Does the Decreasing Impartiality of the News Bother You?

Post Reply New Topic

I have been growing increasingly sickened by the news media as of late. They seem to be at times, fully campaigning for Obama. For example, during the RNC, they would cut away any time a minority Republican spoke. They seemed ready to condemn speeches before they even heard them.

Media outlets are refusing to cover, or only partly covering stories that are damaging to Obama. Look at how much work was done just to get some coverage for Fast and Furious.

Media outlets are getting caught copying each other.

Mother Jones got caught truncating and clipping news stories.

Even if you are a Democrat, you need to be concerned. People should be able to receive impartial news and make a decision. If you think you need the media to cover you, it suggests your platform is weak.

And what happens when the media changes their mind and supports the other team.

Are you suggesting that the myth of the Liberal Media is actually real?

To a large extent, I am seeing it with some networks. Some like Fox are doing the opposite, which is equally bad.

The media is basically run by big business, for big business.

Even here in the UK, our state owned BBC is little more than an extension of the privately influenced political apparatus of the day that parrots and squawks noises of celebration lauding the missappropriation of wealth and alienation of the average person.

The common man, the proletarian, has no meaningful soapbox.

I love the irony of the way you say that as if the GOP doesnt have its hand up the Fox channel's ass like a damn puppet.

Even if that were true, which it isn't, Fox News asks tough questions of Republicans as well, but since you don't watch Fox News you wouldn't realize the fact you have no clue what you are talking about.

@thewhitrbbit

What the heck took you so long to figure out just how in the tank the media is for Obama, though I guess I should be glad somebody here is finally waking up.

If the common man is so oppressed, why don't you set up a political party in North Down to fight the next election?

Very few people really care about your far-left rhetoric. If they did, the "proletariat" would be in office now.

It's a liberal media in the sense a lot in it won't be outright racist or sexist, and may infact be disgusted by racism or sexism. If that attitude is something you'd have to label 'liberal', it's kind of a shame. Some may even go into the media with the idea of being crusading journalists against social ills, and so from that be 'liberal' or 'progressive'.

Yup.

"Liberal Media" has a way bigger boner for Apple than Obama

The smearfest directed towards first Sarah Palin and then Herman Cain totally demolishes your statements. The media is perfectly okay with sexism and racism as long as the people showing sexism and racism are liberals.

Class consciousness has been eroded here due to the phenomenon of orange-ism and 40 years of conflict which is why a Marxist party would fail to fly. Moreover the left parties we have here that do wear Marxist clothes have become synonomous with Irish nationalism. Its impossible to sell that to protestants.

Unlike England, the local populace find the left right dichotomy unpalatable. We have a very different, sensivitive and more greatly complicated political arrangement on this side of the sea.

I wasn't paying much attention to the treatment of Herman Cain - how was it racist?

As for Sarah Palin, she is terrifying. What sexist treatment of her was there? I recall a lot of shock at how stupid and ignorant she was, how unfit for such a position as Vice President she was when partnered with someone of McCain's age. Imagine President Palin. I mean, Bush was bad, but Palin... dear Lord. Goes without saying, unless you're taking a cynical view, Cheney was similarly morally unfit to hold such an office.

I don't care if it disappears completely. I already have my own biases with or without the media. Taking sides is not blatant disregard for the facts, it means synthesizing the information and transmitting clear ideas to readers who know what they want to learn. When I read the newspaper while eating breakfast, I don't want my assumptions challenged, I don't want a list of bland facts in arbitrary order without any kind of insight, I want to have my opinions confirmed by recent events.

Journalism started as something very obviously partial. "Impartiality" simply means that they can throw their advertisements down the throats of people everywhere on the political spectrum, and compete on the shiny content. The present situation, in a number of places, is that there is a number of alledgedly "neutral" media, and a few right-wing ones. To me, that means that right-wing people have media tailored to them, and I don't.

The bogus sexual harassment allegations for starters... They all magically went away when he dropped out of the race.



The reason the left found her terrifying was because she was a successful pro-life Conservative woman, whom chose to actually give birth to Trig Palin rather than have an abortion because he had down syndrome.

Fact of the matter is, Palin didn't have to be experienced, she was going to be Vice President, the person that would have chosen the advisors, the cabinet, etc. would have been McCain.

Furthermore, if you look at Senator McCain's family history, I think he is more likely to have a health issue when he retires. Both his father and grandfather died just after they retired, furthermore McCain's 90+ year-old mother is still alive and still drives a car.

Also, as far as Cheney is concerned, I didn't like him, but he would have been a much better President than Obama is.

I don't know if 'impartiality' is decreasing or that people just notice it now. The media use to be a trusted institution in this country and I'm not sure they ever deserved that reputation so more people waking up the fact they are being manipulated is a good thing.

I've known it for a while, but I have just really found it very sickening this election cycle.