The news media and Nick Berg

I am not predicting the election, I am very worried that people are more concerned with the economic slump and the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal than with the leadership of our country.

Much can, and will, happen between now and the election, however, it is unlikely any issues will supercede Iraq or the economy in importance.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

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?

The murderers, themselves, claimed to be linked to Al Quaeda:

"A video put on a website Tuesday, May 11, showed the beheading of Nicholas Berg with his executioners saying they were linked to al-Qaeda and avenging the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. troops."

0 Replies

I was referring to this Al-Jazeera comment in the link you posted Dlowan:

Quote:

Joining forces with Muslim scholars and Arab and Muslim public opinions, Lebanon's Hezbollah resistance group condemned the beheading of an American hostage by some unknown Iraqis, dubbing it "an ugly crime that flouted the tenets of Islam".

Then in other accounts Al Queda is implicated. It's probably nothing but that caught my eye.

0 Replies

If you have an opportunity to see the video of the execution of Nick Berg DON'T DO IT.

I watched it last night, out of curiosity more than anything, and have literally never seen anything more horrifying in all my life.

This isn't one of those warnings that's supposed to pique your interest, either. Do yourself a favor and stay the hell away from it. I am not easily rattled, but it made me sick, indelibly so.

I see no need for bellicose "let's go nuke 'em" rhetoric - I wasn't swayed politically in the least. I just had a hard time rationalizing the world for a while.

0 Replies

If you have an opportunity to see the video of the execution of Nick Berg DON'T DO IT.

I watched it last night, out of curiosity more than anything, and have literally never seen anything more horrifying in all my life.

This isn't one of those warnings that's supposed to pique your interest, either. Do yourself a favor and stay the hell away from it. I am not easily rattled, but it made me sick, indelibly so.

I see no need for bellicose "let's go nuke 'em" rhetoric - I wasn't swayed politically in the least. I just had a hard time rationalizing the world for a while.

0 Replies

Yes - it is horrifying - I watched it in a confronting reality thing.

We are a spooky species.

0 Replies

I confess to purposefully passing it up. Not particularly a decision out of principle, really out of not wishing to experience certain realities.

And as to Fedral's earlier post re leftist media...

The repetition of this claim has been a purposeful strategy from the right, very well funded and organized, and utilizing traditional marketing strategies (brand/product/idea recognition through repetition, for example) and through filling up the media space, as much as possible, with what is effectively propaganda. This story, the history and personalities, the funding and the organizations, is best related in Alterman's "What Liberal Media". It is an extraordinary work, and it is an example of top level journalism. It is not a screed.

So, once again, Fedral's repeated claim is that the media is biased towards a liberal viewpoint. He cited certain quotes supporting this notion on the previous page. Here are some others.

Quote:

"There just isn't enough ideology in the average reporter to fill a thimble." David Broder.

Quote:

"There is some strategy to it [bashing the 'liberal media']...If you watch any great coach, what they try to do is 'work the refs'. Maybe the refs will cut you some slack on the next one." Rich Bond, 1992 chair of the Republican Party.

Quote:

On complaints about a liberal media during the Reagan tenure..."There were days and times and events we mght have had some complaints [but] on balance I don't think we had anything to complain about." James Baker

Quote:

"I've gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage - all we could have asked. For heaven's sakes, we kid about the 'liberal media', but every Republican on earth does this." Patrick Buchannan

Quote:

"I admit it. The 'liberal media' was never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." William Kristol

Quote:

"I think if you look at the way Clinton's been treated, for example, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that the personal liberal ideological views of most reporters...have somehow led to a free ride for Bill Clinton". Ralph Reed

0 Replies

I haven't watched the Berg video.

I can't imagine I'd ever choose to.

0 Replies

ps

Someone may well pull up some poll of reporters, showing the majority of them to admit voting democrat, and use this as evidence for the claim of a liberal bias.

But how about a poll of media owners and publishers? The fellas who establish their media's slant and editorial content? Reporters don't get to establish slant, that's done above them.

Or a survey of columnists perhaps? The most widely syndicated are George Will and Cal Thomas (Jerry Falwell's past vice president at Moral Majority). Continue a survey of the largest newpapers and conservative columnists out number liberals. With smaller papers, the trend is even more pronounced.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

ps

Someone may well pull up some poll of reporters, showing the majority of them to admit voting democrat, and use this as evidence for the claim of a liberal bias.

But how about a poll of media owners and publishers? The fellas who establish their media's slant and editorial content? Reporters don't get to establish slant, that's done above them.

Or a survey of columnists perhaps? The most widely syndicated are George Will and Cal Thomas (Jerry Falwell's past vice president at Moral Majority). Continue a survey of the largest newpapers and conservative columnists out number liberals. With smaller papers, the trend is even more pronounced.

Your premise is flawed.A columnist writes his OPINIONS of the news,what he thinks it means and what he thinks about it.
A REPORTER reports the news,what happened,where it happened etc.A reporter has only one rule,tell the truth.A reporter has a real simple job...who,what,when,where,why and how.That is all a reporter is supposed to say,nothing more.
When a reporter goes beyond that,he or she becomes a columnist.

0 Replies

Peter Jennings, Brokaw and Rather were the main news filters for this country--are all liberal, and filtered the news through a liberal slant. Brokaw, not as transparently liberal as the other two.

CNN is staffed with some rabid liberals, who's party affiliation is easy to see by what questions they ask, and how they ask them.

Fox has mellowed people like me, who were really fed up with having our news thrown at us at a left angle. I don't watch Fox alone--but I am thankful they exist, and provide a bit of balance. CNN has had to adjust in the wake of Fox's popularity--things are evening up. I don't think there is an unfair advantage currently.

But, there most undeniably was.

0 Replies

Oh my! CNN liberal! Only in America!

context is all.

0 Replies

dlowan,
you said it (what I was thinking)

0 Replies

I know, deb. It's a head-shaker.

One can point out the 'oddity' that a survey of the folks contributing here who are from outside of the US would, in vast majority, show they consider the claim that CNN is liberal to be as laughable as you find it. Folks from Canada, England, Europe, the mid-east, etc...we all shake our heads at this sort of notion. But that doesn't seem to constitute any sort of evidence compelling questioning of the idea. It is a tribute to how effectively the notion has been implanted.

Sofia, and many others, are not going to read Alterman's book. Nor, I think likely, do any serious research on their own to see if their idea stands up under some degree of rigor. It's incredibly weird.

0 Replies

I don't need to read Alterman's book to know that CNN was distinctly to the left of most of my views; treating Democrats with much more patience and deference than their lashed, and strung Republican counterparts.

Some things you can simply OBSERVE.

And, I'm aware that the most of the world is to the left of OUR left. We were talking about American media, as it relates to American viewers.

Geesh.

0 Replies

Well, when we accuse media of bias - which EVERYONE does, by the way - it is perhaps reasonable to contextualise it.

CNN would appear liberal to any number of folks pretty much only in America - and - while bias in the media is so subjective as to be almost an unuseable concept - unless the bias is gross, and includes distortion of facts - I think to say that CNN is biased to the left is worth challenging.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Or a survey of columnists perhaps? The most widely syndicated are George Will and Cal Thomas (Jerry Falwell's past vice president at Moral Majority). Continue a survey of the largest newpapers and conservative columnists out number liberals. With smaller papers, the trend is even more pronounced.

That's been my personal experiance, but do you have any concrete information to back this up?

In any case, here is an excerpt from an e-mail sent to me by Robert Freeman, a journalist and author whose views parallel yours. You may have read his articles on CommonDreams. I don't think he'd mind me reprinting here:

Quote:

The media is largely owned by the right and exists to serve thier purposes. It is those owners that dictate the editorial slant.There is a perception of liberal bias because the right wing has claimed such for decades until it has become an article of faith--an urban legend. It is the perfect way to innoculate the media from the public's understanding of its true nature and its true role in society--which is, in Walter Lippman's words, to "manufacture consent".

0 Replies

ILZ

I'm not sure what information you are requesting.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

Fox has mellowed people like me, who were really fed up with having our news thrown at us at a left angle. I don't watch Fox alone--but I am thankful they exist, and provide a bit of balance. CNN has had to adjust in the wake of Fox's popularity--things are evening up. I don't think there is an unfair advantage currently.

What a bizarre thing to say.

The problem for me is when people misconstue a balanced reporting of the news as being somehow liberally slanted just because the facts and the reality happen to support a liberal viewpoint.

Example: When it became clear that George Bush had launched us into war on false pretenses, the media was seen as being leftist because they reported on the Iraq debacle heavily while largely ignoring Bush's speechs, which by then had become mere propaganda and wishfull thinking, peppered with allusions to imaginary weapons of mass destruction and overjoyed liberated Iraqis.

Many conservatives viewed this as being leftist, simply because reality happened to support an anti-war stance, and that stance was associated with liberals. The reality is that the GOP's predictions and justifications for the war on Iraq have been pretty roundly shot down on every level imaginable. To not report heavily on them would have been remiss.

Fox News, meanwhile, is run by Roger Ailes, a former member of the Bush Administration. They still reported ad nauseum on massive WMD caches and mobile weapons labs for months after it became apparent that none existed. This is the station where the anchor - the feakin' anchor - looked down at the camera barrel and said "...and to all you war protestors, you were pathetic then and you are pathetic now" during the initial invasion.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

ILZ

I'm not sure what information you are requesting.

If you have statistics showing that the majority of columnists are right wing, post them.

0 Replies

The news media and Nick Berg

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know