Mainstream Media

[Bunky]

I think part of the perceived bias is that most media outlets especially cable tends to like fads or controversy, etc. since they draw viewers. This is why O'Reilly, Oberman, etc tend to draw people in their time slights. They go after anything (Ayers, etc. have all been researched and not much there). They like to look at unknown (in this case Palin gets a lot of scrutiny). They are after viewers and Obama is fresh. That is, if they run two stories: one for mccain and one for Obama if Obama seems to draw more interest guess what they will run.

The media tends to favor progressive themes (environment, exposers of the priviledged (except their own anchors), etc) so that is why they tend to look liberal. That is, they want the world to be better. The conservatives do not want it better per se they just want it the same with less government involvement/lower taxes and someone to blame. So, the conservative story is less interesting from a human interest aspect.

[Spilchy]

Without a doubt, there is definitely a more liberal bias (not Left) in the print and TV media outside of FOX News. Conservatives dominate talk radio.

Obama has received a virtual pass on anything critical of him or his miserable wife with the media helping to dismiss his critics or rationalize, trivialize and/or lie about his odious associations. They dumped the Clinton machine long ago and hitched a ride on the Obama bandwagon. I guarantee if John McCain launched his political career with a fundraiser inside the home of an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber who said he "didn't do enough;" he wouldn't get the nomination to be sheriff of Mayberry after the media was finished with him. How about if McCain sat in a church with an unhinged, rabid, lunatic, racist, anti-Semitic preacher for 20 years who pals around with Farrakhan and meets the leader of a terror sponsoring state in Libya during the 80's? And then had the audacity to insult us all by lying to our faces, saying he never knew his preacher spoke like that? You think he would get the nomination? Without a doubt, the media would have shaped popular opinion against him; McCain that is.

But if you bring this up, according to editorials out the ying yang, you're tinged with racist and even xenophobia. I read these editorials every day as they are linked from a political blog I frequent.

Take Sarah Palin (a huge McCain mistake). Although I'm not a fan of many of her beliefs and cringe when she speaks unscripted; she has been raked over the coals about her alleged inexperience (and now her wardrobe). Has anyone in the media ever stopped to realize that Obama only has 143 legislative days as a Senator and if he completes 1 term as president, it will be the longest he has ever held a single job? And this is to be president, not VP. Experience? This guy has ZERO, zip, none, nada, zilch. But this is not a criteria for the media judging him, but it is for Palin.

However way you slice, dice or label it, McCain faces an uphill battle with the media.

[JohnDeere]

obama will end up getting killed by a small town southern man

[MSOsr]

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

All candidates should be critically questioned, and I think most of the time they are. But if you don't listen to, like, or accept the answer, where does/should it go from there?

Are you questioning my patriotism or anyone else's? What makes you a true patriot? Because you're a vet? Begging your pardon, you know nothing about me.

I meant my "questioning" of Obama doesn't make me unpatriotic, as your earlier post seemed to insinuate is the "conservative" response to attacks.

I'm assuming you aren't a vet, because you didn't say you were when the opportunity was presented. That doesn't make your opinions irrelevant or not noteworthy; it might make them, in my opinion, a little naive in some instances, however.

Mike

[Setec Astronomy]

Spilchy, it's well known that Senators are not thought to make good presidents, or rather that that legislative branch experience is not thought to prepare for executive. Who was the last President who was elected without exective experience? I guess it was JFK (Ford was never elected President and Johnson wasn't elected President until after he had served in the job already). Nixon's executive experience was being VP for 8 years (if that counts). So this election is a bit unusual in that we will definitely elect someone who has no executive branch experience.

Palin is the one on either ticket who has the most experience as an executive, but that doesn't seem to really qualify her for the job. Like with any job, it depends on the person. Some people can do the same job their whole lives and still not be any good at it, while others can master it quickly.

When you evaluate job applicants, it is frequently useful to evaluate the entire person, for as with any of us, it is the sum of our intelligence, upbringing, education, and experience that makes us who we are. Nature or nurture? Both.

[MSOsr]

Originally Posted by Bunky

IThey go after anything (Ayers, etc. have all been researched and not much there). They like to look at unknown (in this case Palin gets a lot of scrutiny). They are after viewers and Obama is fresh. That is, if they run two stories: one for mccain and one for Obama if Obama seems to draw more interest guess what they will run.

The media tends to favor progressive themes (environment, exposers of the priviledged (except their own anchors), etc) so that is why they tend to look liberal. That is, they want the world to be better. The conservatives do not want it better per se they just want it the same with less government involvement/lower taxes and someone to blame. So, the conservative story is less interesting from a human interest aspect.

Are you kidding me? Ayers has not been researched, reported or even acknowledged by the mainstream other than Fox. My local paper had an Associated Press story that referred to "the razor thin" evidence of Obama's relationship with Ayers! Is that reporting the news or editorializing it?

"They like to look at unknown (Palin)" ... What about OBAMA? We know all about Palin's college years, but nothing about the pursuits of Obama in college. Obama skipped it in his books, also. What is the story there?

"Conservatives do not want [the world] to be better": Excuse me....tax receipts doubled in the Reagan years, even though the tax rates dropped. The economy and Americans' view of the country had never been higher (how do you carry 49 of 50 states, as Reagan did if that weren't true?)

The stock market was flying high, gas was $2/gallon and jobs growth was excellent two years ago, when the Dems took over Congress. Who benefits if they allow the economy to tank? OBAMA. McCain was ahead in the polls until the economy tanked due to Dem policies. My explanation of Barney Frank's et. al role in the recent collapse has been discussed elsewhere on this site.

Name something significant the Dems have passed in the last 2 years.

Mike (laughing)

[III]

Originally Posted by Picus

well if they say it's fair and balanced it must be, right?

Picus, nobody is saying the fox news channel or anyother conservative network/talk show is right. People have their own opinions if they're right or not. The point is being fair. Period. Without a doubt the mainstream media wants Obama to win this election. How? Just a few of the many examples.

BoycottNYT: The New York Times Smears Cindy McCain

McCain Camp Fires Back at Times for Cindy McCain Story - FOXNews.com Elections

Given Barack Obama's past remarks, one would expect him to condemn the Times for presenting such an unfair portrait of Cindy McCain. Obama himself said the following comments. "I have said before and I will repeat again: I think people's families are off-limits." Remember this from back in May? Democrat Barack Obama had a message for Tennessee's Republican Party: "Lay off my wife."


How about NBC refusing to air Biden's comments about how americans would face a national crisis if elected?

McCain Campaign Plays Hardball With NBC News, Media - FOXNews.com Elections


How about how the liberal media has trashed Joe the plumber?

Michelle Malkin Operation Destroy Joe the Plumber

CNN’s David Gergen Mocks Joe the Plumber, Asks Why McCain Didn’t Vet Him | NewsBusters.org

Trashing Joe the Plumber | Thinking Right | ajc.com

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by MSOsr

What about OBAMA? We know all about Palin's college years, but nothing about the pursuits of Obama in college. Obama skipped it in his books, also. What is the story there?

From Wikipedia:

"Following high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Obama graduated with a B.A. from Columbia in 1983."

Now you know as much about Obama's college "pursuits" as we know about Palin's.

[Banacheq]

Study Shows McCain Media Coverage Mostly Negative - FOXNews.com Elections

I take everything with a grain of salt. Statistics and studies can be interpreted to support opposing viewpoints, but sometimes, there's not much to dispute.

[MSOsr]

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

From Wikipedia:

"Following high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles, where he studied at Occidental College for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. Obama graduated with a B.A. from Columbia in 1983."

Now you know as much about Obama's college "pursuits" as we know about Palin's.

So now it's up to Americans to consult wikipedia to find out what the mainstream media decided not to tell us about Obama (when they told us EVERYTHING about his opponents)? That's further proof of the media bias: if you want to find out something that might be negative about Obama, you have to go find it yourself; if you want to find out anything negative about McCain/Palin, turn on your TV or pick up a newspaper.

Thanks for proving the point.

Mike

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by MSOsr

So now it's up to Americans to consult wikipedia to find out what the mainstream media decided not to tell us about Obama (when they told us EVERYTHING about his opponents)? That's further proof of the media bias: if you want to find out something that might be negative about Obama, you have to go find it yourself; if you want to find out anything negative about McCain/Palin, turn on your TV or pick up a newspaper.

Thanks for proving the point.

What point did I prove? Did you and I read the same thing? Was there something negative about Obama in that educational summary? I thought the point I proved was that there was just as much info about Obama's education out there as there is for Palin.

If you actually want to debate this, CNN ran 2 hour bios on both Obama and McCain about a month ago. The educational backgrounds of both men were discussed.

[Picus]

Originally Posted by MSOsr

Fox is the only network that has both liberal and conservative commentators. The other mainstream networks don't even bother trying -- straight liberals.

Mike (I'll stay with Fox and put up with their idiot liberal commentators)

This says it all. Fox puts on moron Liberals so their Conservative commentary can eat them up. The other stations are just as bad the other way, but Fox is no better. If you honestly think so, well...

Originally Posted by MSOsr

Remind me never to go to Canada again.

You'll be missed...

Originally Posted by Setec Astronomy

Humans are humans, there is always going to be some bias. Some are more biased than others. The thing I find funny is how the "bias card" is always pulled if one side thinks that the MSM didn't find enough stink on the crap they dug up..

I agree, some are more bias than others, but everyone has an agenda, that's all I was saying.