Why is the media so overwhelmingly liberal?

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
Eddie- nothing wrong w/cut n' paste to bolster your argument...IMHO. Would you rather have opinions like Mr. Cristo on the recent Aussie Elections. He rebuts what their newspapers had in print. Guess he carries more gravitas. :thinking: (By the by, I welcome his posts, just think he's off the mark this time.) I look forward to Eddie, Kosar & Mr. Cristo posts.

djv- So wheres the beef. I can't follow your posts sometimes. Just askin as you always seem to have a beef. :confused:
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
Yes, most members of unions and those making minimum wage are part of that hoity-toity 'don't wanna get my hands dirty' crowd.
 

BobbyBlueChip

Trustee
Forum Member
Dec 27, 2000
20,655
254
83
52
Belly of the Beast
To answer 6?5??s question, it doesn?t matter to me if the media is liberal or conservative as I?ll get my news from the sources that I want to get it from and I?m sure most do the same. Just like everything else, news sources are fueled by a profit-motive and advertisers would like people who have a little disposable income ? and who have the time and the inclination to watch news shows. So what sense does it make ? from a business perspective to slant their news to the left? I?ve seen the studies that show how biased the liberal media, but these ?studies? usually come from the WSJ, the New Republic, the hatchet men at the Media Research Center. The press has most likely been a little harder on Bush over the last couple of weeks due to the fact that they want a close presidential race and that?s a much better story. It?s the same way that the gave W a pass last time around with the Rove tactics and no serious commentary on how his projected tax cuts used assumptions that were unrealistic and stated that they would by far help the lower class than the upper class. The media doesn?t slant, they just want ratings.

And gw, southern and hardworking? You get down there much?
 

SixFive

bonswa
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
18,716
237
63
53
BG, KY, USA
thanks for the opinion, bobby. I'm like you, I'll get my news where I want, and I know what I'm going to get from the papers and tv. PS I'm southern and hard working!
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,555
214
63
"the bunker"
bobby...ouch...lol..

edward....what did you expect from one of the great unwashed(no,not the french)...the other great unwashed....the non-anointed.....

just trying to explain the origins of liberal media.....

academia and intellectualism are fine.......when considered in proportion with common sense and principle...

they seem to be even more european than cowboy-american......long on observation and discussion....short on principle and willingness to act......

not talking about iraq.....i`m still not sold that iraq will turn out to be more than a mess...iraq may well sink bush....maybe,rightly so....

academia and intellectualism are fine....but,sometimes it takes more than just lipservice and good intentions to resolve tough issues....something europeans seem to never learn...

if kerry`s elected,we will become more european,imo.....and that scares many of us that aren`t huge bush proponents...
 

bjfinste

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 14, 2001
5,462
18
0
AZ
Eddie Haskell said:
Pretty impressive, huh. Media Research Center. Gosh, with a name like that they must be some kinda independent group who is fair and balanced. Kinda like the Patriot Act and/or the Forest Restoration Act. We better listen to them and take there word as gospel.

Haven't read the rest of this thread, but I often have to drive to Fort Worth for work. There is a big-ass billboard on HWY 183 (one of the main routes to get from Dallas and the eastern suburbs like where I live to Fort Worth). It's a big picture of Uncle Sam pointing out and says, in huge, bold letters: "DON'T BELIEVE THE LIBERAL MEDIA." Very unbiased, indeed.
 

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
Chanman said:
Eddie- nothing wrong w/cut n' paste to bolster your argument...IMHO. Would you rather have opinions like Mr. Cristo on the recent Aussie Elections. He rebuts what their newspapers had in print. Guess he carries more gravitas. :thinking: (By the by, I welcome his posts, just think he's off the mark this time.) I look forward to Eddie, Kosar & Mr. Cristo posts.

djv- So wheres the beef. I can't follow your posts sometimes. Just askin as you always seem to have a beef. :confused:

Should I be so unbelievably obvious as to say...."Don't believe everything you read, Chanman!".

What a silly thing to say....I'm telling you. I live in Australia. I've studied political science, no big deal...But it does mean that I follow the politics of this country pretty closely.
Yet you read an article from (sorry, don't even know which newspaper....But it's a US paper, not an Australian one???) and take it as gospel??

Like I said in the other post....I have NEVER heard of 'Americans Overseas for Kerry'. I have never heard of nor seen John's sister, Diana!!

One interview (and subsequent quote) in a [relatively] poorly circulated 'paper**, does not make for a particularly convincing campaign!! :142lmao:

** While The Australian newspaper is 'national', all states have their own 'paper(s) that outsell The Australian easily.

Did I ever say she didn't exist? She quite obviously does....What I'm saying is that the effect that she had on this country's election process/issues was ABSOLUTELY ZERO!

As for other parts of the article, I do actually agree with Miss Kerry, that terrorists are trying to undermine Australia's (and others') resolve with bombings and scare tactics. It's logical then that we are in more danger by being in Iraq and so closely allied to the US.
BUT...As I've said numerous times before, our position with the US WILL NOT CHANGE...And I totally understand and accept that.

We're not stupid!!...We're tiny on a global scale and we NEED America. (We do also give a fair bit back in return...Pine Gap, some of the best advanced scouts in the world, a fairly one-sided "Fair Trade Agreement"!!:rolleyes:...A place to dump a seemingly endless pile of 'Friends' repeats!! :cursin: )

As I also stated, to be fair to Latham he was back-tracking on the 'pledge' to withdraw troops...He knew it was unrealistic...and potentially damaging!!
(Oh, fwiw, I voted for Howard...well, the 'Liberal' party...Our system is different than yours.)


All this connects nicely to the topic of this thread actually. (And as Ed pointed out earlier the hypocracy of it all!).
The Australian newspaper is owned by News Ltd. Kerry Packer. It's biased. All Packer (News Ltd.) publications in Australia have an editorial bias towards the Australian Liberal party. (Hence the artical was pro-Howard and his mate Bush). Why? Because Packer just happens to 'donate' large amounts of $$ for the 'Liberal's' campaigns. Why? Because the 'Liberals' (long story short) look after big business.
(Not sure if it was last year or 2002-03, Packer paid something like $32 tax!)
It is as conservative as it comes! (With some 'arty' window dressing just to fill out the pages :D)

So yes, of course diferent parts of the media have different bias'....The wonderful irony is that you have been suckered by a very conservatively based (bias) publication.
 
Last edited:

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
25
Cincinnati
aclu.org
Here, here, my upside down friend. I believe academia and intellectualism became bad words when nationalism, patriotism and wrap yourself up in the flag became the buzz words of this administration. Patriotism and nationalism are okay in perspective. When they get out of control you get war (look at the alliamces in WWI and Germany in WWII).

By the way C, what the hell time is down there?

Ed
 

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
(By the by, I welcome his posts, just think he's off the mark this time.)
I found more than one source about this MrC, but I don't consider myself an expert. I also thought you were a transplanted Kiwi living in Canada-guess I was wrong. On both counts.
 

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
Chanman said:
I also thought you were a transplanted Kiwi living in Canada-guess I was wrong. On both counts.

Really? Why?....Definately not in Canada....And definately no Kiwi :cursin: ...They're New Zealanders! ;)

It actually struck me that I didn't exactly say what I meant to last post...
...Obviously Diana Kerry and 'Americans Overseas for Kerry' does exist, and they were a total non-factor/failure! (Which is essentially what you were saying.)

What I meant to get accross was the the entire 'war' was a total non-issue here.
90% of this election was based on economic management (micro and macro).
2-3% was a totally opposite timber/logging policy that cost the Labour Party two unexpected lost seats down here in Tasmania. (Not Canada :D)
The other 7-8% was various other issues (including the 'war', and the fact that Latham really is a bit of an idiot!)

Sp basically, while Miss Kelly did absolutely fail in what she was trying to do, I'd be surprised if she even changed ONE persons vote!! (Ok, slight exageration, but DEFINATELY had no effect what-so-ever on the result of this election.)

(Still interested in this Canadian thing!) :toast:
 
Last edited:

MrChristo

The Zapper
Forum Member
Nov 11, 2001
4,414
5
0
Sexlexia...
Chanman said:
you all look alike to me. :toast:

:142lmao: Like that! :clap:

Just one more thing....

(By the by, I welcome his posts, just think he's off the mark this time.)

Does that mean I'm on the mark every other time? :yup

lol!!!...No need to answer that! ;)
 

Turfgrass

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 26, 2002
1,153
5
0
Raleigh
djv said:
Eddie I think he's telling us Duke part of the Conservative network has sent things to a New York paper from high school students. Don't see how it ties into anything here. Duke right from the middle of the religious right. At least I think most here know that.


Duke conference speakers endorse terrorism
List reveals supporters of Palestinian suicide bombers, killing Jews

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 15, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Aaron Klein



Speakers at a Duke University Palestinian solidarity conference that starts today have advocated suicide bombing and are connected to terrorist organizations, charged the university's Conservative Union.

The Palestinian Solidarity Movement, allied with the controversial International Solidarity Movement, an organization that openly supports Hamas and calls for the destruction of Israel, is holding its fourth annual conference to "put pressure on the Israeli government, partly by urging universities to sell their stock in companies with military ties to Israel," WorldNetDaily previously reported.

Attendees of the three-day event will listen to speakers explain their strategies for taking action against Israel, including lectures entitled, "Divestment: The Weapon of the Global Fight for Justice" and a talk on "How to effectively use the media and improved public relations to advance the Palestinian cause."

Now a list of speakers, which was recently released, has revealed that several of those featured openly advocate terrorism.

In a recent article, Charles Carlson, who will lead a workshop at the conference, called Palestinian suicide bombers intelligent bombs "because the body bombers act in a logical fashion...Lest there be any doubt, this writer supports the Palestinian right to launch bombs on Israelis any way they know how...I salute the 58 Intelligent Bombs; they were not cowards, nor were they 'homicide bombers,' as President George W. Bush calls them."

Carlson specifically encourages the use of children as weapons, declaring, "How dare anyone, even Yasser Arafat, condemn youth for choosing to sacrifice their life for something in which they believe...I pray for these sad children and do now join those who condemn them."

Carlson also calls for the mass murder of Israeli youth, asserting, "Each wedding, Passover celebration or Bar Mitzvah [in Israel] is a potential military target..."

Also leading a workshop at Duke will be Fadi Kiblawi, who advocates killing Jews everywhere. He wrote an article, "The helplessness, the degradation. It is enough to make one indifferent when they [Jews] die in a freak accident in a wedding hall while dancing Dabkeh. It is enough to make one want to strap a bomb to one's chest and kill those racists...The enemy is not just overseas. The enemy is also amongst us."

"President Brodhead, is this your idea of 'education through dialogue'?" the Conservative Union asked in an open letter advertisement to University President Richard Brodhead that detailed the speakers connections to terrorism.

The conference will be PSM's fourth national gathering, following previous events at Berkeley, Michigan and Ohio State. Some PSM critics have charged those earlier events were hotbeds of anti-Semitism, with some attendees shouting, "Kill the Jews," and "Death to Israel!"

Rann Bar-On, a graduate student who has identified himself as an activist for the International Solidarity Movement and is a member of the campus group sponsoring the PSM conference, said he thinks the event will foster a useful dialogue on campus.

Bar-On said PSM supports nonviolent action on behalf of the Palestinian people, but neither he nor the group would sign a statement prepared by Jewish groups condemning terrorism.

"We don't see it as very useful for us as a solidarity movement to condemn violence," Bar-On told The Herald-Sun last month.

And a statement on the PSM website says: "As a solidarity movement, it is not our place to dictate the strategies or tactics adopted by the Palestinian people in their struggle for liberation."

Last year's original conference organizer, Charlotte Kates, reportedly said, "Why is there something particularly horrible about 'suicide bombing? except for the extreme dedication conveyed in the resistance fighter's willingness to use his or her own body to fight?"

PSM spokesperson Fayyad Sbaihat dismissed Kates quotations as having been "taken out of context."
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
M Moores film KO'd from pay per view by Liberial network 2 days befor election. Ok for Sinclair group to show there half truths a long with swith boat half truths. Maybe reason is Moore was trying to sell his. He should have asked if any liberial networks had the balls to show it free. Then you would be fighting fire with fire. Everyone could make up there minds with half truths. That is according to the lates info only about 6% of the voters now left that have not made up there minds. Hard to believe. With all the debates and chit that has gone on for a year. There are still 6% that have not made up there minds. What do they need to get hit by a hammer.
 

CHARLESMANSON

Hated
Forum Member
Jan 7, 2004
2,651
15
0
89
CORCORAN, CA
.....no matter what, the liberals will stick up for the other liberals in here as usual.....no matter how rediculous the argument is.. Like DJV kissing ass to his hero Eddie Haskell sitting there behind his monitor like a goon typing away..."Yeah,,!! you tell 'em Eddie!!!"...LLOL...man c'mon get real

I still think my argument at the top of the thread is the best, nobody has given any other solid reasons for the media being overwhelmingly liberal.....go ahead and give your flip answers it just shows how sharp you are. Whatever the liberals say I seriously dont give a flying crap anyways
...you guys who deny the fact that media is left-wing you need to check yourself into a shitward or sober up. And don't give me this Fox News BS either......that's only one station.
Get past the denial and lets hear some answers.
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top