Liberals Whine and Cry About Conservative Media Bias

And we are to believe these people are rational? They whine and cry about the few sources of morally grounded and forward thinking news that exist? Perhaps it is because they have no message or ideas of their own. Can anyone think of any ideas or progressive ideas the liberals have come up with recently? I mean, besides killing more babies and promoting homosexual acts as normal?

gopusa.com/news/2005/may/0525_conservative_media1.shtml

Conservative Media Bias Called a 'Matter of Life and Death

(CNSNews.com) – Conservative bias in the American news media is “not simply a matter of taste, but of life and death,” a panel of liberal radio talk show hosts and representatives of leftist organizations told a group of Democrats on Tuesday.

“There is no more urgent problem facing America today,” stated Mark Lloyd, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP), one of 10 panelists who spoke on “Media Bias and the Future of Freedom of the Press.”

The forum was chaired by U.S. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, and focused on what Lloyd called “ideological distortion” that is “built into the current system.”

No individual or group dedicated to the monitoring of liberal media bias was invited to the event, though Conyers said he might invite “an independent or a Republican” at a similar forum in six months.

“Whoever has the most money has the loudest voice,” Lloyd said, which means that “multi-national corporations dominate the debate today. Profit is what counts,” instead of “promoting a democratic dialogue.”

Other panelists focused their criticism on “the right-wing media,” which Al Franken, a comedian and radio talk show host, described as a “coordinated propaganda machine capable of causing symptoms closely resembling mental illness.”

In his opening statement, Franken named “the Fox News Channel, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the Washington Times and, of course, talk radio” as media that work in league with the Bush administration and corporate-funded think tanks.

Franken also charged that people in “right-wing radio,” such as conservative talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, “routinely lie, they spread hate, and I chose to do the job I’m doing right now” on the liberal Air America network “because someone needed to push back.”

After Franken stated that he had gone on USO tours to boost the morale of U.S. troops abroad, he accused Limbaugh of being a “one-man demoralizer,” for telling his listeners that “liberals want soldiers to die.” Limbaugh’s program, he noted, is broadcast on Armed Forces Radio.

“These guys will just lie,” Franken added, since “their purpose is not to serve their audiences, but to manipulate them.”

Eric Alterman, another senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and author of the book “What Liberal Media?” said there’s so much wrong with the media “that one could go on forever.”

Over the past five decades, Alterman said, Republican politicians, writers, television pundits and think tanks have been remarkably successful at convincing the American people of a “liberal bias” in the media.

“Using the very same media outlets that they complain don’t give their cause a fair shake, they know that slamming the other side is little more than a way to get their ideas across while drowning out opposing voices.” Alterman called it “a massive bait-and-switch operation.”

Alterman also expressed concern for the establishment press, which "must, on a daily basis, come face to face with an administration obsessed with secrecy and which belittles and browbeats reporters at every opportunity.

“Note how quickly [White House Press Secretary] Scott McClennan [sic] blamed Newsweek for the rioting in Afghanistan last week,” he said.

“Despite the fact that his bosses presided over the invasion of Iraq and the well-documented abuses at Abu Ghraib and Bagram, the administration – along with a whole host of ready-for-prime-time conservative talking heads – pounced on one sentence in a short blurb, claiming that it caused irreparable harm to the ‘image of America’ in the Muslim world,” Alterman added.

Reaction to Newsweek’s retracted story also drew fire from Randi Rhodes, another Air America talk show host, who accused the White House of calling the magazine “an accessory to murder for printing a story of Koran abuse that the [International Red Cross Committee] has clearly documented for more than three years” in Cuba, Afghanistan and Iraq.

If the media is able to simultaneously antagonize the Left and Right, they must be doing something right…

[quote=Philip P]If the media is able to simultaneously antagonize the Left and Right, they must be doing something right…
[/quote]

That is one way to look at it.

OR… the media doesn’t show much good news in Iraq, generally doesn’t show faithful Christians in a good light, or show republicans in a good light, or show abortion or homesexuality in a bad light. AND, they don’t show ALL the worst pictures and sounds of the horror of war (to which the Left wants us to see nightly), and nor do they spend resources running down liberal conspiracy theories (that the Left wants everyone to believe).

SO…if you were to make the MSM more responsible in their journalism, what in the above would you change???

[quote=jlw]That is one way to look at it.

OR… the media doesn’t show much good news in Iraq, generally doesn’t show faithful Christians in a good light, or show republicans in a good light, or show abortion or homesexuality in a bad light. AND, they don’t show ALL the worst pictures and sounds of the horror of war (to which the Left wants us to see nightly), and nor do they spend resources running down liberal conspiracy theories (that the Left wants everyone to believe).

SO…if you were to make the MSM more responsible in their journalism, what in the above would you change???
[/quote]

Personally I would make everyone who votes for war go fight themselves. If you can’t take it, don’t make others do your dirty work. Short of that, put more of it on tv. Death makes people uncomfortable? Not uncomfortable enough, I fear…

Funny, how simply acknowledging the horror of war apparently is a de facto anti war position.

[quote=Philip P]Personally I would make everyone who votes for war go fight themselves. If you can’t take it, don’t make others do your dirty work. Short of that, put more of it on tv. Death makes people uncomfortable? Not uncomfortable enough, I fear…

Funny, how simply acknowledging the horror of war apparently is a de facto anti war position.
[/quote]

Fair enough,they under the reality check should show abortions at every stage while people want the truth,don’t you agree:nope:

[quote=Philip P]Personally I would make everyone who votes for war go fight themselves.
[/quote]

Or send their sons to war, not the sons of others.

[quote=Philip P]Personally I would make everyone who votes for war go fight themselves. If you can’t take it, don’t make others do your dirty work.
[/quote]

HUH??? Philip, you are a smart and reasonable person, but that is the silliest gradeschool argument ever. We have a volunteer armed forces, 75% of which is unapologetically behind their commander-in-cheif and 99% behind their mission REGARDLESS of who gives orders, because that is what they signed up for–duty, honor, country.

Short of that, put more of it on tv. Death makes people uncomfortable? Not uncomfortable enough, I fear…
Funny, how simply acknowledging the horror of war apparently is
a de facto anti war position.

War is hell. It is HAPPENING. So while is IS happening, do you want to win it, or lose it??? Do you want to feel crappy about it and lose it, or crappy about it and win??? Do you want public opinioon to be on the side of our military, or the world public opinion to be on the side of the terrorists?? Do you want to see the REAL decapitations of people by terrorists while eating your cereal with your kids in the morning??? I don’t.

I do find it amazing that they will show the pictures of Abu Graib over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again BUT won’t show any more images of 9/11, and if someone does, they are accused of “exploitation”. Explain that.

[quote=Richardols]Or send their sons to war, not the sons of others.
[/quote]

If there was a madatory draft, I would agree with you 100%. But because we have an all volunteeer armed forces, your chicken-hawk crappola is sophmoric.

[quote=Philip P]Personally I would make everyone who votes for war go fight themselves. If you can’t take it, don’t make others do your dirty work. Short of that, put more of it on tv. Death makes people uncomfortable? Not uncomfortable enough, I fear…

Funny, how simply acknowledging the horror of war apparently is a de facto anti war position.
[/quote]

Oh, so Congress is supposed to head into war? A little inefficient I would think.

This was originally posted on everything2, under “An Experiment you can do to see if your newspaper is indeed Liberally biased”:

Experiment One: Discover Your Corporate Masters!

  1. Cut out all of the advertisements. Put these in Pile One.
  2. Cut out anything that looks like an unedited press release from a corporation, and the entire Business Section. Place these in Pile One.
  3. Cut out anything that you think is “unbiased reporting” like the Weather. Place these aside for Experiment Two. If these are actually unbiased, they will have no effect on you.
  4. Try to find anything liberal in the remaining shreds of paper. Place these in Pile Two.
  5. Gaze awestruck at Pile One and wonder quietly what happened to the free market of ideas that capitalism provides. Contemplate whether liberal bias is the real issue.

Experiment Two: Episodic or Thematic?

  1. Now that the paper is cut into tasty bite-size pieces, divide news into that which is episode oriented - that which focuses on concrete issues such as an individual welfare mother, a crime spree, or a terrorist bombing. Label this Pile One.
  2. Next find the news that provides information that contextualizes an issue or problem, and focuses on general developments, trends, or preconditions that contribute to problems such as surges in welfare dependence, crime or increased terrorist attacks. Label this Pile Two.
  3. Gaze awestruck at Pile One and wonder quietly why Americans can’t see the ongoing, systemic problems in society. Contemplate whether liberal bias is the real issue.

[quote=jlw]I do find it amazing that they will show the pictures of Abu Graib over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again BUT won’t show any more images of 9/11, and if someone does, they are accused of “exploitation”. Explain that.
[/quote]

And over… :smiley:

That’s easy. It’s pollitically correct and cool for the media to show pornography. They do it all the time. And 9/11 is too difficult for us to see. So we must pretend it didn’t happen so we can feel better and continue war bashing.

[quote=ybeayf]This was originally posted on everything2, under “An Experiment you can do to see if your newspaper is indeed Liberally biased”:

Experiment One: Discover Your Corporate Masters!

  1. Cut out all of the advertisements. Put these in Pile One.
  2. Cut out anything that looks like an unedited press release from a corporation, and the entire Business Section. Place these in Pile One.
  3. Cut out anything that you think is “unbiased reporting” like the Weather. Place these aside for Experiment Two. If these are actually unbiased, they will have no effect on you.
  4. Try to find anything liberal in the remaining shreds of paper. Place these in Pile Two.
  5. Gaze awestruck at Pile One and wonder quietly what happened to the free market of ideas that capitalism provides. Contemplate whether liberal bias is the real issue.

Experiment Two: Episodic or Thematic?

  1. Now that the paper is cut into tasty bite-size pieces, divide news into that which is episode oriented - that which focuses on concrete issues such as an individual welfare mother, a crime spree, or a terrorist bombing. Label this Pile One.
  2. Next find the news that provides information that contextualizes an issue or problem, and focuses on general developments, trends, or preconditions that contribute to problems such as surges in welfare dependence, crime or increased terrorist attacks. Label this Pile Two.
  3. Gaze awestruck at Pile One and wonder quietly why Americans can’t see the ongoing, systemic problems in society. Contemplate whether liberal bias is the real issue.
    [/quote]

EXPERIMENT ONE: see if you can stay awake listening to a liberal blame corporations for everything. :yawn:

[quote=ybeayf]This was originally posted on everything2, under “An Experiment you can do to see if your newspaper is indeed Liberally biased”:

Experiment One: Discover Your Corporate Masters!

  1. Cut out all of the advertisements. Put these in Pile One.
  2. Cut out anything that looks like an unedited press release from a corporation, and the entire Business Section. Place these in Pile One.
  3. Cut out anything that you think is “unbiased reporting” like the Weather. Place these aside for Experiment Two. If these are actually unbiased, they will have no effect on you.
  4. Try to find anything liberal in the remaining shreds of paper. Place these in Pile Two.
  5. Gaze awestruck at Pile One and wonder quietly what happened to the free market of ideas that capitalism provides. Contemplate whether liberal bias is the real issue.

[/quote]

What is this supposed to mean? All businesses that advertise are conservative? All people that read the paper study the business and advertisment section? The editorials do not carry more weight about what the paper represents than other portions of the paper? What are you talking about?

see if you can stay awake listening to a liberal blame corporations for everything.

I’m not a liberal, and I don’t blame corporations for everything. I do blame them, however, for working together to drive independent media voices out of the mainstream.

What is this supposed to mean? All businesses that advertise are conservative?

Corporations are inherently conservative – they seek to maximize profit above all else and maintain and increase collaboration with the government to preserve their privileged position.

All people that read the paper study the business and advertisment section?

There is no “advertisement section” – the whole paper is essentially a collection of advertisements with some articles here and there.

The editorials do not carry more weight about what the paper represents than other portions of the paper?

That, I would agree with.

What are you talking about?

You seem a bright boy, I’m sure you can figure it out.

[quote=jlw]EXPERIMENT ONE: see if you can stay awake listening to a liberal blame corporations for everything. :yawn:
[/quote]

That’s not fair, they don’t blame corporations for everything. I’ve never heard a liberal blame corporations for creating jobs or selling superior products as fair prices.

The theory is preposterous.

[quote=Maranatha]That’s not fair, they don’t blame corporations for everything. I’ve never heard a liberal blame corporations for creating jobs or selling superior products as fair prices.
[/quote]

Actually, they DO. Creating jobs at “not high enough wage” or creating products made by people “not earning enough wage” even *if *the prices of said products are very affordable to said people “not earning enough wage”…not good enough. And heaven forbid if any of those products were manufactured and brought to market with fair prices if OIL was used in any way!!

[quote]You seem a bright boy, I’m sure you can figure it out.

The theory is preposterous.
[/quote]

Which – that you are bright, or that you can figure it out?

[quote=ybeayf]Which – that you are bright, or that you can figure it out?
[/quote]

Yes.

Yes.

Very well. I hereby retract my statement that you were bright. What of the theory that you are dim?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.