Posted on 04/14/2004 7:46:27 AM PDT by Pikamax
But are you willing to admit it's your fault? Will accept blame? Do you feel guilty?
So the public is wising up to what the media has been doing...
Why is that a problem?
Actually the public wising up to what the media has been doing IS the problem. Note that starting this month Free Republic has to EXCERPT the Boston Globe.
They don't like the line by line criticism.
Shining the light of truth causes the 'Rats and roaches to run.
Of course they didn't - hiring decisions took care of that. The employee deck was already stacked with liberal leaning reporters that see eye-to-eye with the editors.
The problem with this article is two-fold:
1) The article focuses on the wrong issue - I suspect advertiser and financial bias is there, but is not a big motivator for news slant.
and
2) the prevalence of ideological bias - which is rampant - receives minimal mention.
Gee, Boston Globe, you think we don't know what a straw man is? Oh boo-hoo - I feel so awful about what the public thinks of you! How ironic that you support our reservations with a slanted article on the very issue.
Very true:
Watts blasts Reuters over T-word: Congressman urges media giant to call terrorists 'terrorists'
Posted on 10/04/2001
Rep. J.C. Watts, Jr., R.-Okla., is urging the London-based Reuters news service to reconsider its recently stated position of not using the word "terrorist" to describe the 19 Islamic terrorists who collectively killed approximately 6,000 Americans Sept. 11.
Lying liars:
Accidental Houston Chronicle memo admits to tainting the news with political agenda
There isn't a more critical issue on the horizon. I propose a series of editorials, editorial cartoons and Sounding Board columns leading up to the rail referendum, with this specific objective: Continuing our long standing efforts to make rail a permanent part of the transit mix here.The timing, language and approach of the paper's editorials would, of course, be the decision of the Editorial Board. But I suggest that they could be built upon and informed by a news-feature package with an equally specific focus...
Do they really think this was an isolated case???
Jann Wener gave millions to Salon to boost the company out of bankruptcy raised the stock from 5 cents a share to nearly 40 cents. Today (just over 2 months from his buy-in) that stock is around 14 cents a share.
Some on the left are well-heeled (like Soros and the investors in Air America). The left can afford to sell the public propaganda; it is a lie to claim that all business owners are conservative/republican just because they have money. I think that some of the left's ugliest assumptions about conservatives come from their projected self-hate at what type of person they are despite their money.
Also "market share" is a relative concept. In Boston there are 2 daily papers but here in Houston, thanks to approval of a merger by the Clinton Administration, there is only one daily newspaper (and it is unlikely that another will ever be established).
If a newspaper has a monopoly and is the only game in town, there is less imperative to be kept in check. Some advertisers will always support the paper regardless of content because apart from direct mailing, there is no way to get their ad supplements to the public every week.
That must have been a rough childhood
I think the political disconnect, and the unethical shaping and spin of the news to support their political agenda, and their blatant attempts to influence elections is the biggest disconnect.
But I think the profit motive is also a disconnect and it's made worse by their misconception of what we want. The press believes shock value sells and it's the reason why Janet Jackson's boob was displayed repeatedly and longer on newsshows than the original superbowl plot. They shamelessly hype non-events and seek out those who trash traditional values to make news out of them.
There's always John Hockenberry, who is in a wheelchair as a result of injuries he received many years ago in a serious traffic accident. He has been a national network reporter for decades, formerly at NBC and now (IIRC) at ABC News. He always is shown in the wheelchair - he doesn't want the crew to hide that fact a la FDR.
As Bernard Goldberg writes in his book "BIAS," the media really doesn't see itself as biased, since it only hires people who all think alike. They all think they're "middle of the road" and "sensible" - except that the middle of that road is the stripe that runs down Broadway in New York City. In NY, they ARE "middle of the road." But they're considerably to the left of the REST of America.
They all think the NY Times is a reasonable unbiased newspaper - because they always agree with its style of reporting and its view of what is news and what isn't. In fact, this last item - bias by omission - is one of the media's greatest failings. They leave out needed perspective ("Record High Gas Prices") or flat out don't cover stories detrimental to their worldview("Gorelick Memo Points Finger At Herself As Cause Of Lack Of Communication")
Worse is the fact that most people in the media are not specialists at any one field. So their reporting on anything of a technical nature is bound to exhibit leaping, bounding errors of fact OR a complete lack of understanding of the field being reported upon. For a while, NBC's Dr. Bob Arnott covered aviation for the net - a good choice since he is, in addition to being an MD, a licensed pilot with IFR and multi-engine ratings. But they cut him loose with the droningly boring Robert Bazell put in his place and Arnott sent to Iraq. When Arnott filed lots of stories about how well the war and peace were going, they let his contract expire. Now, Bob Hager does aviation reporting for NBC, but he doesn't apparently have ANY background in it. And that's the norm.
As someone else said here, the bias starts with the hiring process - which itself is comprised of Tape and Resume. If you get hired, you've already proven that you air stories in the style the network likes.
Michael
Bush Is Stumped on Question of Mistakes
See what you think about this thread.
Good News! The reporters didn't give Kerry an easy time in his press conference. Kerry's performance was pathetic and included a stunning admission that he considers stability a greater priority in Iraq than democracy>
Kerry was snippy with reporters and denied his gaffe!
Ladies and Gentlemen, Kerry is not going to be your next president!!!
BINGO!
The major networks and CNN have seen their share of market steadily erode. MSNBC can't get out of the cellar. Yet, none of them are prepared to face, much less admit, the obvious: their transparent leftward bias is destroying their viewership, thus their profitability.
The principals quoted in this article even dance around the issue. Like the good socialists they are, they stubbornly attribute their declining credibility to viewers distrusting their corporate profit motive. They hold themselves blameless -- because their motive solely concerns the "public interest" (as they define it, of course).
The journalism "profession" is a veritable swamp of self-delusion.
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.