southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000640894 Only 44% of people believe the media fairly and accurately reports stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 The studied effects and hazards of watching fox news A new study shows that patrons of Rupert Murdoch's brand of journalism are most likely to be misinformed about key facts of the Iraq war. http://www.alternet.org/story/16892 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2004 Author Share Posted September 23, 2004 The studied effects and hazards of watching fox news http://www.alternet.org/story/16892 Or they could just watch CBS... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Or they could just watch CBS... Which channel is owned by General Electric? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2004 Author Share Posted September 23, 2004 Which channel is owned by General Electric? NBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 I was wondering why the NBC Peacock is in the GE commercials... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000640894 Only 44% of people believe the media fairly and accurately reports stories. Lies! All Lies!!! Oops... Wow, I guess they're right after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Of the entire sample, 48% perceive the media as "too liberal," 15% as "too conservative," and 33% find it "just about right." The number finding the media too liberal has only gone up 3% in the past year, however. Make that 48% plus me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 24, 2004 Author Share Posted September 24, 2004 Lies! All Lies!!! Oops... Wow, I guess they're right after all. Well at least 56% of us are right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 It doesn't surprise me when you have CBS working hand in hand with the democrats and creating a totally bulls*** story about Bush. It backfired though and now both Kerry and CBS are suffering for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1000640894 Only 44% of people believe the media fairly and accurately reports stories. Nuke It doesn't surprise me when you have CBS working hand in hand with the democrats and creating a totally bulls*** story about Bush. It backfired though and now both Kerry and CBS are suffering for it. The GOP's campaign is working. Rejoice and be Glad! When it hits 2% only the fringe wackos will believe, then the Republican government can do whatever they want and we'll all go skipping down the yellow brick road whistling a happy tune. Get your GOP news right here! Buy your GOP news right here! Direct from President Rush to you, get your GOP news! The only news for America! Here's what the GOP wants you to believe! 100% Right Wing Biased, just like you like it! No truth, no independence, all right wing approved! It's sad that so many people want to give up their rights. Give up independent judges, give up the media, give up your right to free speech. Just bury your heads in the sand. Remember when the media was in bed with the Bush campaign alledging that Kerry had an affair with the intern. Where were all the conservative remarks then? Oh I forgot, that was an honest mistake by Matt Drudge and Fox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 It doesn't surprise me when you have CBS working hand in hand with the democrats and creating a totally bulls*** story about Bush. It backfired though and now both Kerry and CBS are suffering for it. Yeah, that damned liberal media never hounded Clinton at all for any sexual improprieties at all. There was something involving a girl named Monica. Did anybody ever hear about that? The media is only as liberal as the conservative business interests that own the outlets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Who pushed that? Drudge, Rush, et al. Certainly not CBS. Besides, that was Clinton's second term. It wasn't going to effect an election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Who pushed that? Drudge, Rush, et al. Certainly not CBS. Besides, that was Clinton's second term. It wasn't going to effect an election. See there's the problem, conservatives want the press to push stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 That is an interesting angle. Yes, they do, sir. You know why? Because otherwise it isn't news. The Swiftboat ads (which I still don't think have been totally debunked, by the way - I'm sure Apu can prove me wrong pretty quickly, be my guest) would have never been picked up by the mainstream media if it were not for the conservatives talking about them. It wasn't until about a week after the ads were out that the mainstream media picked up on it, because otherwise they would have been left out on "news". Why is that wrong? If left to their own devices, it's terribly slanted the "mainstream press" gets ahold of for news, and as we have talked about a little bit, it's more about the advertising dollars as to when news stories get broke, etc etc etc ... which is SAD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 That is an interesting angle. Yes, they do, sir. You know why? Because otherwise it isn't news. The Swiftboat ads (which I still don't think have been totally debunked, by the way - I'm sure Apu can prove me wrong pretty quickly, be my guest) would have never been picked up by the mainstream media if it were not for the conservatives talking about them. It wasn't until about a week after the ads were out that the mainstream media picked up on it, because otherwise they would have been left out on "news". Why is that wrong? If left to their own devices, it's terribly slanted the "mainstream press" gets ahold of for news, and as we have talked about a little bit, it's more about the advertising dollars as to when news stories get broke, etc etc etc ... which is SAD. Is it because they do not want viewers and profits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 The mainstream press only reports "conservative" news if it's a) about making money for them, or b.) it's about sex, which goes back to a) the money, because sex sells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 The mainstream press only reports "conservative" news if it's a) about making money for them, or b.) it's about sex, which goes back to a) the money, because sex sells. I didn't know news could be divided up as conservative and liberal. It wasn't until the GOP made a campaign of punishing anyone who dares to criticize them that anyone even thought in these terms. I cannot wait for the Government Broadcasting System like TAAS in the old Soviet Union. It would have been nice to have. Nixon and Clinton would be hailed as heroes without the damn press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Tex, I agree! But the press, is not about the press anymore. It's all politicalized bulls***. THAT is the problem now. Your story on the CEO of the parent company of CBS "supporting Bush". Hell yes, he does. He's getting richer because of him - and NO, I'm not talking about his PERSONAL taxes, I'm talking about his business growing because of economic recovery - so what does that say? The "conservative" media is so successful now because they bring about stories that the mainstream press won't touch, so their news is "fresh" and "different". That's why Rush, Hannity, Faux news, etc is having the ratings successes they are, and the "mainstream" media can't get left behind, so they pick it up, eventually. In a sick way, it's a balance of one another. If there were "REAL" journalism now, all this wouldn't matter, but money has gotten in the way of it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Tex, I agree! But the press, is not about the press anymore. It's all politicalized bulls***. THAT is the problem now. Your story on the CEO of the parent company of CBS "supporting Bush". Hell yes, he does. He's getting richer because of him - and NO, I'm not talking about his PERSONAL taxes, I'm talking about his business growing because of economic recovery - so what does that say? The "conservative" media is so successful now because they bring about stories that the mainstream press won't touch, so their news is "fresh" and "different". That's why Rush, Hannity, Faux news, etc is having the ratings successes they are, and the "mainstream" media can't get left behind, so they pick it up, eventually. In a sick way, it's a balance of one another. If there were "REAL" journalism now, all this wouldn't matter, but money has gotten in the way of it all. Journalism should be about ratings and profits not about truth and the public trust, now I get it. If the public wants pictures of smiling school kids in Iraq instead of Kerry swift boat stories, give them the kids. If the public is tired of reports of government wrong doings, give them happy stuff. If the viewers only want negative stories about Dems, give them that. And this will make our country better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Journalism should be about ratings and profits not about truth and the public trust, now I get it. If the public wants pictures of smiling school kids in Iraq instead of Kerry swift boat stories, give them the kids. If the public is tired of reports of government wrong doings, give them happy stuff. If the viewers only want negative stories about Dems, give them that. And this will make our country better? No Tex, I'm saying it should NOT be about ratings and profits, but it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 That is an interesting angle. Yes, they do, sir. You know why? Because otherwise it isn't news. The Swiftboat ads (which I still don't think have been totally debunked, by the way - I'm sure Apu can prove me wrong pretty quickly, be my guest) would have never been picked up by the mainstream media if it were not for the conservatives talking about them. It wasn't until about a week after the ads were out that the mainstream media picked up on it, because otherwise they would have been left out on "news". Why is that wrong? If left to their own devices, it's terribly slanted the "mainstream press" gets ahold of for news, and as we have talked about a little bit, it's more about the advertising dollars as to when news stories get broke, etc etc etc ... which is SAD. They are in it for ratings and advertising dollars, plain and simple. Robert McChesney, an author and well respected expert in media studies by people of just about all political stipes (and a UIUC professor. w00t w00t) He and Neil Postman in their books explain pretty well that people tune in to see fights and struggles which in turn dumbs down the media. It increases the preponderance of talking heads like Moore, O'Reilly, Rush, Hannity, Colmes, Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough et al. where nothing really gets accomplished on the show except two opposing douchebags get on the air and spew their venom with neither of them really hitting an actual policy point to inform viewers. Actual policy debates are relegated to channels like C-SPAN where viewing numbers equals the people who are subscribed to American Grocery Monthly Magazine. It's also a nice explanation for why there is no talk of policy in this election cycle (and others). It's not about their stance on issues, it's become more of a pro wrestling match commentary. "Will the tag team of John Squared be able to take out the English Mangler and Tricky Dick Cheney?! Tune in to find out!" As for the Not So Swift Boat Vets for Smearing Kerry... SBV's anti-Kerry letter includes around 300 names as signatories. However, several vets whose names appear on the letter have stepped forward to state that they never approved the use of their name in that letter and that they do not support SBV. Three days after Media Matters pointed out that SBV's website contradicted the account of their star "witness" William Schacte that he was in the boat with Kerry at the time Kerry won his first Purple Heart, SBV coolly revised their website. Here is a site of documented evidence of the Not So Swift Boat Vets coming up with a lot of contradictory stories about Kerry (they can't even lie consistently): http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/sbv_v_sbv.htm There is plenty to hit Kerry with than to resort to making s*** up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 No Tex, I'm saying it should NOT be about ratings and profits, but it is. But then I hear conservatives point to how successful Fox, Rush, Hannity, etc. are and explain that's because they are doing it right? I get a feeling conservatives just want to read dirt on liberals and happy stuff about the GOP. Whenever a negative story appears concerning the GOP, there is always the wave of outcry about media bias. The GOP is making itself criticism proof and we all lose because of it. I guess a point could be made that Bush is perfect and any negative stories are just media bias, but I believe hannity and rush are the only two that really believe that. If the Watergate breakin happened today, it wouldn't have been given 1/2 a column of ink and the GOP mouthpieces would have killed it in moments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 But then I hear conservatives point to how successful Fox, Rush, Hannity, etc. are and explain that's because they are doing it right? No, I say they are successful because they report news that the other outlets don't, and they APPEAR to be "fresh" and "balanced", etc - and because their news is "fresh" they get all the advertising because it's a different standard of reporting then every other outlet in the country. That's why they are successful. I'm also saying that it does give a balance to the "mainstream" press, although I think both sides (conservative AND mainstream) do nothing but spin stories that will appeal to their viewers, in turn driving up the almighty advertising dollar$. I leave my answer to Faux News doing it "right" to this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 No, I say they are successful because they report news that the other outlets don't, and they APPEAR to be "fresh" and "balanced", etc - and because their news is "fresh" they get all the advertising because it's a different standard of reporting then every other outlet in the country. That's why they are successful. I'm also saying that it does give a balance to the "mainstream" press, although I think both sides (conservative AND mainstream) do nothing but spin stories that will appeal to their viewers, in turn driving up the almighty advertising dollar$. I leave my answer to Faux News doing it "right" to this... American businesses are great marketers and imitators. Why aren't more media outlets copying Fox? Would you agree that Fox's strategy out of the gate was to produce a conservative friendly newscast and jump on the bandwagon startedby rush, et. al.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.