Heres the list for conservative leaning media outlets. Rush limbaugh and Conservative leaning talk show crew. there really is no other nation wide conservative media outlets (i consider fox as fair and balanced and not conservative leaning as many liberals would say) There you have it. That is just all there is to it

Right-leaning pundits:
Pat Buchanan
Fred Barnes
John McLaughlin (On PBS, none-the-less)
David Gergen
Robert Novak
William F. Buckley Jr.
George Will
William Safire
Rush Limbaugh
Sean Hannity
Cal Thomas
Jonathon Alter
Joe Klein
Robert J. Samuelson
James Kilpatrick
Mortimer B Zuckerman

Right-leaning newspapers (With National Distribution):
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Times
The New York Post

Right-leaning newsmagazines:
US News and World Report
The American Conservative
The Weekly Standard
National Review
Chronicles

Right-leaning Television News Networks:
FOX News

While it is generally agreed that leftist theory holds a greater share of television outlets, it is counterbalanced by the fact that the proponents of the right hold a virtual monopoly on talk radio, and evenly split the world of print media as well as the internet. As such, this division is much closer to 50/50, rather than the vast bias claimed by proponents of the right.

EDIT: For the record, Al Franken's show was canceled.