^I was referring more to 24-hour news networks, rather than just hour-long programs...

Didn't CBS get the shit fined out of them for that incident, anyway?
And if they didn't... well, that's very unfortunate.

7/21/2010 9:49:15 AM

Quote :

"I was referring more to 24-hour news networks Fox News, rather than just hour-long programs the programs I like..."

Fixed it for ya

Quote :

"Didn't CBS get the shit fined out of them for that incident, anyway?"

hell no

Quote :

"And if they didn't... well, that's very unfortunate."

I mean, sure, if you're a fascist that wants to flush the notion of free press...

7/21/2010 10:10:19 AM

Quote :

"Should a group of "journalists" of a certain ideological mindset employed by various organizations be colluding to suppress what they believe is not news because it harms the presidential candidate they support? "

I could care less if a bunch of advocates of one ideology or another communicate with each other in order to hash out messaging strategies. They get paid to persuade, not deliver objective reporting. It's not my problem if people aren't media literate enough to discern between various types of journalistic styles.

7/21/2010 10:46:53 AM

Quote :

"Fixed it for ya"

What the fuck are you talking about? There are no "programs I like" that also qualify as television news. I don't care much about 60 minutes because it hasn't been socially relevant since the late 90s. I didn't even realize it was still on the air.

That and, like I said, it's not an entire network devoted to a 24-hour continuous stream of non-information. Those are somewhat more reprehensible for a variety of reasons.

Quote :

"I mean, sure, if you're a fascist that wants to flush the notion of free press..."

Right, because a free press and truth in advertising are two totally incompatible things. I'd use the rolleye smiley here if I didn't hate that thing.

7/21/2010 12:27:42 PM

Producer for NPR Affiliate Apologizes for Hateful Remarks on Rush Limbaugh
July 22, 2010

Quote :

"A producer for an NPR-affiliated radio station has apologized for saying she would 'laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out' if she were to see conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh suffering a heart attack In the latest fallout over the exposed e-mails from a now defunct private online forum for liberal journalists, Sarah Spitz, who produces the show Left, Right & Center for KCRW public radio program, said in a statement posted on NPR that she 'made poorly considered remarks about Rush Limbaugh to what I believed was a private email discussion group from my personal email account.' 'As a publicist, I realize more than anyone that is no excuse for irresponsible behavior. I apologize to anyone I may have offended and I regret these comments greatly; they do not reflect the values by which I conduct my life.' The Daily Caller, an online magazine launched by conservative commentator and Fox News contributor Tucker Carlson, has been releasing the e-mails that show some liberal journalists were actively seeking to influence news coverage rather than just report or comment on it. The stories recount how some journalists plotted to kill stories on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scandal to protect then-Sen. Barack Obama 's presidential campaign. Other e-mail chains advocated for shutting down Fox News. The leaked e-mails led to one blogger, David Wiegel, losing his job at The Washington Post. His colleague, Ezra Klein, the founder of the forum, pulled the plug on the list server known as Journolists. The e-mails provided evidence to critics that some journalists in the mainstream media harbor a deep-seated bias against conservatives. Spitz seemed shocked by her own hatred for Limbaugh, writing, 'I never knew I had this much hate in me. But he deserves it.' The outspoken Limbaugh, who famously expressed hope that Obama would fail as president, said even he could not relate to Spitz's hateful remarks. 'Not having wished anyone dead, nor having fantasized about watching someone die, I cannot possibly relate to this,' Limbaugh said in an e-mail to the Washington Examiner's Byron York that he also read on his show. Limbaugh continued that he thinks most liberals are jealous of his success. 'I am a legitimate, achieved and accomplished Number One and I've made it on my own and without them and without having followed their proscriptions,' he said. 'I think they are also jealous that I just sold my NY condo for a 125 percent profit while their homes are worthlessly underwater.' Limbaugh later added: 'And it is not just that they hate how I became who I am. They literally hate ME. They hate me because I am the most prominent, effective and unrelenting voice of conservatism and they have not been able to stop me.'"

http://tinyurl.com/27c8z5u

Many leftists are filled with hate.

7/22/2010 2:23:54 PM

Quote :

"'Not having wished anyone dead, nor having fantasized about watching someone die, I cannot possibly relate to this,' Limbaugh said in an e-mail to the Washington Examiner's Byron York that he also read on his show. Limbaugh continued that he thinks most liberals are jealous of his success."

lol

7/22/2010 2:31:11 PM

I would not piss on him if he were on fire.

7/22/2010 2:34:10 PM

^ QED.

FTR, I would never truly wish any of you dead or even ill. And if something life-threatening happened to you while you were in my presence, I would do everything in my power to help you.

Don't give me any of that "DIE IN A HOUSE FIRE" garbage, either. If I ever posted that here, it was Internet BS and I never actually wished it on anyone and you know it.

I mean, it's just like with the Bush shoe-throwing incident. I realize that some here and elsewhere were just having fun with it, but others were actually wishing Bush harm--hell, schmoe posted somewhere here that he wished someone would put a bullet in Bush's head. Disturbing.

I would never cheer if something similar (to the shoe-throwing incident) happened to Obama--and I wouldn't wish it to happen. I simply disagree with Obama's positions and those of many of today's Democrats. And I wish Obama a long and happy life--in retirement.

[Edited on July 22, 2010 at 2:59 PM. Reason : This is one BIG difference between me and some of you. I am not filled with hate.]

7/22/2010 2:57:26 PM

http://www.buzzfeed.com/reddit/idiots-everywhere-fall-for-fake-onion-story

7/22/2010 2:57:51 PM

Some of you are incessantly howling about FOX News. Well, here's what you get from MSNBC host Ed Schultz:

MSNBC's Ed Schultz Is Pissed at President Obama (Again)
July 23, 2010

Quote :

"'They must have a war room at the White House. I think they've got a sissy room too,' Schultz said. 'I didn't vote for that.'"

Freely admits that he voted for Obama, yet basically calls him a "sissy."

Quote :

"He said he supports primaries as needed to keep the party's moral compass. 'We have to do our vetting process. You're either with us, or you're against us in the progressive movement in America,' he said."

You're with us or you're with the RACISTS!!!1 RAWR!!!1

Quote :

"He also complained that Obama hasn't gone on his show or sat recently for interviews with Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow, adding that during the campaign, 'I busted my ass for Obama.' Schultz said that instead of going on The Ed Show, Obama went on Bret Baier's show on Fox, 'in my time slot. What's that all about?' Schultz said he's 'not anti-Obama' but wants to 'change some plays' to help the Democrats win in November."

http://gawker.com/5595047/ed-schultz-is-pissed-at-president-obama-again

What a loudmouthed partisan hack jerk.

7/24/2010 4:59:52 AM

Quote :

"'I busted my ass for Obama.' Schultz said that instead of going on The Ed Show, Obama went on Bret Baier's show on Fox, 'in my time slot. What's that all about?'"

sounds butthurt

7/24/2010 10:11:59 AM

Can't we just shut this thread down. "The Liberal Media", left with the invention of the internet. There are a million source of news, and most studys show that people pick news programs that agree with what they believe in. In the words of Oblio:

Quote :

"A point in every direction is no point at all."

7/24/2010 11:59:47 AM

Quote :

"most studys [sic] show. . . ."

7/24/2010 3:09:51 PM

^ That's the best you got? ... To point out a spelling error? ... Or maybe you want some references? Here's one:

http://www.livescience.com/culture/090608-media-message.html

[Edited on July 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM. Reason : *~<]BO]

7/24/2010 6:16:36 PM

^ A sentence beginning with the tired introductory element "Most studies show" will often get mocked here. This is nothing new.

7/24/2010 7:32:19 PM

I see ... Well, when you want to stretch yourself beyond mere mockery, come back and see us ...

P.S. - I didn't start the sentence with, "most studies show" ... I ended it that way ... In support of the main idea.

7/24/2010 11:20:16 PM

^ don't feed the troll

7/24/2010 11:20:55 PM

in the interest of being a grammar nazi, you did start an independent clause with the phrase, so...

7/24/2010 11:26:37 PM

^^ You're right. I should stop responding to BoBo.

^ Indeed.

7/25/2010 10:17:21 AM

Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters
August 27, 2010

Quote :

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880. By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744."

http://tinyurl.com/2w4bk7q

I guess this sort of (1) balances out the recent News Corp. $1 million donation to Republicans and (2) confirms--once again--which way the MSM leans.

[Edited on August 28, 2010 at 2:29 AM. Reason : As if there were ever any doubt. ]

8/28/2010 2:29:01 AM

you're even more of a fucking idiot than I give you credit for if you don't understand the difference between a media corporation giving money to politicians and individuals citizens giving money to politicians.

8/28/2010 3:43:15 PM

^ Please stop the name-calling. And did I ever indicate that there was no difference?

In fact, I used the term "balances out," which obviously suggests two separate things weighted against each other on a metaphorical scale. But this, of course, is self-evident.

8/28/2010 4:20:22 PM

You know, I started to berate him for the same thing, but I have a feeling the majority of the folks working in the MSM will be biased towards the corporation they choose to work for. After all, why would you be an ardent lefty and go work for News Corp and vice versa?

Of course, his point #2 is just stupid as fuck and somehow implies that News Corp isn't part of the MSM. People continue to somehow construe multiple left leaning organizations vs 1 right leaning as some sort of a liberal slant when the reality is that 1 conservative organization is carrying the same weight (and viewership) as the left leaning combined.

8/28/2010 4:26:34 PM

^ Actually, my point is not stupid at all--and you knew exactly what I meant. The MSM other than FOX News, which has been in existence for a lot less time than the other media outlets in question.

8/28/2010 4:49:13 PM

Quote :

"I guess this sort of (1) balances out the recent News Corp. $1 million donation to Republicans and (2) confirms--once again--which way the MSM leans."

That is a very weak argument.

What you said was that the MSM donations (which occurred in 2007-2008) to the Democrat Party balances out the News Corp. donation to the Republican Party (in 2010). One would say, based on evidence (that is, TIME), it is more like the OTHER WAY AROUND.

8/28/2010 7:17:18 PM

Quote :

"sort of"

8/29/2010 3:44:18 AM

Rgr...so you really mean not at all.

Makes sense, then.

8/29/2010 4:10:44 AM

^ It was an imperfect comparison, as comparisons often are, but one worth considering nonetheless.

8/29/2010 4:31:07 AM

Quote :

"There’s just one element missing from these snapshots of America’s ostensibly spontaneous and leaderless populist uprising: the sugar daddies who are bankrolling it, and have been doing so since well before the “death panel” warm-up acts of last summer. Three heavy hitters rule. You’ve heard of one of them, Rupert Murdoch. The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, with a combined wealth exceeded only by that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett among Americans."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html

8/29/2010 10:35:54 AM

Quote :

"^ Actually, my point is not stupid at all--and you knew exactly what I meant. The MSM other than FOX News,"

Again, you fail to realize we aren't living in that alternate reality between your ears where stupid shit makes sense and outside inputs are rejected before they are even contemplated.

You said the MSM leans left. Now you have modified it to say the MSM sans FNC leans left. I knew what you meant?

I'd say let us know when you rejoin this planet but we'll likely be able to tell when that happens as your replies will start becoming a little more coherent.

8/29/2010 12:21:47 PM

^ Please stop posting.

8/29/2010 2:54:32 PM

^ You first.

8/29/2010 3:11:34 PM

Best video ever concerning "liberal media"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlyb1Bx9Ic

8/29/2010 5:38:49 PM

Best video, really? I was only halfway watching it but they make the claim the media is actually right leaning, but I didn't see a source attributed to this claim. The rest of it was just filler about controlling the population.

Doesn't that video seem a bit odd juxtaposed against this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7h6VETOkXpU&NR=1

8/29/2010 5:56:10 PM

Check this thread--it'll give you all the confirmation a rational person would need. Unless, of course, you don't want confirmation; then no amount of evidence will convince you.

8/29/2010 7:37:04 PM

Latest edition of Propaganda Weekly from the liberal media:

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-gaggle/2010/08/26/on-jobs-and-deficits-republicans-are-worse-than-obama.html

Quote :

"Estimates Say Fewer Jobs, Larger Deficits if Republicans Were in Charge Nothing is more important to Republican politicians these days than jobs and the deficit—at least according to Republican politicians. As House Minority Leader John Boehner put it in a "major economic address" on Tuesday, President Obama is "doing everything possible to prevent jobs from being created" while refusing to do anything at all "about bringing down the deficits that threaten our economy." Elect Republicans in November, Boehner assured his audience, and we will put an end to this insanity. There's only one problem with Boehner's message: so far, the things that Republicans have said they want to do won't actually boost employment or reduce deficits. In fact, much the opposite. By combing through a variety of studies and projections from nonpartisan economic sources, we here at Gaggle headquarters have found that if Republicans were in charge from January 2009 onward—and if they were now given carte blanche to enact the proposals they want to—the projected 2010–2020 deficits would be larger than they are under Obama, and fewer people would probably be employed. "

8/29/2010 7:38:23 PM

^ Evan Thomas, Newsweek's former editor at large, has admitted that the magazine is liberal:

http://www.mrc.org/audioBias/MP3/2005/Totenberg_1.mp3

This should come as no surprise.

[Edited on August 29, 2010 at 8:15 PM. Reason : And I don't think the deficits would be as large and the jobs would be slightly better.]

8/29/2010 8:12:31 PM

Wait so no one can post using partisan sources?

Awesome, I guess that means you'll pretty much stop posting from now on then, right?

8/30/2010 1:25:15 AM

^ Objectivity is a myth. News is biased for a number of reasons.

8/30/2010 4:21:00 PM

Can't we just trust people to determine what the bias is themselves without acting like this is a problem somehow?

8/30/2010 6:11:47 PM

^ No. Bias in the news is a problem for everyone for a number of reasons.

8/30/2010 7:27:32 PM

The saturation of the media with sources you find objectionable sorta happened on its own. The market just went this way. The market made Fox #1, but it hasn't driven the people you seem to have a problem with out of the market.

Are you trying to say something should be done about this or are you just saying stuff for the sake of saying it?

[Edited on August 30, 2010 at 8:42 PM. Reason : .]

8/30/2010 8:39:46 PM

Fareed Zakaria has written in Newsweek (of course) that the United States overreacted to the 9-11 attacks:

What America Has Lost
It’s clear we overreacted to 9/11.
Sept. 4, 2010

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/04/zakaria-why-america-overreacted-to-9-11.html

And here's one response:

Did We Really Overreact to 9/11?
A response to Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek.
by N.M. Guariglia
September 8, 2010

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/did-we-really-overreact-to-911/

All I can say about Zakaria's position is wow. As I've indicated here, he is not the moderate that some of you claim he is.

[Edited on September 9, 2010 at 7:37 PM. Reason : .]

9/9/2010 7:35:55 PM

Nine Years After 9/11, Is Al-Qaeda's Threat Overrated?


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2017444,00.html#ixzz0zHAv5jbr

9/11/2010 9:52:00 PM

Hooksaw needs a bullet to the head.

9/11/2010 11:19:01 PM

^ that's pretty inappropriate...

9/11/2010 11:31:02 PM

Quote :

" ?The leader of 50 racist shitheads got more press than all the anti war protests in 2003."

- Lizz Winstead, Daily Show co-founder

9/11/2010 11:37:48 PM

CNN anchor fired after Jon Stewart rant
Rick Sanchez rails against Jews, calls 'Daily Show' host a 'bigot' in radio interview

Quote :

"CNN has fired anchor Rick Sanchez following a radio rant Thursday night where he called Jon Stewart a 'bigot,' blamed CNN brass for discrimination against him and insinuated that the media industry is controlled by Jews. The network announced Sanchez's dismissal in a statement early Friday evening: 'Rick Sanchez is no longer with the company. We thank Rick for his years of service and we wish him well,' the statement said. Sanchez's controversial interview occurred on the final day of his show in the 8 p.m. time slot, where he was replacing Campbell Brown, who departed in May. Angry about being replaced by CNN's new 'Parker Spitzer' talk show and the constant jokes made at his expense on the 'Daily Show,' he lashed out on at his perceived enemies — CNN brass, Jon Stewart and Jews. Sanchez went on Pete Dominick's Sirius XM show to promote his new book, 'Conventional Idiocy.' While on air, he called Stewart a 'bigot,' implied that CNN is controlled by Jews and that the network passed him over for promotion because he's Latino."

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39464138/ns/today-entertainment/?GT1=43001

More anti-Semitic ravings that are typical of some at CNN. And I predict the "outrage" here and elsewhere will be somewhat muted.

[Edited on October 1, 2010 at 8:45 PM. Reason : BUT, BUT FAUX NEWS, HOOKSAW DUMMYHEAD! RAWR!!!1 ]

10/1/2010 8:43:42 PM

he was fired, what fuck more do you want?

10/1/2010 9:12:12 PM

anti-Semitic = liberal

10/1/2010 10:12:40 PM