The news media and Nick Berg

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
Fedral,
Here is how the press works.
If Bush was to see a boat sinking,and he was to walk on the water out to the boat and save all the passengers,here is how the press would report it...BUSH CANT SWIM

Absolutely nothing good will be reported by the media,not if they thought it might help Bush.
As an example,how much have you heard about the Kurds in northern Iraq? Since Saddam was removed,they have opened schools and hospitals,they have full religious tolerance,they are welcoming foreign investment,they have a thirving economy,and they are the model of what Iraq could be if the insurgents would let it.
But,since that would prove to be good for Bush,the press wont report it.
Thats the way the press works and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

It's my opinion that someone with a big tough avatar like yours ought not to be whining like a little girl. Besides, why not give the left the media? After all, bush has the supreme court. :wink:

I will say this,
we finally have a liberal that admits the press has a bias against Bush.Thats a first.
But the last time I studied journalism,the press was supposed to report the news,not slant it.Their job was to give the facts,ALL THE FACTS,and let us decide what to think.
The press has forgotten what they are supposed to report...who,what,when,where,why and how.
Thats all they are supposed to report.

0 Replies

Pointless again....I didn't say the media was left-bias, I said you ought to allow it and not complain since you have the supreme court.....there's a world of difference there......Now as far as having a bias against bush, when an administration has screwed things up as badly as bushinc., and has been so unbending, unapologetic and arrogant as bushinc, were you expecting them to be popular? have some cocoa and think about it.......

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Pointless again....I didn't say the media was left-bias, I said you ought to allow it and not complain since you have the supreme court.....there's a world of difference there......Now as far as having a bias against bush, when an administration has screwed things up as badly as bushinc., and has been so unbending, unapologetic and arrogant as bushinc, were you expecting them to be popular? have some cocoa and think about it.......

No,I dont expect them to be popular,but I do expect the press to do their job.
The press reported the truth about Hitler,so why cant they do it now?
All they are supposed to report is who,what,when,where,why and how.Thats all they are supposed to report.
When they dont do that,it gives reason to doubt their motives.And by not reporting the success of the Kurds since the war,they are ignoring facts and truth.That makes them suspect.

0 Replies

Mysteryman, you have started a thread to discuss media bias and you lead in with an article which starts like this.

Quote:

For those who still doubt that ideology guides most of the world's major news media, the reporting of the Islamic ritual murder of Nick Berg provided textbook examples of an almost universally leftist bias. News media have essentially become propaganda organs for anti-Americanism.

Now, first of all there was nothing "Islamic" or "ritual" about the murder of Berg. Second, when was it decided that "leftist bias" equates to
"anti-americanism" and by who?

If you want to debate bias, it would help if you used unbiased sources.

As for this;

Quote:

As an example,how much have you heard about the Kurds in northern Iraq? Since Saddam was removed,they have opened schools and hospitals,they have full religious tolerance,they are welcoming foreign investment,they have a thirving economy,and they are the model of what Iraq could be if the insurgents would let it.

Could you possibly tell me where you got this idea from? Especially the "full religious tolerance" part.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

perception wrote:
proper unbiased news organizations.

What do you consider to be a "proper unbiased news organization"? Can you please name some?

I wrote that "tongue in cheek" just to see if you were paying attention.

There are no totally unbiased news organizations IMO but the Christian Science Monitor is very objective and comes as close as any----again IMO.

0 Replies

Using townhall or Prager as the keystone in a case for liberal media bias is rather like taking Hulk Hogan as one's model for grace and daintiness.

Townhall was established by the Heritage Foundation. That foundation has an operating budget (as of 2000) yearly of $32.5 million funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and others, some $35 million over time from Scaife alone. (Richard Mellon Scaife, we may recall, was the gracious fellow who responded to a question from Columbia Journalism Review writer Karen Rothmyer when asked about why he dedicated his fortune to conservative causes with the following, "Your fukking Communist kunt, get out of here." He added that she was ugly and her teeth terrible.)

A quote from Heritage's Vice President, Burton Pines, is probably in order here..."We're not here to be some kind of Ph.D. committe giving equal time. Our role is to provide conservative public-policymakers with arguments to bolster our side." Of course, it misidentifies itself as centrist or objective.

Heritage provides talkshow guest and policy-makers with handy colored index cards that state conservative positions in pithy phrases (which goes some distance to explaining how these chaps and chapesses say the same things).

So, that's fedral's townhall.

0 Replies

I think it's interesting how the Arab media thought Nick Berg's murder was bad not because it's wrong to kill, but because it makes Arabs look bad and diverts attention from the abuse at the prison. There's something basically wrong with that kind of attitude.

0 Replies

Yep. You're right. There's a lot wrong in ALL of this.

Like calling abuse of prisoners "incidents".

Polarization is dumb, right?

0 Replies

Fedral- Kudos to you for your original post showing the difference between liberal newspaper reporting and conservative newspapers and your last post giving some real evidence concerning left wing media bias.

As far as I am concerned, the bottom line with regard to media bias was the exposition made by Bernard Goldberg in his book- Bias.

On Page 19 Goldberg wrote:

quote

"The Left routinely uses words like "scheme" instead of the more neutral "plan" to describe tax cuts that favor "the wrong people". Sometimes they put the word "rsiky" before "scheme" to make it sound really scary.

On Page 43 Goldberg wrote:

"There was one other thing Andrew Heyward told me, face to face in his Eye to Eye Office(Heyward was the executive producer of Eye to Eye - a CBC property starring Connie Chung)...Look Bernie, he said, "of course there's a liberal bias in the news. All the networks tilt left"....And Heyward said one other thing I will always remember: "If you repeat any of this, I will deny it."

If you listen to the radical and rabid left you might come to the conclusion that the New York Times(the most important newspaper in the country) and the Washington Post--both liberal newspapers, are owned by Richard Mellon Scaife.

0 Replies

I would advise anyone looking for the ubiquitous left wing bias to examine the adjectives and adverbs used in news stories.

The left says:

"Senator Kennedy presents a plan to relieve the heavy burden placed on senior citizens by the affluent medical insurance companies"

The left also says:

Senator Frist rammed through a bill designed to keep commodity prices as the highest level in years.

Nuances, but important ones that we sometimes miss.

0 Replies

Yes, yes Fedral - but you have still not made a case for the vengeance thing with which you opened the thread - nor responded to the challenges to your logic.

Bias is everywhere.......left, right....what we notice is the bias which is different from our own.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

perception wrote:
proper unbiased news organizations.

What do you consider to be a "proper unbiased news organization"? Can you please name some?

The ones that agree with him, of course.

0 Replies

To find out what is biased or unbiased, we look to ourselves and find our own ethics and beliefs to guide us through. Replacing the human conscious with a news anchor is a reality which happens daily in the darkness of an information starved country.

0 Replies

Here's a good piece from the Atlantic
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2004/06/green.htm

0 Replies

Great piece

0 Replies

Kerry and Bush appear to be fighting a fake entrenched war of attrition with each other. Each of them pretends to be holding back their nonexistant ace in the hole. Kerry is still telling anyone who will listen that the public doesn't really know him. Bush is still insisting he has unfinished business to do.

I don't believe that there will ever be a single moment where the US public realizes "The biggest issues are the economy and Iraq, and both candidates are coming up short!". But if that moment does arise, it would be excellent for it to appear before election day.

0 Replies

I just read through this thread for the first time. In the media example from the Arab press, did I misinterpret that the Arabs themselves connected Iraqis with Al Qaeda?

0 Replies

Solon says that "both candidates are coming up short"

Perhaps. It all depends on what your definition of "short" is. After all, Bill Clinton said, it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Mr. Solon apparently feels that the election will take place next week.

It is standard thinking among election watchers that many people don't start to really pay attention until after Labor Day.

It is then that the situation in Iraq will be scrutinized carefully by more people and it is then that the Unemplolyment figures and the jobs created numbers will be most relevant.

As Michael Barone indicated in his column in US News and World Report Mat 24m 2004,
quote

"John Kerry's hope of riding to the presidency by denouncing the "jobless recovery" is fading as the Bureau of Labor Statistics' employers survey results come in: 288,000 jobs in April, on top of a revised 337,000 for March and a 867,000 total for the first four months of this year. If job creation continues at the pace of March and April, there will be a net gain in jobs during President Bush's term."

Everyone will be watching the situation in Iraq most carefully during the months of July and August after the interim Iraqi government is named by United Nations special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi.

In the meantime, many things can happen between now and Nov. 2nd 2004. Predicitions at this time are rather foolish.

0 Replies

The news media and Nick Berg

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know