[Copernicus]

Posted to *CCRM

[Batrachian]

"Even though we knew you favored the more liberal side of the issue, you covered both perspectives. We appreciated that and respected you for it.

But then came the election of 2000 and the Florida recount, and, from the perspective of people like me, everything changed."

Does this person really think that the mainstream media only became biased after 2000?

[Let's Roll]

Of course we haven't stopped watching the nightly news - it's so important to me that I tape it to watch when I get home. It's just that it's FOX News and Brit Hume now.

[Empireoftheatom48]

They lost me long before 2000. Thank God for FOX, Rush, Hannity and the internet!

[I still care]

Interesting to see this article today. I wonder where the media was during the pro-life march in January. I saw nary a mention on broadcast news.

But they are following the proaborts today, aren't they?

[Drango]

Mike Bellah teaches English at Amarillo College.

I nominate Mike for mayor, congress or whatever....

[jerryrivers]

Dan,Tom and Peter: Walking vomit.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

"In short, Dan, Peter and Tom, we haven't left you; you've left us. Come back to us and we'll come back to you."

In short, DanRatherbiased, Petah and Brokejaw, don't come back. Stay over there and I'll stay over here. I like it this way.

[Common Tator]

Nah.. those anchors are not doing anything they have not done for years.

The only difference is we now have the internet to tell us the truth.

Did our military suffer a defeat or victory in the Tet offencive in Viet Nam. Brokaw, Cronkite and Rather said it was a massive defeat because we were out smarted . They told us the South Vietnamese did not care enuough to defend their own nation.

Now we know it was a great victory for our side due in large part becuase the South Vietnamese forces deafeated the North Vietnamese attackers. But back then we had no way to know the truth. The media as our only source.

Did the media tell us of Clinton's and his sexual exploits? Or did they surpress them until Drugde on the internet blew the whistle on him.

Did Dan Rather and Cronkite tell us that Jimmy Carter out debated Ronald Reagan in 1980? They sure did. Those that did not watch the debates were certain that Jimmy bested Ronnie.

Did the media get upset when Democrats broke into Barry Goldwaters campaign headquarters to screw it up? Did they do anything in congress when the guys who did it wrote a book after the election braging about it?

Did the media get upset when Republicans broke into the DNC in 1972 to find out what the Democrats were up to?

Did the media get upset when Ikes Chief of staff took a wool coat from a South American goverment to promote its wool producing sheep? Yes he had to resign.

Did the media get upset when Clinton took tons of loot from the Chinese using Gore was the bag man?

I can give you a thouand examples. The media has always been biased.

What they have yet to figure out is that a large number of us have caught them in the act and no longer believe them.

The only thing different from 20 years aog is sites like FR. FR prevents the leftist media from gettting away with it. As people find out, they stop viewing.

The first requirement to be a media elite is to believe that the Little People are "Stupid."

It will be their downfall. It has already started.

[prairiebreeze]

We haven't stopped watching nightly news.

Yes, we have.

Come back to us and we'll come back to you.

No, we won't.

Prairie

[Looking4Truth]

Old Media becomes more irrelevant each day. I haven't watched 'network' news in years. I get all of my 'news' information from the internet. That way I don't have to hear all the hollywood fluff that is in each newscast, much less the ultra commie bias that is prevalent in Old Media.

[Maria S]

I am really encouraging everyone to get a copy of “Hillary’s Secret War…The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists” by Richard Poe. Among other things, it details how so many of us have turned to the internet…and talk radio.

I mentioned, on another thread, that hellinahandcart’s 911 discussion thread is mentioned (page 227). Other freepers mentioned in the book: Fred 25m usin35, truthkeeper, Cicero, NTNgod, artios, Hillary’s Lovely Legs, homegrown, Tennessee_Bob, The Game Hen, Areafiftyone, BurkeanCyclist, BigWaveBetty, Catspaw, Frogmom, Freefly, Liberal Classic, TheFactor, and Wingnutsn Bolts. Probably a bunch more…I just haven’t gotten to them yet!

Get a copy of this book, Folks…lots of good info just in case Hillary DOES run for president!

[lowbridge]

Of course, there were controversial issues even then (the abortion debate, for instance), but we still felt represented.

No we didnt.

It seemed to us that you strove for objectivity.

No it didnt.

Even though we knew you favored the more liberal side of the issue, you covered both perspectives.

No they didnt

We appreciated that and respected you for it.

No we didnt.

[Rome2000]

It was pretty pathetic looking at these sorry SOB's anchors on the networks the day Saddam was caught.

[CFC__VRWC]

Then came 9/11, a tragedy that seemed to bring us together again. In the days following that horrible attack, we were not Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives; we were just Americans. We all resolved to comfort the survivors and punish the perpetrators. We watched you again in the war in Afghanistan. Though you still presented a liberal slant, you strove for fairness, and, more importantly, you seemed to celebrate the success of America, even if it came under a conservative administration.

Which newscasts was this guy watching? Even before the dust from the WTC had settled on 9/11/01, the networks were all but calling President Bush a coward because he didn't go immediatlely rushing back to Washington, even though we still had no clue as to what other targets the terrorists had selected. Peter, Dan and Tom were carping nonstop about how Bush had "failed his first test of leadership." It was only after it became abundantly clear that the American people were absolutely NOT GOING TO TOLERATE the normal petty ideological media sniping at the President that the networks backed off the Bush-bashing and pretended to support him for a short while.

Once President Bush made the decision to invade Afghanistan, all we heard from the media was nothing but carping and bitching and negativity. We heard all about how the mighty Taliban was going to humiliate our armed forces, how the mujahadeen had routed the Soviet Union and we couldn't possibly do better. This was the first time we heard the mention of the media's most prized word for a military action initiated by a Republican administration, quagmire. Once we rolled up Afghanistan like a cheap carpet and sent the Taliban fleeing into the hills, the media promptly switched to pimping al-Jazeera-style accounts of "atrocities" commited by our troops, and started telling us all about how we hadn't accomplished anything, how the Taliban hadn't been routed but had merely engaged in a "strategic retreat."

I could go on and on, but I'd be here for days. Simply put, the mainstream media has been against this administration and against this nation since the first WTC tower was hit.

[kcar]

Tell it to the mountain. Actually, nobody I am friends with ever plans to watch them (or CNN or MSNBC) ever again. CBS has been blocked since the Reagan movie.

Back to the letter, I can see the Network chiefs saying, no, don't read that one, read this one instead:

Dear Tom/Dan/Peter: Why were the Networks so easy on the Scrub at the last press conference? Really, you're just too nice and polite.

[mcenedo]

Mike Bellah teaches English at Amarillo College.

When even college English teachers start to notice the bias, you've got to question the sanity of any intelligent human being who believes network news.

[Peach]

Network News Anchors = Old Media.

Just as Rumsfeld called France and Germany parts of Old Europe, the Old Media does not realize just how out of step they are.

[Kirkwood]

Biased since at least 1973 (Watergate era - bad, bad Republicans!) and even before that for Cronkite.