Skip to comments.
Spot the Difference [Lying Media Dissected in WSJ]
The Wall Street Journal ^
| 11-12-03
| DAVID W. BRADY and JONATHAN MA
Posted on 11/12/2003 5:36:44 AM PST by Pharmboy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
This is the best way to defeat the evildoers: numbers, numbers and numbers. Objective data tallied up and put forth--Anne Coulter does a great job with references as does Bernie Goldberg in his citation of fact after fact.
[Sorry--but I could not get the table to read as easily as I would have liked--but you can still get the point]
It is building toward a tsunami aginst the media elites.
1
posted on
11/12/2003 5:36:45 AM PST
by
Pharmboy
To: Timesink
Oh it's Schadenfreude time again! *Ping*
2
posted on
11/12/2003 5:37:53 AM PST
by
Pharmboy
(Dems lie 'cause they have to...)
To: Pharmboy
What? No "Atilla the Hun" conservatives?
I think I'm under-represented!
3
posted on
11/12/2003 5:45:03 AM PST
by
G.Mason
(Lessons of life need not be fatal)
To: Pharmboy
I.e., The Propaganda Machine is a propaganda machine.
4
posted on
11/12/2003 5:46:05 AM PST
by
Savage Beast
(Happiness is the best IQ test.)
To: Pharmboy
Great article, but -ack-, the link doesn't work!
Qwinn
5
posted on
11/12/2003 5:46:38 AM PST
by
Qwinn
To: Qwinn
Whoops--meant to say that this is a subscription and you can't get there from here.
6
posted on
11/12/2003 5:50:09 AM PST
by
Pharmboy
(Dems lie 'cause they have to...)
To: Pharmboy
We actually got something done about "the Reagans" TV smear. Does anyone care about the network news shows and their shrinking audience ?
To: Qwinn
Here's the correctred link to the home page, but you STILL can't get to the editorial without signing up.
I hope the WSJ considers this post an ad for their fine journalism and they increase their subscription base from Freepers.
8
posted on
11/12/2003 5:53:03 AM PST
by
Pharmboy
(Dems lie 'cause they have to...)
To: Pharmboy
This is the best way to defeat the evildoers: numbers, numbers and numbers. Objective data tallied up and put forth--Anne Coulter does a great job with references as does Bernie Goldberg in his citation of fact after fact. Certainly it is necessary, but IMHO not sufficient. After you have seen enough evidence to satisfy you that there is "bias in the media," the question naturally follows, "What is to be done?" And that question cries out for an analysis of, "Why does 'bias in the media' exist?"
I reached that stage twenty years ago. I started this thread two years ago to get people to challenge my thinking on the issue to help me clarify my opinion on the matter. I am far more interested in clarifying why the problem exists, and what remedies can prudently be attempted, than any other topic which is frequently discussed.
9
posted on
11/12/2003 6:05:38 AM PST
by
conservatism_IS_compassion
(The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
To: Pharmboy
This article offers empirical evidence of what we have observed, but the bias extends much deeper: the selection and framing of issues, the avoidance of embarrassing events (the Rockefeller "Molotov Cocktail" Memo, and Bush's speeches on advancing "The Age of Liberty"), the choice of guest and the counterpart (often to ensure liberal dominance), softball versus hardball questions (Russert decimating Gore and Edwards were notable because such an occurrence was so rare), the failure of the host to cutoff a liberal interrupting or otherwise encroaching on other guest's time, the repetition of unfavorable news for the other side (overemphasis on reporting war deaths and failures in Iraq at the expense of stories about progress made -- Hardball's look this week is unique for MSNBC), the invitation to give the "last word" (more resonance), etc. And that's just off the top.
Here's a Display of Propaganda Techniques
Here's a Polling Site for Those with Much Time
10
posted on
11/12/2003 6:10:05 AM PST
by
OESY
To: Eric in the Ozarks
Does anyone care about the network news shows and their shrinking audience?Unfortunately, the people generally have access to broadcast but not always to cable. The effect is strong--and it is not an accident but an effect of government censorship.
11
posted on
11/12/2003 6:14:58 AM PST
by
conservatism_IS_compassion
(The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
To: Pharmboy
Well, I'm just amazed. Imagine that!
Seriously, I don't know that there is anything that can or should be done about the inequities in major US newspapers. Some papers are going to be conservative and some liberal, just as in the past some were Democrat, some Whig. The Washington Post has the legal right to represent the Imperialist, Stalinist, Trotskyite, Nazi, or left-liberal viewpoint. If we start restricting their ability to print whatever stupidity they wish, the next time they get into power--and they will get into power again--they will have the legal firepower to restrict ours.
What I find interesting and disturbing is that the liberal bias sells. You'll notice that the Washington Times, which is a fine newspaper offering a satisfying accumulation of right-wing columnists and news stories written from the right-wing perspective, can't compete with the Washington Post. Even many conservatives I know read the Post and not the Times. The Times could not survive economically if it didn't have financial backing. Its subscription rates are low and its ad pages a joke.
The fact is that cities, where major US newspaper pick up their subscribers and generate ad revenues, are located in cities, are bastions of Democratic strength. If there's a way to combat this demographic I can't think of it.
I agree that bias in the broadcast media is a much more serious issue, particularly in taxpayer funded sources like NPR. But I am at a loss to know how to alter or regulate this. As long as journalism schools keep graduating lefties and the American public keeps buying their work, left-wing bias is going to be a problem.
12
posted on
11/12/2003 6:43:38 AM PST
by
Capriole
(Foi vainquera)
To: conservatism_IS_compassion
"Why does 'bias in the media' exist?" Easy, when a democratic government has the power to control property, all it takes to control the marketplace is to manipulate public opinion. Control of communications media to consolidate political forces becomes the means to control the factors of production and the key to the control of wealth.
There's a reason they call it, "our democracy."
13
posted on
11/12/2003 6:44:55 AM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(The environment is too complex and too important to manage by politics.)
To: Pharmboy
bump
14
posted on
11/12/2003 6:52:57 AM PST
by
VOA
To: Pharmboy
Not-News Ping ...
15
posted on
11/12/2003 6:54:48 AM PST
by
Phaedrus
To: Eric in the Ozarks
Does anyone care about the network news shows and their shrinking audience ? This is why so many of these media outlets are conglomerately owned. Like Walmart, they can accept losses in this area when the business is bolstered elsewhere. The news is a tool to them, not a business. If they really cared about ratings and viewership, they would learn something from FNC.
16
posted on
11/12/2003 7:00:09 AM PST
by
pgyanke
("If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you behave." Ar-Bshp Fulton Sheen)
To: Pharmboy
bump
17
posted on
11/12/2003 7:06:49 AM PST
by
Pest
To: Pharmboy
IMHO this is a dangerous trend in the media. Most of it stems from the "J" schools who pump out poorly educated, poorly prepared people who claim the "journalist" label. What a shame that such a noble profession has decended to this level and no wonder journalists are among the least respected people in this country.
If they are not willing to do something to correct this, they will deserve the disgust and ridicule they receive from the American people.
Too bad most of them aren't bright enough to know how much they are being laughed at.
To: OESY
... (overemphasis on reporting war deaths and failures in Iraq at the expense of stories about progress made -- Hardball's look this week is unique for MSNBC) Speaking of casualities in Iraq, as a former Marine I like to make this comparison. More Marines and Navy personnel died in the first hour on Iwo Jima during WWII then have been KIA in Gulf War I (Desert Storm) and the the Irag conflict to date. This includes all branches of the U.S. military and coalition forces in both conflicts.
19
posted on
11/12/2003 7:07:22 AM PST
by
BluH2o
To: Pharmboy
The radio station that carries RUSH and Sean here is a cBS affiliate and the network news on the hour is so blatantly slanted left I could smash the radio. It's the tone of their delivery and their emphasis on key negative words is beyond sanity...
20
posted on
11/12/2003 7:30:01 AM PST
by
tubebender
(FReeRepublic...How bad have you got it...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson