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

To: GenXFreedomFighter
No, they didn't give Clinton a free ride, but some things he pulled were so obviously scandalous that they had to smack him around a little bit. And they do give conservatives airtime, but look at how they're treated in "straight" news coverage (a la Dan Rather) when nobody's being interviewed. As for Clinton being a moderate, he didn't get to be the leftist he wanted to be (see Hillarycare and the 1994 election). Check out Bias by Bernard Goldberg sometime. You'll see what I'm talking about.

I have not read Bias, but I will. Lets say Dan Rather skews his reporting in a pro-Clinton way (which I see no evidence of). He is still one "Liberal" voice compared to the conservative talking head gallery on Meet the Press, This Week (in Washington), and anything on Fox. I am not suggesting that the Media is right wing; I am saying that it is a myth that the Media is control by (and skewed) "liberals". If anything, the media is corporate owned...and I do not believe corporations are liberal

26 posted on 03/18/2002 12:50:47 PM PST by alarma_da
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: alarma_da
If anything, the media is corporate owned...and I do not believe corporations are liberal

What makes you think that? Generally speaking, corporations are profit oriented, so I can understand how corporations would not be far leftists, as having their corporation confiscated by the government/workers would be pretty stupid. However, an individual corporation could do quite well under a left-liberal economic regime.

Suppose you have an internet company that also owns a television network. That internet company might be able to destroy all of its competitors if a certain regulation is passed. Sure, the regulation would cost them as well, but the increased profits from their new monopolist position would more than make up for those losses. Is it not conceivable that the corporation's television network might not take a more pro-regulatory stance whenever the proposed regulation is being considered in Congress? (All of this assumes, of course, that the content and bias of a network is determined by the board of directors, which I'm not sure is true).

Even if we say that the corporations are never economic left-liberals, that still leaves them free to be social left-liberals. If a news broadcast is constantly airing anti-gun, anti-smoking, anti-hunting, or anti-homschooling stories, that makes them liberally biased in my book, even if they're not calling for higher taxes or more government spending.

37 posted on 03/19/2002 8:49:16 AM PST by timm22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

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