The double standard

Search

Is that a moonbat in my sites?
Joined
Oct 20, 2001
Messages
9,064
Tokens
There's a double standard that has gripped the fourth column. This bastion of the people, this watchdog over the government has sold it's soul; it has become a political entity with a political agenda that is so tainted that it has devolved into a fifth column.

Where do I begin---
The Boston Globe, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and a host of other "media" have all become advocates through which the activists and elitists of the left promote their agenda.

The activists are easy to recognize; Barbara Streisand, Rosey O'Donnell, Alec Baldwin, Al Franken, Jeanine Garrafalo, Sean Penn and a host of others are all representative of the elitist and Marxian mind set found among their ilk.

All of these people have one thing in common, they advocate and agenda that would apply to the masses, but not to them - after all, they have needs beyond those of the public.
Some prime examples of this hypocrasy can be found in Barbara Striesand who came out against the ownership and use of SUVs, but said that she "needed them" when questioned about the seven SUVs that she owned. Rosey O'Donnell, a rabid anti-gun advocate also answered that she "needed them for her own protection" when asked why her bodyguards carried guns.

This media never seem to apply the same rules to the Republicans that they do to the Democrats; when Trent Lott, the Senate majority leader, stated during a birthday bash for Thurmonds 100th birthday, "what a great president Strom Thurmond would have been"( Thurmond had run as a Dixiecrat and a segregationist in the 60's), Lott was reviled by all of the major media as a bigot who was trying to resurrect segregation.
--- Chris Dodd, a high ranking Democrat Senator from Connecticut stated During a birthday bash for Robert Byrd that Byrd was a man to be emulated, nary a word was heard. Robert Byrd is a sitting Senator from West Virginia and a past member of the Ku Klux Klan.
The Republican is reviled for a foolish statement, while a Democrat is ignored for vitually the same mistake.
Robert Byrd, a "past" member of the Ku Klux Klan used the word "nigger" on national TV, and not a word was written or said, except in passing.

Now the national media claims that there is no bias, yet I see it time after time, as some nincompoop like Alec Baldwin states publicly that he wished someone would assassinate the Bush family, or Michael Moore is lauded for his "documentary" that is nothing more than a political diatribe which has been called a documentary. If some icon of the right came out with a documentary detailing Kerry's deep French roots and his questionable Vietnam record, I wonder how this same media would react?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,917
Tokens
Even old Lurch was asked if he owned an SUV...he said he didn't...then he was asked if his wife owns one and he says "the family has it..I don't have it." Unbelievable.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Yes, and Murdoch, who owns more media worldwide than any other organisation, including Fox, the NY Post, the Weekly Standard blah blah is all notoriously right wing. On the matter of the latter, it is a mag that goes directly to Congressmen and Senators, lobbyists and other major players. You tell me, which media bias should you be keeping your eye on -- the one that feeds ten-second, ADD-inspired hyper-clips to the average joe or the one that spews a singular point of view to a supposedly bi-partisan Washington?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,917
Tokens
Xpanda,

The media bias in the U.S. is overwhelmingly liberal...it isn't even close. Watch the evening news in the U.S. some time as one example. The only area where the conservatives dominate is talk radio.

P.S. If you use blah blah in your future posts please refer to me in the credits otherwise Wil is going to get mad at you.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Re: blah blah ... I don't understand your request. Slow today.

PS. I think Canada has a different definition of Liberal Media than the US. We don't have Fox News here (although we do get Fox News Sunday for some reason -- and it's crap) and none of our media is even close to being that right wing. It's all relative, I guess.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,917
Tokens
X,

Wil didn't appreciate me using blah blah blah in some of my posts...

The way Wil posts on this political forum is the way our evening news works. When the latest job growth numbers were less than the consensus, he was right out there posting that up before the ink got dry.

Yet when the jobless claims number came in positive yesterday, not a word was written. This is how the Libs work...seek out the worst news they can find and try and convince the masses everything is dour. It has nothing to do with "just reporting the facts." It has to do with reporting one side of everything and repeating it often enough to make everyone believe.

P.S. Watch Dan Rather sometime if you can..he makes Wil look like a rookie
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SENDITIN:
X,

Wil didn't appreciate me using blah blah blah in some of my posts...

The way Wil posts on this political forum is the way our evening news works. When the latest job growth numbers were less than the consensus, he was right out there posting that up before the ink got dry.

Yet when the jobless claims number came in positive yesterday, not a word was written. This is how the Libs work...seek out the worst news they can find and try and convince the masses everything is dour. It has nothing to do with "just reporting the facts." It has to do with reporting one side of everything and repeating it often enough to make everyone believe.

P.S. Watch Dan Rather sometime if you can..he makes Wil look like a rookie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Truly, no offense intended, but American news makes me nuts. It's like watching a children's show with all the drama and suppositions that we can't pay attention for more than two minutes. If I want news of the American variety, I'll either read it, or find it on the BBC or one of the Canadian networks. CNN is the worst by far -- bunch of drama queens.

Although, it is only fair, the right-wing media does the same thing you accuse the left of. I scoured the NY Post online today for their version of the story that Bush's military records have come up missing. Not a word. Every other site seems to have something on it. I read the Weekly Standard, well, weekly, and I have to wonder why I do this to myself. Geez, do they reek of neoconservatism. I don't know how Conservatives can even stand it. As long as a market exists, the media will follow it, I suppose.

As for the blah blah thing -- Wil's never said boo to me about it and I do it all the time. Must be a Liberal Bias thing.
icon_smile.gif
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,917
Tokens
X,

Do you get Fox news up there? Hannity/Colmes is a pretty good show...you get both sides of the debate and the hosts treat each other with respect even though their views are usually far apart.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Only Fox News Sunday, which I watched once and won't be doing ever again. It wasn't as bad as CNN, but it was still pretty bad. There is something strangely eerie about a network that supports many of the ideologies held by the Religious Right via Republicanism while simultaneously coming up with shows like Temptation Island.

Think I'll pass.

There's a show on PBS that I think is called Politics (easy enough) that I rather enjoy. Multiple views, academic in focus, and not smattered with a bunch of idiots talking over each other. Oh, and no drama.
 

Is that a moonbat in my sites?
Joined
Oct 20, 2001
Messages
9,064
Tokens
I'm at a bit of a loss here - I mention the 4 major networks in the US and Xpanda comes up with Murdoch and Fox - by any count, that's 4 to 1 - and Fox, although biased to the right, does present a "fair and balanced" point of view.

By the By, Cspan also appears to have drifted leftward over the last several years - although not a major player, they still have an impact.

Comparing the Post to the times is like comparing the mouse to the lion. There is no comparison - the major printed media have travelled so far to the left that Marx looks like a fascist to them.

Senditin got it right - Wil mimics the big media in that you never get the true facts, just the bias du jour! It's not just on the editorial page, it's in the news and the way that the news is presented.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Murdoch owns News Corporation which in turn accounts for half of the world's media. Your 4 to 1 analogy doesn't quite ring. I contested your assertion that there exists a double standard in the media -- this is obviously not the case. ALL media is biased, but not all of it is biased towards the left.
 

Is that a moonbat in my sites?
Joined
Oct 20, 2001
Messages
9,064
Tokens
Xpanda - whewre are you getting your 'facts"?

First off, you conveniently don't mention the big 4 networks; ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN - vs Fox.

Then you say something abvout Murdoch owning half of the "worlds" media. If Murdoch does own half of the worlds media, it ain't in the US of A.
All of the largest newspapers in nearly all of the American cities (I say nearly all, because I don't know for sure that it's all of the cities.) are biased to the left - and that is a fact.

Your assertions are full of merde.
 

Is that a moonbat in my sites?
Joined
Oct 20, 2001
Messages
9,064
Tokens
Oh yes, and the BBC is another large media organization that's biased to the left - It must kill them to see Labor in Britain supporting Bush and the war.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Most of the global population is to the left of the current US administration. It makes sense, does it not, that the media reflects this? At any rate, the main reason I bring up Murdoch is to point to the Weekly Standard, a neocon mag with one helluvan audience. The NY Times might hit more people, but not the ones the Standard hits.

I buy space in media all the time so feel confident when I say that their description of the readership is unlike any description I've ever seen:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Readership & Circulation

Delivering Influence

Lots of Washington publications say they have influence. The Weekly Standard delivers it.

The Standard’s VIP distribution system is unrivaled by any other Beltway publication. Each issue is hand-delivered - by request- every Sunday morning to an exclusive list: the most powerful men and women in government, politics, and the media.

From the White House to Congressional leadership to the top echelon of Washington’s print and broadcast journalists, every important player in the city gets a copy. Articles delivered on Sunday are the foundation of Congressional debates the following week.

Moreover, before breakfast on Mondays, 4,000 requested copies of The Standard are delivered – also by hand - to every Member of Congress, to Congressional committees, and to federal agencies throughout the city.

Our distribution system allows advertisers to target those in office with precision. No other beltway publication can match The Weekly Standard when it comes to marketing to official Washington.

The Beltway and Beyond

The Weekly Standard has a large following of opinion leaders outside the Beltway, as well. More than 65,000 politically active Americans nationwide receive the magazine each week. Again, no other Beltway publication can match The Standard’s circulation.

Affluent and well-educated, this group is the very top tier of opinion leaders across the country. They are loyal and engaged with the magazine. Despite the fact that opinion leaders have little time to consume news, our readers spend TWO HOURS with each issue.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/advertising/default.asp<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Media bias aimed at voters is one thing, and I don't dispute your position on that. But media bias aimed at policymakers is quite another, and infinitely more influential. Media bias is everywhere -- always has been and always will be. Human nature, basically.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
Well here is an example why.Ny Times ran something like 25-35 frontpage stories on Abu grabass..( astory that is way over played) and every one knows it and basically could give a shit.
The Times ran 1 count em 1 front page story on the US turnover in Iraq and then a follow up a couple of days later on paghe 4 or something.
Its like people read the times, then have to read something to counter it or look for what the NYTimes have selectivley NOT found what they seem fit to print.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,265
Messages
13,566,066
Members
100,782
Latest member
rikvipfans1
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com