Left Wing Biased

[DrKilledByDeath87]

Yes, it's true I'm rather left wing myself...but something continually bothers me...People bitching on and on and on about Fox News and MSNBC and all the major news media being biased.

Then these same people praise the independant media and other left leaning information sources for broadcasting "the truth". Are these people blind to the fact that the left-wing media is ALSO biased...OH GOD NO, could it be, they're trying to persuade you to believe their point, JUST LIKE THE "EVIL" RIGHT WING MEDIA...

Thoughts/Comments/Questions/Flames?

[Montgomery-Scott]

tru dat. tru dat. It's just that the EVIL RIGHT WING MEDIA is much larger, more widely distributed, and better financed than the BIASED LEFT WING MEDIA.

[ImmoralLibertarian]

once again, watch the BBC. its not biased.

you get CBBC or summit like that in Canada don't you?

[DrKilledByDeath87]

At 7/25/04 07:46 PM, grand_retard wrote: once again, watch the BBC. its not biased.

you get CBBC or summit like that in Canada don't you?

The BBC has it's own little biases as does the CBC, unviased media is impossible

[Wraith]

Personally, I like the independent sources. If they're biased, it's usually to a lesser degree than the ones that are nationally distributed. Hell, I'd accept an article from The Onion if someone showed it to me.

[BAWLS]

At 7/25/04 08:15 PM, The_Bacon_Jesus wrote: The BBC has it's own little biases as does the CBC, unviased media is impossible

It seems to make sense that a source outside of the U.S. would be fairly unbiased about reporting American affairs. CNN seems to handle things pretty well, though.

[CI-Lain]

Ok here lets fix this and end it here.

a ranking of major news outlets from -10(being furthest to the left) to 10(being furthest to the right) and 0 being unbiased.

NPR------------------(-2)
Air America-------(6)
FOX news---------(7)
MSNBC-------------(2)
CNN-----------------(-1to1)
News Radio-------(7)
Economist---------(2) But by far the best
economy focused news source I know of
BBC------------------(0)

Keep in mind i have listened to or read all of these media sources.

Npr is only a -2 because while it is clearly to the left its much more mundane and layed back. Its less beligerent and obvious.

AAR is kinda obvious for its -6. I still enjoy it more than most news media becaus its FUN. Its not all about news an politics nor is it yelling and screaming, its very laid back and funny.

Fox News is obviously over to the right. O'reilly, Hannity, and Colmes all fit the bill. Yes I said Colmes. Hes not a liberal. He may be a democrat but he doesnt speak up nearly enough which gives false impresions about the attitudes of liberals to encouragable viewers. Liberal colmes is just shouted down by neo-con Hannity.

MSNBC...scarborough....

CNN is really hard to tell. I said a range of numbers because alot of times it shifts. I mean crossfire is both left and right, balanced. So thatr earns a 1 and a -1.

News Radio. Well considering every one i know of is either employed by FOX or is scarborough or Limbaugh well...it just seems obvious.

Economist is not very conservative because they couldnt care less about the major social issues of the day, which is refresshing. It is a factual, well written journal with alot of stats to refernce in the back of every issue. It is a little conservative because it represents buisness and conservatism has stood for deregulation.

BBC its not amaerican and has long been considered the center.

Keep in mind this is very much my opinion and feel free to dissagree but make sure youve seen these media outlets before you judge. I think Im pretty accurate.

[CI-Lain]

At 7/25/04 09:47 PM, CI-Lain wrote: Ok here lets fix this and end it here.

a ranking of major news outlets from -10(being furthest to the left) to 10(being furthest to the right) and 0 being unbiased.

NPR------------------(-2)
Air America-------(6)

AirAmerica was supposed to be -6 sorry my mistake

[The-Vox]

Left good.... right bad

[Montgomery-Scott]

excelent post. very professional. I think ur right on with this list. Good job man.

[exide-edge]

Never limit your research to a single source.

If i were to consult two different sources on the same subject
moveon.org or rightwingnews im sure i would recieve conflicting opinions.

[DrKilledByDeath87]

At 7/25/04 09:51 PM, xlaw42 wrote: Left good.... right bad

Ur statement contradicts ur sig

"anti-welfare" - The left traditionally supports thing like welfare
"pro-nazism" - Nazism is extreme right

maybe im missing something but I'm confused

[BAWLS]

At 7/25/04 09:47 PM, CI-Lain wrote: a ranking of major news outlets from -10(being furthest to the left) to 10(being furthest to the right) and 0 being unbiased.

You forgot some.

CBS--------------------(-5)
AFN---------------------(7)

[CI-Lain]

At 7/25/04 10:19 PM, NotYouZ wrote:

At 7/25/04 09:47 PM, CI-Lain wrote: a ranking of major news outlets from -10(being furthest to the left) to 10(being furthest to the right) and 0 being unbiased.

You forgot some.

CBS--------------------(-5)
AFN---------------------(7)

Just out of curiosity what is AFN stand for?

and CBS is not far to the left. I think its easier to judge the cable networks because theyre buisness is news. CBS is a normal station I dont see it as to the left and it really doesnt have all that many shows based around politics or the news.

[AbstractVagabond]

At 7/25/04 07:20 PM, The_Bacon_Jesus wrote: Yes, it's true I'm rather left wing myself...but something continually bothers me...People bitching on and on and on about Fox News and MSNBC and all the major news media being biased.

Then these same people praise the independant media and other left leaning information sources for broadcasting "the truth". Are these people blind to the fact that the left-wing media is ALSO biased...OH GOD NO, could it be, they're trying to persuade you to believe their point, JUST LIKE THE "EVIL" RIGHT WING MEDIA...

Thoughts/Comments/Questions/Flames?

As it's been said before: The truth is an unwilling slut. I don't think the left wing has the truth any better than the right wing. I sure know I don't have a firm grasp on "facts". Whenever I call something the truth or a fact, it's always to stroke my ego. A fault of mine I can't seem to correct. I say that with a certain post in mind I regretfully did.

What makes me so angry with the right wing is their KKK-like mentality. No, not racist mentality. The mentality of feeling superior to everyone else. It's not all men are created equal, it's all conservatives are created equal.

What gets the left wing under my skin is their desire to make everything as bland as humanly possible. They want to preserve life, but not enjoy life. It's not all men are created equal, it's all men are created neutered.

I try to be open-minded, but you know what? That's an impossible task, especially if you're to take a stand on something. Especially if, like me, your emotions always get in the way of logical thinking. I try, though.

[AbstractVagabond]

At 7/25/04 10:34 PM, CI-Lain wrote: Just out of curiosity what is AFN stand for?

Awww Fuck No!!

[Spookshow]

It's hard to report something reliably when people like ACLU and NRA get involved.

[bumcheekcity]

At 7/25/04 09:47 PM, CI-Lain wrote: NPR------------------(-2)
Air America-------(-6)
FOX news---------(7)
MSNBC-------------(2)
CNN-----------------(-1to1)
News Radio-------(7)
Economist---------(2)
BBC------------------(0)

Actually, to edit that, I must suggest you put CNN over to thr gith by a couple of points. They're more a +2. And BBC aren't PERFECTLY unbiased. Their coverage of Iraq WAS leaning to the left, but still fair and balanced, and their coverage of domestic issues is unbiased almost completely. They're more on a (-1 to 0)

[ClassicalStar]

At 7/26/04 10:32 AM, Spookshow wrote: It's hard to report something reliably when people like ACLU and NRA get involved.

Oh, I see we've got another Jerry Falwell here.

Well, let me state that you conservatives are dispicable characters.

Conservatives = Hitler's children=Pisses me off like Hell.

[XcakerX]

I whole heardly agree with this topic.

What gets my goat is that people think a left-wing slant is actually a good counter to a rightwing slant. More and more people are beging to believe opinions can be "true" and "correct". Its funny how sometime rational people out for a better america can sometimes end up being the person they hated in the first place.

What ever happened to ethics in journalism, reporting the news, the whole news, and nothing but the news, save the opinons for the editorial sections of newspapers, and fictional film. We can save the sensationalism for works of fiction can't we.

Ethics is something American Journalism lacks. Right-wing media portrays a slanted, and sometimes even fictious view of events and false premise.

Everyone else is in media is too busy making a slant so left wing, its putrid, even to reasonable thinking liberals.

We can't give gays their rights without denying christians theirs, We can't have buisness, goverment and social reform without repealing the 2nd amendment, We can't listen to our mp3s, we must obey coperate rule, We can't be safe from the terrorists without raging an entire global war to end mandkind.

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT.

Can't I pick and choose what I want to believe rather than swallowing the party line, because right now the party line on both sides is getting increasinly hard to swallow.

Thanks to the Republicans, I can't love my country, wave a flag, without denying the very things the flag, and this country were founded on, and represent.

Thanks to the Democrats, I can't care about women, gay rights, without pushing bullshit social security, which takes people's money, and runs out before it comes back.

Thanks to the Democrats(michael moore actually), I can't be armed and proud, and support a racially equal, balanced and harmonious state.

Thanks to the Republicans I can't actively defend my country against foreign attackers without also pledging alegence to bogus war.

Thanks to Coperate Democrats, my Rock music might be labeled offensive, and I might thrown in jail for listening to it.

[Rabindarath]

At 7/25/04 09:47 PM, CI-Lain wrote: a ranking of major news outlets from -10(being furthest to the left) to 10(being furthest to the right) and 0 being unbiased.

You forgot some.

CBS--------------------(-5)
AFN---------------------(7)

Just out of curiosity what is AFN stand for?

AFN stands for the Armed Forces Network

[RedSkunk]

All of this "charting of bias" and crap is really dumb. You guys make me depressed.

A network's bias is intangible - it constantly changes, and you can't categorize it, or immediately compare it with another. I mean, you can't, without looking like an ass. While CNN might have a bias towards one area, Fox might have a different sort of bias in another area of the news.

Politics isn't a linear spectrum, neither is bias. You're generalizing everything to the point of meaningless.

Of course all news sources are biased. But you know what? You go to Fox, CNN, BBC, or Al-Jazeera, and they all get the majority of their news from AP, or Reuters.

Sure, they have their own specials occasionally, but these are usually classified as editorials. Hannity, O'Reilly, Franken - they aren't news reporters. They're talking heads. "Bias" isn't applicable - they're giving their opinions, calling opinions "bias" just makes you look like a fool.

Additionally, bias is in the eye of the beholder. I might say CNN has a right-wing bias. A European would tend to agree with me. A FNC viewer, would strongly disagree. It's a subjective term.

[ClassicalStar]

At 7/26/04 12:36 PM, uncle_skunk wrote: Additionally, bias is in the eye of the beholder. I might say CNN has a right-wing bias. A European would tend to agree with me. A FNC viewer, would strongly disagree. It's a subjective term.

True dat. Good point.

[Jemistad]

At 7/26/04 12:43 PM, banyabeethovenpump wrote:

At 7/26/04 12:36 PM, uncle_skunk wrote: Additionally, bias is in the eye of the beholder. I might say CNN has a right-wing bias. A European would tend to agree with me. A FNC viewer, would strongly disagree. It's a subjective term.

I'm not sure I totally agree. To determine a bias, the 'beholder' must be unbiased. Remember that bias was originally used scientifically, and not politically.

[ClassicalStar]

At 7/26/04 12:47 PM, Jemistad wrote:

I'm not sure I totally agree. To determine a bias, the 'beholder' must be unbiased. Remember that bias was originally used scientifically, and not politically.

You're so right.

[Rabindarath]

At 7/26/04 12:32 PM, XcakerX wrote:
What ever happened to ethics in journalism, reporting the news, the whole news, and nothing but the news, save the opinons for the editorial sections of newspapers, and fictional film. We can save the sensationalism for works of fiction can't we.

I don't think this lofty level of journalistic ethics ever really existed. There are scores of examples of media campaigns against a person or a cause (or for a person/cause for that matter) in the past that could make the notion of an unbiased media practically a myth.

What I think has changed from the past are a couple of things.

First, pride in one's work. Journalists checking multiple sources, getting their facts straight even writing and speaking using correct grammar and spelling. I once heard a newscaster on CNN Headline News say, "There is groups of people...". Holy fuck. Could you take a little less time going over your hair and a little more going over your script?

If reporters would stick to some quality standard in the reporting of their news, and not be so giddy about getting something out first (and brag about it), it would ratchet down things a notch. Just think if the networks didn't call Florida for Gore, then Bush, then calling it 'Too Close To Call'. It may have turned the rancour down a notch.

The second thing is a decline in civility. Disagreeing with your opponent while not thinking they're the child of Satan. I'm more or less left-wing, but I thought the Iraq war was a good idea solely for the reason that when the U.S. wants to get rid of a dictator, even if it is for selfish reasons, you don't pass up that chance.

I don't view those who opposed the war as Saddam-lovers or "if they were living in the 30s, they be saying "Hands off Hitler"". Their idea of non-violence is a goal we should ultimately aspire to, not despise. But, realistically, I belived that was the sole way to get Saddam out of power was with force.

Not that I did an exhaustive search, but I couldn't find great numbers on either side who held a respectful view of their opponents. On inourname.net, the site claimed to hold a respectful view of their opponents, blah, blah. Yet under the "Celebrity Stupidity" section, it wonders why oh why weren't there any Columbine type shootings when Michael Moore went to high school. Oi.

It doesn't get any better with anti-war activists denegrating the holocaust with "Bush=Hitler" signs on, what seemed like, every second activist.

The bias will always be there, because the people themselves are biased. Those in the field just need to do their job better and not be such dickheads sometimes.

[The-Enforcer]

At 7/25/04 07:20 PM, The_Bacon_Jesus wrote:

:Then these same people praise the independant media and other left leaning information sources for broadcasting "the truth". Are these people blind to the fact that the left-wing media is ALSO biased

Thank You! At least one other person realizes that the left wing outlets aren't unbiased. Thats what I've been trying to say for weeks but most of these idiots are trying to convince me that the BBC wasn't left-wing!

[Jemistad]

Good point. Other types of media aswell - I was a little confused by Farenheit 9/11. Michael Moore is the most biased person I've ever seen. I really admire his work, but sometimes his bias pisses me off. At the end of Bowling for Columbine, he parades a picture of a dead 6 year old, to make Charlton Heston feel bad about the NRA. I don't think its justifiable to abuse picture's of dead girls to coerce viewers into thinking left wing.

Also - there is an element of cool associated with being left wing. Everyone at my old school were against the war. I felt most people were jumping on the bandwagon so they didn't get left out.
People don't think you can be a decent person, and be right wing.

[RedSkunk]

At 7/26/04 12:47 PM, Jemistad wrote: I'm not sure I totally agree. To determine a bias, the 'beholder' must be unbiased. Remember that bias was originally used scientifically, and not politically.

But remember that we're using it politically. I ask you to find one instance of an unbiased "beholder", in this political connotation.

If it doesn't existance, then we have to settle with biased determinations of bias. I'm pointing this out. This is how it is.

[Jemistad]

True. I think everyone has a bias. Whether or not they let it change their opinios or actions is a different matter. There are people that act in complete neutrality.