Posted on 09/08/2008 1:22:08 AM PDT by Luke21
Ever since Spiro Agnew lambasted the press in 1970 as "nattering nabobs of negativism," Republicans have reveled in attacking the national media for its so-called "liberal bias." President George H.W. Bush ran for re-election in 1992 with a bumper sticker that read "Annoy the media: Re-elect Bush." His son, the current President Bush, trotted before cameras in 2001 with a copy of Bernard Goldberg's book on the subject, "Bias," conspicuously cradled in his hand.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Time not biased? Just score based on count of columnists.
The media has become the the guy in the joke who, when his wife discovers him in bed with another woman, flatly denies that the woman is even there, exhorting the wife with: “Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?”
When it comes to media bias, I’m going with my lying eyes.
Very well stated. They cannot be trusted on any political or social story, and watch it when they report on the weather. They’ll even try to use hurricanes to elect Democrats.
Unless the public is right on the cusp of getting sick of all the fawning converage of The One that has been shoved down their throat for a year. Combine that with an attack on a 17 year old pregnant girl, and you have political dynamite.
The best thing about this is that McCain now has to see the press was always using him to get at other Republicans. They could have cared less about McCain, personally or as a politician.
As soon as he IS the Republican, into the dumpster with him. His constituency now includes conservatives. That can only bodes well for the results of a McCain administration--he may actually start taking our opinions into account.
they favorite tactic is one most people don’t realize....they start off talking about what the Rat said, then go to the video clip where the Rat repeats it again, then they might have one line of some Pub saying something....so its two parts Rat to one part Pub.....
Obviously, that anonymous GOP “strategist” is not affiliated with the campaign for a reason.
And how many fricken “strategists” do both parties need, anyways?
Without going beyond the blurb I’ve got one error. “Bias” wasn’t published until February 2003.
Judge Time magazine’s bias by Time magazine’s columnists, and judge the print and broadcast media’s bias by their politics. More than 80% of American reporters who’ll answer the various surveys will admit to voting Democrat in their last election, and public records show more than 80% of the press who’ve donated money to candidates this year have donated to Democrats.
If they aren't biased then they are just epically stupid.
I once heard Pat Buchanan say this same thing, basically that if you have strong personal political views you cannot help but let them seep into your work.
Then of course there are the Keith Olbermann’s of the world who have their agenda and no inclination to try to hide it.
The question assumes it cannot be both at the same time.
Both are true: the media is biased AND it is a good tactic to tell the truth.
Both are facts the media refuses to understand.
LOL
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.