Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The ABC's of Media Bias (Communist Moles Run the MSM)
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | Thursday, October 14, 2004 | Lowell Ponte

Posted on 10/19/2009 7:15:18 PM PDT by DaveTesla

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
We wonder why the MSM is biased in favor of Left wing Canidates.

Their not BIASED, their fellow communist travelers.

Read about Mark Halperin at ABC and his father Morton.
Rich in treacherous history.

1 posted on 10/19/2009 7:15:18 PM PDT by DaveTesla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

When did political bias in the worldwide MSM exactly start?


2 posted on 10/19/2009 7:18:14 PM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Conservatives obey the rules. Leftists cheat. Who probably has the political advantage?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
If I had my guess id say back in the 50’s to early 60's.

I don't think it is bias it is communist propaganda.

Slowly they have gained total control.

3 posted on 10/19/2009 7:24:36 PM PDT by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

Exactly. it is sad.


4 posted on 10/19/2009 7:27:15 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore

Cronkite.


5 posted on 10/19/2009 7:27:52 PM PDT by MotorCityBuck (Page 73, Johnson, Navin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

bookmark.


6 posted on 10/19/2009 7:30:02 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

Lowell Ponte? 2004?


7 posted on 10/19/2009 7:33:08 PM PDT by csmusaret (Obama. The master of Jack, Squat, and the Nobel committee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

bfl


8 posted on 10/19/2009 7:33:26 PM PDT by gibsosa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret
Same people causing the mess today.

I heard a Republican quote the Center For American progress
using data that they provided for his reason for voting for Cap and Trade.

In 2004 Nobody paid a lot of mind to this.
Now that the white House is openly flaunting it's
lovers of communism right in front of us.

Read about 2/3 the way down about Morton Halpern, the
Pentagon papers and the Communist spy Phillip Agee.

9 posted on 10/19/2009 7:41:39 PM PDT by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
When did political bias in the worldwide MSM exactly start?

There's always been media bias but in past times it was mostly out in the open, not sneaky and posing as "objective" reporting.

Strong Communist influence in the media began at least as early as the 1920s. Read "Witness" by Whittaker Chambers for a glimpse of how it was. The current generation of vipers snuggled into secure, safe places during WW II and under cover of the Vietnam anti-war movement.

There have been repeated attempts to expose it, as in this fairly recent piece, but the public was apathetic and comfortable. Those who gave warning were considered "paranoid."

10 posted on 10/19/2009 7:53:52 PM PDT by Bernard Marx ("Civilizations die by suicide, not from murder" Toynbee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla
They are fools. I agree that they are "flaunting' their communism now.

Their problem is that now, they no longer have a monopoly on information, and more and more people trust them less and less. They will always have the idiot-bloc that is too zombified to question anything they say to them, but they are more or less preaching to the choir. The MSM isn't going to create many "converts" to their cause. They can merely keep the ones they already have in their audience placated. Yes, it's a sizable chunk of America that is too stupid to even know what communism is or what the history of communism is, but there is also a sizable chunk of this population that has brains, and in the end, these commie idiots are going to lose, one way or the other. I'll take 100 thinking patriots against 1000 morons with their hands out any day, and face it, if someone likes Obama and believes what the MSM tells them, how smart can they be anyway? The main audience for the MSM are the idiots of the world. Smart people that don't like having their intelligence insulted on a daily basis have moved on to other news outlets.

The alternative media is exposing these lying traitors every day, and every day, the MSM becomes less credible than the day before. The newspapers are in such trouble that Obammy said he'd entertain the idea of bailing them out. lol. The lead communist helping out his propagandists. Let him do it. That will be about as popular as ramming his commie-care down everyone's throat.

11 posted on 10/19/2009 8:06:18 PM PDT by smedley64 (Sun Tzu trumps Alinsky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: smedley64
"they no longer have a monopoly on information,"

You think of the Internet. But they hold info that is really matters: schools and universities.

"and more and more people trust them less and less."

Is that why we have a socialist president now? Is that why, after he showed himself fully, his approval rating is still above 40%?

12 posted on 10/19/2009 8:21:47 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
“But they hold info that is really matters: schools and universities.”

Spot on!

Then they march out of the universities and take jobs in
our industry and run it straight into the ground.

I understand why Horowitz spends most of his time fighting inside of the university's.

It is the proverbial front line.

13 posted on 10/19/2009 8:38:03 PM PDT by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Put it this way: Does the populace have more choices to be informed now than they did 30 years ago?

Sure, we have a socialist president now, but his popularity is among the lowest of all time so early into his first term. You're touting his "above 40%" approval rating as some sort of evidence of his enormous popularity? Ok...

I'd like to see his popularity near zero too, but these things take time. Did you expect him to go from 65-70% approval to 20% in 9 months? That's a stretch. If it wasn't for a vocal alternative media, he'd be waaaaay above 40% right now.

14 posted on 10/19/2009 8:41:09 PM PDT by smedley64 (Sun Tzu trumps Alinsky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: smedley64
"Put it this way: Does the populace have more choices to be informed now than they did 30 years ago?"

That's where you commit an inadvertently leap of faith. THe fact that something is there does not imply that people will avail themselves of that.

The full truth about the Soviet Union is out there. People of Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil don't avail themselves of it. In our own country, Marx could be seen as wrong on all counts: the data were there. Roosevelt instituted so many socialist reforms that Marx would be proud. Which information was NOT available to Americans?

During the last elections, nobody could find anything that Obama accomplished in his life, in anything he was actually doing. Did people use that information in their choice?

Using information is hard work and not everyone is cut for it. Instead of it people use various biases and rules of thumb (heuristics), which often lead to decisions that are inconsistent with ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION.

P.S. If you'd like to read more on decision-making of this kind, read the words of Kahnemann, Tversky and their colleagues.

15 posted on 10/20/2009 7:56:26 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
My main point is that Obama isn't exactly that popular. Some of you are acting like the guy has palm leaves thrown in front of him wherever he goes. It isn't happening.

The man is a dangerous menace, but people are waking up. 28% strongly approve of him, 40% strongly disapprove. Those are horrific numbers for him after just nine months. Those numbers are horrific because people aren't buying what the MSM is trying to sell them, and they aren't buying Obama either. Sure, 28% are, but so what? It's not like you can have everyone wake up to reality. Many are. That's all I'm saying.

16 posted on 10/20/2009 1:07:21 PM PDT by smedley64 (Sun Tzu trumps Alinsky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MotorCityBuck

1947. The Communists survived the HCUA hearings and forever tsk tsked the threat of Communism. Not that they claimed they weren’t really communists. Just that they posed no threat even when they were working in league with the KGB.


17 posted on 10/20/2009 2:20:01 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The character assassination of Rush Limbaugh is worse than what the Left accused Joe McCarthy of.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla
Leftist activists learned by the 1970’s that mass demonstrations weren't going to change the world and that two junior, police reporters (Woodward and Bernstein) could collapse a presidential administration. Activists flocked to newsrooms and broadcast studios. Today they control the industry and the message.
18 posted on 10/20/2009 2:26:26 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee (A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

Bravo! Thanks. I don’t know how that slipped my mind.


19 posted on 10/20/2009 2:27:55 PM PDT by MotorCityBuck (Page 73, Johnson, Navin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla
If I had my guess id say back in the 50’s to early 60's.

You're giving them way, waaaay too much credit there. You can go back to the 1920s and read Walter Duranty's claims that there really was a multi-year famine in the Ukraine (Stalin didn't starve anyone!), Soviet political trials were fair to the accused (no show trials here!), and that Stalin was a great man.

I know a lot of FReepers pine for the WW2-era press, but honestly, I think the reason they were so gung-ho to beat the Axis Powers had less to do with national security and more to do with how the Nazis had damn near toppled Stalin and the Soviets. If not for Lend-Lease, it would have happened.
20 posted on 10/20/2009 3:06:46 PM PDT by Terpfen (FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson