Things have changed over the past few years with the media, and its biases.

I watch absolutely 0 cable news, I get 100% of my news from google news. Some things i've noticed:

The LA Times and the CS Monitor are both great news sources, but the LA Times sometimes leans right, and the CS Monitor sometimes leans left.

The "Business" news sites (Business Weekly, WSJ) are largely worthless, the articles seem to be written with copious buzzwords designed to get computerized trading algorithms to shift a certain way.

Fox News.com surprisingly has some of the best articles on science topics, often going a bit deeper than the press releases. Otherwise their "rush transcripts" and blogs, which are obviously far right, get really high Google page ranks.

With these caveats, I feel like there's a good balance overall from Google News.

2/11/2011 10:32:47 PM

2/12/2011 2:50:44 AM

2/12/2011 2:53:10 AM

I recently learned that Rupert Murdoch owns The Wall Street Journal. Upon learning this, I lowered my opinion of WSJ greatly.

2/12/2011 5:23:30 AM

Has Google reported the story about how the DOJ is biasing FOIA requests more towards liberal groups and denying (or not responding to) conservative groups?

Or the story of how Planned Parenthood is pulling the same stuff as ACORN?

2/12/2011 8:51:30 AM

^ And how Faux News is equally supporting and perpetuating fraud by lauding these "activists"?

2/12/2011 9:04:41 AM

Quote :

"CS Monitor "

Im all over the CS monitor's nuts. Its definitely above average.

2/12/2011 10:07:48 AM

it's owned by a church, so at least a few posters here will find something wrong with it

2/12/2011 10:20:12 AM

^is that true? despite me liking it I really haven't looked into its ownership or anything like that. When I read its articles I really don't pick up any kind of religous bias. I just read an article about the evolution of the human foot this morning.

2/12/2011 10:26:55 AM

Quote :

"Or the story of how Planned Parenthood is pulling the same stuff as ACORN?"

NPR reported on that and pretty much called it bullshit.

Quote :

"it's owned by a church, so at least a few posters here will find something wrong with it"

In fairness it's one of the craziest of churches, Christian Scientists, those are the ones who don't believe in any sort of medical treatment, opting instead for the "healing power of prayer".

2/12/2011 10:45:23 AM

I don't watch cable TV at all, much less cable news. I feel sorry for anybody that gets their news from those outlets.

I just use Google news. As far as actual sources, Al Jazeera has impressed me recently by being the first to cover some stories that were basically ignored by American outlets.

2/12/2011 1:43:24 PM

Quote :

"I recently learned that Rupert Murdoch owns The Wall Street Journal. Upon learning this, I lowered my opinion of WSJ greatly."

He owns myspace too right?

2/12/2011 1:48:18 PM

Quote :

"Al Jazeera has impressed me recently by being the first to cover some stories that were basically ignored by American outlets."

The American international newspaper reporter is an all but extinct species.

Al Jazeera has emerged to fill this void.

^
yes, he bought myspace some years ago

[Edited on February 12, 2011 at 2:51 PM. Reason : +]

2/12/2011 2:50:39 PM

Quote :

"^is that true?"

yes, and its not hidden. they even have it in the "about us" section of their website. i don't think there is any bias either, but a few of the posters here think anything connected with religion is terrible.

2/12/2011 3:56:40 PM

Quote :

"^ And how Faux News is equally supporting and perpetuating fraud by lauding these "activists"?"

I don't understand. Fox News isn't supporting Planned Parenthood.

Are you suggesting that Fox New conspired with Live Action to force Planned Parenthood to "collude with a man posing as a pimp to cover up exploitation of 14- and 15-year-old immigrant sex workers"? (from CS Monitor news source)

Or are these just not the types of activists that you agree with (that is, the Pro-Life types) and, therefore, feel necessary to display your own bias towards/against?

I agree, some is in order.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, and let's not forget that minor news story last week about how President Obama named Jeff Immelt as the chairman of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

Who is Jeff Immelt? He's the chairman and CEO of GE.

What's GE?

Well, they own the following news/media organizations (not even going to list everything else they own...except one):

NBC
Universal Studios
NBC Universal Television Group
NBC News
USA Network
Syfy
Chiller
CNBC
MSNBC
NBC.com
MSNBC.com
iVillage
Bravo
qubo
Telemundo Television Studios
The Weather Channel
Hulu
A&E Television Networks
Obama

2/12/2011 9:21:03 PM

what news outlet was the planned parenthood story not on?

2/12/2011 11:00:04 PM

^^ not to derail this thread, but GE has definitely had a cozy relationship with the gov. I vaguely recall a while back some weird trade agreement that favored GE's jet engines.

It's not unlike the nature of the previous administrations strong favoritism towards Haliburton which saw massive profits after the start of the Iraq war.

So far though, I don't think the Obama admin has started any wars because of their affinity to GE.

2/12/2011 11:34:32 PM

Plus, liberals are the ones who are supposed to be pissed about that, not conservatives. Conservatives love rich, white CEOs...they should be happy Obama made a point to include businessmen in the process so they can offer up advice on the free market or whatever.

I, on the other hand, am not pleased.

2/13/2011 6:47:39 AM

^GEs investment in this admin is really paying off. They get the lightbulbs, national medical records, and now this high speed rail.

I think the point you are missing about most conservatives is CHOICE. I also dont think you will find many that support jobs or rules being passed down based on political influence either.

2/13/2011 9:30:41 AM

this is not a liberal thing, shit like this exists in every administration. you are completely naive if you think this is limited to the obama administration or to liberals.

2/13/2011 9:44:13 AM

Quote :

"I don't understand."

Nope, you really don't. Both these activist clowns and the ones who made the ACORN videos LIED. They intentionally set up a false scenario and even broke the law yet Faux News, their ilk and, obviously by your defense, their lackeys were more concerned with feigned outrage to push their social agenda than they were about the apparent fraud that was committed.

2/13/2011 11:29:39 AM

Whoa, whoa, whoa... let's not bring facts into this argument.

2/13/2011 11:59:59 AM

Quote :

"Or the story of how Planned Parenthood is pulling the same stuff as ACORN?"

It's cute how, even after something has been clearly and openly exposed as a scam and a fraud, you'll stand behind it.

2/13/2011 12:05:59 PM

I'm asking honestly here. How has this been "exposed as a scam and a fraud?" Did those workers not say what they actually said on the videos? I know PP notified the FBI, but that still doesn't exactly forgive PP workers from giving the advice they gave.

2/13/2011 12:20:29 PM

Quote :

"I think the point you are missing about most conservatives is CHOICE."

LOL…

right...

2/13/2011 12:22:32 PM

Quote :

"^^ not to derail this thread, but GE has definitely had a cozy relationship with the gov. I vaguely recall a while back some weird trade agreement that favored GE's jet engines. It's not unlike the nature of the previous administrations strong favoritism towards Haliburton which saw massive profits after the start of the Iraq war. So far though, I don't think the Obama admin has started any wars because of their affinity to GE."

In other words, corporatism is fine, as long as "our guy" is promoting it.

2/13/2011 1:06:56 PM

I think it's fair to point out the faux rage conservatives have about GE and Obama when there was an ex-Halliburton CEO blatantly steering money towards that company for 8 years and nothing was said. No one's happy about this, but where the fuck were these people from 2001-2009?

2/13/2011 1:39:10 PM

Quote :

". you are completely naive if you think this is limited to the obama administration or to liberals. "

And I havent said it is. Hhaha, touch a nerve?

2/13/2011 1:59:39 PM

the second part of your post stated that only conservatives favor choice, implying that corporatism existed only among liberals or at the very least liberals were okay with it. neither of those would be accurate. you lost.

2/13/2011 2:02:18 PM

Quote :

"not to derail this thread, but GE has definitely had a cozy relationship with the gov. I vaguely recall a while back some weird trade agreement that favored GE's jet engines."

To be fair though, aircraft are probably one of the last remaining high-value, high-technology manufactured goods that the United States still produces domestically at millions of dollars per jet engine. Given that GE is one of the last two remaining jet engine manufacturers, it's only natural that the administration would push hard to push their interests (and the jobs that they sustain). Don't have to sell a lot of them to put a dent in the trade deficit.

2/13/2011 4:15:40 PM