Posted on 11/16/2012 8:00:49 AM PST by RatherBiased.com
Most observers of the 2008 presidential campaign -- even including some liberals after the fact -- were shocked and appalled by the media's pro-Barack Obama sycophancy. Unfortunately, the intentional and unintentional advocacy of the media on behalf of Obama was even worse in 2012.
There are many reasons why the conservative movement failed to achieve electoral success this year, but perhaps one of the most significant is the enduring power and influence of the left-dominated "mainstream" media. The 2012 cycle demonstrated that left-wing journalists have far more sway on Americans' opinions than many conservatives have been willing to admit.
While the right's ability to access mass audiences has increased substantially in recent decades with the advent of talk radio, cable television, and the Internet, its audience reach is still tiny compared to the hundreds of millions who consume news generated by the liberal mainstream media.
It is true that the audience share of these supposedly objective outlets has decreased in recent years, but that hardly means they have lost their ability to persuade people, especially with working journalists now ever more willing to throw their self-styled proclamations of objectivity to the wind.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Most observers of the 2008 presidential campaign -- even including some liberals after the fact -- were shocked and appalled by the media's pro-Barack Obama sycophancy. Unfortunately, the intentional and unintentional advocacy of the media on behalf of Obama was even worse in 2012.
There are many reasons why the conservative movement failed to achieve electoral success this year, but perhaps one of the most significant is the enduring power and influence of the left-dominated "mainstream" media. The 2012 cycle demonstrated that left-wing journalists have far more sway on Americans' opinions than many conservatives have been willing to admit.
While the right's ability to access mass audiences has increased substantially in recent decades with the advent of talk radio, cable television, and the Internet, its audience reach is still tiny compared to the hundreds of millions who consume news generated by the liberal mainstream media.
It is true that the audience share of these supposedly objective outlets has decreased in recent years, but that hardly means they have lost their ability to persuade people, especially with working journalists now ever more willing to throw their self-styled proclamations of objectivity to the wind.
Oops. This is from the conclusion:
Liberals have learned from conservatives. The question now is whether the right can learn from the left. While imperfect, the right’s policy and electoral efforts are far superior to its media and messaging institutions. Having more favorable media environments at the state and national levels will not guarantee victories for conservative candidates, but it will make their jobs of persuading the public much easier. People are not persuaded to ideas so much as acculturated to them.
Conservatives frequently complain about how America’s cultural institutions are inhospitable to their values yet they spend almost all of their money on think tanks and campaigns. If they wish for that situation to change, they need to change their priorities. Focusing solely on government is not the solution.
I’ve ALWAYS maintained that the MSM is all-powerful. Look at the viewers of the 3 main networks vs. FOX. Look at who’s in the White House.
Whatever happened to that guy who wrote on this site, “soon the networks will be just a few of millions of urls on the web. Shortly after the 08 elections the network newscasts will go dark...” Who was that guy and is he still here?
You’re right. Too many on our side think that because they don’t watch ABCBSNBC that they don’t matter.
Totally naive and incorrect. Their audience dwarfs Fox News’s audience.
Many people seem not to have noticed that the MSM is not static. It is not composed of only the dying old newspapers and alphabet over-the-air broadcast networks of yesteryear. It now includes Facebook and social media, the entertainment industry, the Huff Post and leftist websites, and foreign information agencies of like mind. Of special importance is the university system and lower level schoos which require (yes, REQUIRES) students take pseudo-intellectual coursework that is decidely leftist in foundation to receive degrees. Any information-producing organization is a part of the overall system that shapes popular beliefs. I can also speak from years of experience inside these organizations that peer-pressure to conform to the leftist viewpoint is much greater than anything experienced by traditional Americans. A standard tactic is to ridicule opposing views so that none but the strongest independent personalities would dare consider thinking or speaking otherwise. Again, the peer pressure is great on minorities and young people. Your ideas cannot triumph unless the sea of propaganda and the peer-pressure is countered. That is where the action must take place.
Evan Thomas of Newsweek (now defunct), estimated that the liberal bias of the MSM was worth 5 - 8 percent in a national election.
The question is, what do we do about it?
Great article documenting the role the liberal media played in promoting Obama’s re-election. Ping to Today show list.
Same here. Most conservative outlets are preaching to the choir and don’t deny their conservative bias. The MSM is “supposedly objective, have been proclaimed as such from their inception,and people still retain some perception that they are. And as you say, they still reach many more people than do conservative outlets. Fox, merely by not being biased to the left like the other alphabets, was pasted with the conservative label though they never really have been so.
We need to look at people’s motives for voting Democrat. I think that many people vote Democrat because of fear. They are fearful people. The Democrats take advantage of their fear. The Republicans need to learn how to take advantage of their fear. The proper thing would be to make them courageous and strong, but that’s a mighty big task. Probably impossible for most of them. Take advantage of their fear, but for good reasons. The Democrat leaders take advantage of their fear to put money in their, the leader’s, pockets.
“Understand yourself and understand your opponent, and in one hundred battles, you will not be defeated.”
While we can talk about the obvious, what is there to do. The MSM is the bully on the playground. Most of the MSM is ignorant or socialists or both. They believe whatever they hear even from Jon Stewart. MSM is progressive/socialist propaganda machine that almost never has a conservative viewpoint except if it is negative. They are controlling and proud of it and there isn't too much anyone can do. Someone prove me wrong, please.
The only people who can change the situation are the wealthy conservatives who gave hundreds of millions to the right-leaning super PACs. This money was then flushed down the toilet and the utility bill was paid to the MSM.
If anyone knows large conservative donors, they need to tell them stop giving to Rove et al. and start buying up media properties. It is the only way to change our situation.
I just posted this as a new thread. It contains a brief analysis on what would have been a better way to spend the vast sums Conservatives spent on the past election, with respect to use of the mass media: [Obama Or America--Clarity On Irreconcilable Differences]
William Flax
William Flax
Conservative media caters to the informed electorate, those who care about politics and the fate of the nation. That's why we're always stunned that stupid people vote for 0bama. Any acquaintance with the facts shows just how vile this impostor is.
Most the people I work with ..only hear the headlines, and that’s all MSM news is about.. Headlines.
Romney: “Okay to let Detroit go bankrupt”
(not even his headline)... so people read the headline, don’t bother with the article, on account’a it’s has some big words in it there..... and voila... they say “well, I’m not be a vot’n for dat guy”...
A few months back, several posts here referenced a survey in which 60% of respondents indicated that they did not consider the MSM credible—That result is not insignificant.
Regardless, for whatever reason, the Republican party seems reluctant to articulate what it stands for. (Maybe it doesn’t know, at this point.) I firmly believe that a combination of not conveying a strong conservative message, and turning-off the evangelical/conservative/TEA Party wing, sealed Romney’s fate.
The MSM lies about Democrats, and it lies about Republicans. Any Republican/conservative who thinks otherwise is a fool.
Reagan showed the way—Bypass the media and go straight to the people. Funny how often that success is overlooked.
Conservatives must invade and ultimately re-take the institutions of our culture for which we have had little but disdain for a generation or more.
This is how the left took control - by infiltrating our top universities, our charities, our school systems, our media outlets, our libraries, our museums, our symphonies, our government bureaucracies - from the federal level down to the merest municipality.
Rather than taking a swipe at Ivy League schools, at Big Media, at the NEA, we must invade and gain access to these places and change them from the inside out, in part using similar means to those used by those who took them from us.
Big-money conservatives need to invest in television broadcasting and news. I think Glenn Beck is going to try something like this. Fox has moved to the Left, and the MSM, MSNBC, and CNN are now Marxist front groups. I think a conservative television network, complete with courageous, crusading reporters (who don’t care if they’re invited to the latest Sally Quinn/Bradley Brie-and-Vin soiree’), and a free network presence, would change the minds of low-information voters.
If anyone knows large conservative donors, they need to tell them stop giving to Rove et al. and start buying up media properties.
If I knew some I would. I am just a pea in the peopod of life. But, I hope your idea gets some momentum because by next election we will be facing the same lenin leaning MSM again.
“...complete with courageous, crusading reporters...”
That's a great idea. Except for the fact that conservatives seldom thing to become journalists - who wants to go become part of the Beast? - and most schools that provide journalism credentials are controlled by the left.
We need to re-take the more basic institutions of our culture, the premier of these being our educational institutions.
sitetest
“seldom thing to become” should be “seldom think to become”
We need to do a mass march on the networks.
We need to buy an over-the-air network and can all the liberals.
I’ve done a lot of reading since the election and I now conclude that Romney lost because of organized massive voter fraud. The voters, poll operators, machines, vote counting agencies, are all corrupt. To let this slip by without widespread investigations is derelict of duty.
ping
I’m with you. Democrats have gotten away with voter fraud for so many years that they’re getting sloppy with it. And obvious....
Obama the other day was talking about how he liked some of Romney's ideas - yeah - that's because Romney HAD ideas. What dems have is 'tactics' and thuggery, and scams ... That what dems are good at - third world type thuggery. But they know and we know they can't buy voters if the productive people of this society don't give them money...
If we let dems 'govern' based on their ideas, they'll fail.
In the meantime our job should be to shore up the vote - keep the creepy little totalitarians from stealing our right to vote and with it, our future.
I always thought that the conservatives (not necessarily the Republicans) should reject and fight back against the straw men arguments set up in interviews, be it the Sunday shows, debates,etc. I thought Romney missed a great opportunity to slam both Schiefer and Candy Crugly about the contect of the questions, much like what Newt did.
Instead of playing nice nice, they need to call out the hypocracy every single change they get.
No way they figure it out before the SS Progressive goes under. No way. They threw all of that hope over the side and it's smart enough to swim back to shore.
I’m not buying the premise. Buckwheat’s win can be explained in two words: Voter fraud.
Republicans and conservatives have huge majorities in states. In 2010, republicans completely controlled 25 states. In 2012, that number grew to 30 states. In state-wide races, rats are being thrown out of office all across the country. Rats have lost 700 state legislative seats since 2008. The propaganda press wasn’t effective in the states.
Goebbels would have envied our MSM.
Sure Republicans won in 2010. But that was only because the Dems did not vote.
See this link for the sad reality of American politics:
http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/01/trend-in-party-identification-1939-2012/
There was only 1 point since 1939 that Republicans have outnumbered Democrats among surveys of adults (note: not voters or likely voters)
Until we admit that we have a huge cultural relevance problem, we will continue to lose.
In the founding era journalism consisted of notoriously independent printers, and newspapers were weeklies. In the middle of the Nineteenth Century, the telegraph network was built up, and the Associated Press united the printers, even tho they remain nominally independent. The crucial independence which printers gave up in joining the AP lies in the assumption - essential to the exploitation of the telegraph - that all reporters within the AP network are objective. If that isn’t taken for granted, the printer has no basis for trusting reports from journalists in distant cities whom he has never even met, let alone vetted and hired. That explains the massive propaganda campaign promoting journalistic objectivity as the default assumption. The public has been subjected to that propaganda barrage since the memory of living man runneth not to the contrary.Whatever happened to that guy who wrote on this site, “soon the networks will be just a few of millions of urls on the web. Shortly after the 08 elections the network newscasts will go dark...” Who was that guy and is he still here?But if you look at all critically at the “journalistic objectivity" assumption, it crumbles of its own weight. The reality of journalistic perspective is quite distant from objectivity. The perspective which inheres in journalism is that the things which happened recently are important, and that the things that changed quickly are more important than those which change slowly, or not at all. Things which happen rarely are important, while things which usually happen are of no significance. And bad things are more important than good things.
The fundamental fact is that nobody can be certain of their own objectivity. That being the case, the most that can be expected is a good-faith effort at objectivity - and any such effort must begin with an open examination of the reasons why one might not be objective. The problem with that, tho, is that openness about the reasons you might not be objective would tend to negate the claim that you actually are objective. Any claim of actual objectivity is incompatible with any good-faith attempt at objectivity. And membership in an organization (e.g., the AP) which you know will claim objectivity for you is tantamount to claiming objectivity for yourself.
abb
“Sure Republicans won in 2010. But that was only because the Dems did not vote.”
Republicans won in 2008 and 2012 when rats allegedly turned out in force. I’m not buying what you’re selling. The numbers of conservatives and republicans in state legislatures speak for themselves.
Instead of throwing a chart at me, try explaining why republicans are dominating state legislative races. I’m on your side and am not picking a fight. I’m simply looking for a reasonable explanation of why conservatives dominate state races and lose national races. My reasoned judgment tells me voter fraud. Many of these ballots have only obuma’s name marked on the ballot. That doesn’t make sense.
He's already got something going. The Blaze TV . It has his show plus The Real News with a cast of younger people discussing the day's news, and several other good shows.
He wants to expand- Give the MSM a run for their money, but it takes finances to get it off the ground, and keep it rolling.
I urge all Freeper's (and especially any Big money Repubs) to read the article here- It's spot on- then go to Glenn Beck's site and sign up for the 14 day free trial. See for yourself what he's up to- It's free- Then please back him him up in what he's trying to do.
He's got the plans, and the ability to get them going. He just needs the support to make it happen. What he's trying to build is exactly what we need now.
We have GOT to get caught up in these areas. It's cost us sooo much to not understand the effects of the MSM and how they operate in our society.
As for the election disaster- IMHO Mitt Romney lost to Big Bird.
The minute he made that statement about not funding Sesame Street at the debate- I knew the MSM was going to take it and run with it. It played into every negative stereotype of our side there is i.e.-mean spirited, cold, greedy ,against-the-children.
If Mitt and his team , had taken the time to understand how the MSM plays this game- in election after election- he would have never given them that advantage.
Still, he might have been able to salvage it, if he had used it to illustrate our cause i.e. -by explaining how much the Sesame Street people make (guy who plays Big Bird gets BIG buks), how much they make in merchandising and so on.. and then tie it to , a small business trying to pay its taxes.
Say that the business has to lay off workers to pay its taxes, in order to give Sesame Street money they don't really need.
Make the point that this is totally unfair to the laid off workers, so, asking Sesame Street to pay for itself is NOT an example of repubs " being mean to BIG BIRD".
( And it would shock most people to know how much they -Sesame Street- do get=big $$$$$$$ on top of the government money.)
He could have used it to MAKE PEOPLE THINK about what each of the parties REALLY stands for and what happens when you give them power i.e.Free Stuff" IS NOT FREE.
(Now we get to learn this lesson the hard way.)
Mitt could also have pointed out the bias of the MSM- how they play on people's emotions -and they do NOT show both sides. (They never WILL either.)
And he said little to nothing about Obama's so called health plan. Not one Republican was for it. They didn't even read it before passing it, and its a total financial and medical nightmare.
He should have been reminding people every day-in detail- about all the things that got the Tea Party started in the first place-the death panels , massive debt, and all the other horrors we had forgotten about (but now will sadly, be subjected to). Little was said about it. Now our health system-the best in the world- is in ruins. Tragic
(I don't even want to say anything about the wide spread voter fraud-been saying it for over 10 years -the repubs have done little to nothing. If they don't fix it- they might as well go home now and wait for the overlord's to tell us all what to do.-uGHHHH!!!).
It's too late for now, but maybe, if there's anything left of this country, after 4 more years of Marxism , maybe the Pubs will grow a spine, and figure out how to win.
God help us.
Good questions.
We now have a Republican supermajority here in the Indiana legistature and a Republican governor.
But Romney ran well ahead of the Republican governor.
So we’re not much of a case study.
Yeh, this is getting SO OLD. The repubs need to insist, next time (if there is a "next time") to ONLY attend debates moderated by both sides. One from theirs (MSM), one from ours (Rush, Mark, Sean).
Each side asks one question, then other side gets to ask the next one, and so on.
This would make the debates interesting and informative, instead of the boring "Got ya" sessions they are now.
Yes, I’m still here, but I don’t spend as much time here as I used to. I spend a lot of time on my own newsblog trying to do what I can to change the complexion of news reporting in my local area.
Everyone here on FRee Republic pretty much is in agreement on what is conservatism and why it is a good thing. It’s really a waste of our time to stay in the echo chamber reinforcing each others worldview.
It’s the rest of the electorate who needs educating.
And for the record, I intend to stay here on FRee Republic for as long as it lasts, or I pass on, whichever comes first.
FR is but a training ground to educate each other on how to teach the unwashed on why conservatism is a superior political theory. All we have to do is spread the good word.
We have the technological tools to do it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.