1
   

The press once again proves it's bias

 
 
Fedral
 
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 11:47 am
The 'Alphabet Networks' have once again proven their bias by lowering the verification standards for stories involving Republicans to the point at which they will believe and report anything as long as it hurts the Right.

Well, the chickens have come home to roost on this story, or to use another metaphor ...

This one bit them right in the az$:

CBS: Bush documents can't be verified
'We shouldn't have used them,' executive states MSNBC staff and news service reports
Updated: 12:59 p.m. ET Sept. 20, 2004

NEW YORK - CBS on Monday said it cannot vouch for the authenticity of documents used to support a "60 Minutes" story about President Bush's Vietnam-era National Guard service after several experts denounced them as fakes.
The network said that while it was "deliberately misled," it was wrong to go on the air with a story that it could not substantiate.

"Based on what we know now, CBS News can't prove the documents are authentic," CBS President Andrew Heyward said in a statement. "We shouldn't have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret. Nothing is more important to us than our credibility and keeping faith with the millions of people who count on us for fair, accurate, reliable and independent reporting. We will continue to work tirelessly to be worthy of that trust."

'Full confidence' initially
The statement began with this explanation of events:

"'60 Minutes Wednesday' had full confidence in the original report or it would not have aired. However, in the wake of serious and disturbing questions that came up after the broadcast, CBS News has done extensive additional reporting in an effort to confirm the documents' authenticity. That included an interview featured on last week's edition of '60 Minutes Wednesday' with Marian Carr Knox, secretary to the late Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the officer named as the author of the documents; the interview with Bill Burkett to be seen tonight; and a further review of the forensic evidence on both sides of the debate."

CBS said Burkett, a retired National Guard lieutenant colonel, had provided the documents. In a press release accompanying Heyward's statement, CBS said that Burkett "also admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents' origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source."

The documents were said to be written by Killian, indicating he was being pressured to "sugarcoat" the performance ratings of a young Bush, then the son of a Texas congressman, and that Bush failed to follow orders to take a physical. Killian died in 1984.

Rather issues own statement
CBS also said it was commissioning an independent review of the incident, and will announce the names of the people conducting the review shortly.

The announcement was a major blow to the credibility of CBS News and its chief anchor, Dan Rather, who reported the story.

In his own statement Monday, Rather said:

"I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where ?- if I knew then what I know now ?- I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.

"But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism."

Almost immediately after the Sept. 8 story aired, document experts questioned memos purportedly written by Bush's late squadron leader, saying they appeared to have been created on a computer and not a typewriter that was in use during the 1970s.

CBS strongly defended its story, and it wasn't until a week later ?- after the military leader's former secretary said she believed the memos were fake ?- did the news division admit they were questionable.

Even then, Rather said no one had disputed the story's premise: that the future president had pulled strings to get a relatively cushy National Guard assignment and failed to satisfy the requirements of his service.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6055248/?gt1=5100
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 830 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 11:50 am
Please.

The media is incredibly soft on Bush. He NEVER has to answer direct questions about what he has done. Ever. He is completely insulated from reality in the white house.

And with Fox News acting as the republican propaganda channel (I watched a few days ago, and what did they talk about? Kerry, and how bad he was, for hours and hours), it's hard to crow about how biased the media is against Bush...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 11:52 am
I guess those who against the network news will see as a deliberate hoax on the part of CBS who when looking like he was going to get caught fessed up.

Dan Rather is obviously a liberal so he probably was glad to get such a story handed to him. However I seriously doubt any news caster will run a story that they knew was made up, their reputation is on the line and they know it.
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 11:56 am
Fox news is as biased to the right as the 'Alphabet Networks' (ABC,CBS,NBC) are to the left.

At least Fox invites Liberals to its point/counterpoint type shows ...

When was the last time you saw a real conservative asked to join a discussion in network primetime.
0 Replies
 
Magus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:00 pm
"...a REAL Conservative"?

By whose definition?

Does he have to actually WEAR and DISPLAY a SWASTIKA to signify?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:03 pm
Does Bob (the sleeze) Novak count. I see him most every day on the "Liberal" media.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:06 pm
When was the last time you saw a real conservative asked to join a discussion in network primetime. <---

The last one? Zell Miller. And look how well that went.

As for a discussion of the slant of the media, I would point everyone to:
http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/35667#736290

Where an excellent rundown of the media bias is given; it's been consistently slanted right since the 30's. One of my favorites (and this one's especially for you, Federal):

Quote:
A study of ABC World News Tonight, CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News in the year 2001 shows that 92 percent of all U.S. sources interviewed were white, 85 percent were male and, where party affiliation was identifiable, 75 percent were Republican. "


Seems there are more white male republicans on the alphabet networks than anything else, by far. Which directly contradicts your claims, Federal.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:15 pm
From everything I've read it seems that these documents were passed around the White House before the story ever ran and not one person, not even Bush himself, questioned their authenticity.

Which makes it very hard for me to shake the image of Karl Rove giggling his ass off over having engineered another fun little prank.
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:41 pm
I point you to a wonderful article posted by Foxfyre:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=34383
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 12:59 pm
And if you don't believe me...

And to refuse to believe the poll of the people...

How about the opinions of individuals in the media themselves?

"I thought he [former CBS News correspondent Bernard Goldberg] made some very good points. There is just no question that I, among others, have a liberal bias. I mean, I'm consistently liberal in my opinions. And I think some of the, I think Dan [Rather] is transparently liberal. Now, he may not like to hear me say that. I always agree with him, too, but I think he should be more careful." -- CBS's 60 Minutes commentator Andy Rooney on Goldberg's book, Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, on CNN's Larry King Live, June 5, 2002

"Most of the time I really think responsible journalists, of which I hope I'm counted as one, leave our bias at the side of the table. Now it is true, historically in the media, it has been more of a liberal persuasion for many years. It has taken us a long time, too long in my view, to have vigorous conservative voices heard as widely in the media as they now are. And so I think yes, on occasion, there is a liberal instinct in the media which we need to keep our eye on, if you will." -- ABC anchor Peter Jennings appearing on CNN's Larry King Live, April 10, 2002

"There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics. About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic, they have for a long time. There is a, particularly at the networks, at the lower levels, among the editors and the so-called infrastructure, there is a liberal bias. There is a liberal bias at Newsweek, the magazine I work for ?-- most of the people who work at Newsweek live on the upper West Side in New York and they have a liberal bias....[ABC White House reporter] Brit Hume's bosses are liberal and they're always quietly denouncing him as being a right-wing nut." ?- Newsweek Washington Bureau Chief Evan Thomas in an admission on Inside Washington, May 12, 1996.

"Everybody knows that there's a liberal, that there's a heavy liberal persuasion among correspondents." -- Walter Cronkite, March 21, 1996 Radio & TV Correspondents Dinner.

"There are lots of reasons fewer people are watching network news, and one of them, I'm more convinced than ever, is that our viewers simply don't trust us. And for good reason. The old argument that the networks and other `media elites' have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that it's hardly worth discussing anymore. No, we don't sit around in dark corners and plan strategies on how we're going to slant the news. We don't have to. It comes naturally to most reporters.....Mr. Engberg's report set new standards for bias....Can you imagine, in your wildest dreams, a network news reporter calling Hillary Clinton's health care plan 'wacky?'...
"?'Reality Check' suggests the viewers are going to get the facts. And then they can make up their mind. As Mr. Engberg might put it: `Time Out!' You'd have a better chance of getting the facts someplace else -- like Albania." ?- CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg on an anti-flat tax story by CBS reporter Eric Engberg, February 13, 1996 Wall Street Journal op-ed.
"I won't make any pretense that the American Agenda is totally neutral. We do take a position. And I think the public wants us now to take a position. If you give both sides and 'Well, on the one hand this and on the other that'--I think people kind of really want you to help direct their thinking on some issues." ?- ABC News reporter Carole Simpson on CNBC's Equal Time, August 9, 1994.

"We're unpopular because the press tends to be liberal, and I don't think we can run away from that. And I think we're unpopular with a lot of conservatives and Republicans this time because the White House press corps by and large detested George Bush, probably for good and sufficient reason, they certainly can cite chapter and verse. But their real contempt for him showed through in their reporting in a way that I think got up the nose of the American people." ?- Time writer William A. Henry III on the PBS November 4, 1992 election-night special The Finish Line.

"There is no such thing as objective reporting...I've become even more crafty about finding the voices to say the things I think are true. That's my subversive mission." ?- Boston Globe environmental reporter Dianne Dumanoski at an Utne Reader symposium May 17-20, 1990. Quoted by Micah Morrison in the July 1990 American Spectator.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 01:41 pm
Fedral wrote:
I point you to a wonderful article posted by Foxfyre:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=34383


That article only states that an opinion poll seems to indicate that people perceive the networks as biased.
0 Replies
 
Magus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 01:42 pm
Out of over 300 million inhabitants there are BOUND to be a few individuals who see things from a skewed perspective.
Quoting them alll together in one post does NOT mean that their skewed perspective is accurate... it just proves that they have peers.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2004 01:43 pm
Not to mention over half of those quotes are from the early 90s. Only two are recent, and they are admissions of personal bias and not bias in reporting.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The press once again proves it's bias
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/10/2026 at 02:51:29