English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Media reporting, to me always seems slanted to the left. They keep a body count to back the liberals in the Iraq war, but you have no body for the less controversial Aphgan war. They criticize 16% fraud and waste in progams that had to be thrown together in a situation no one (even democrats) seriously expected from Hurricane Katrina. They are strangely silent though on the 10% fraud rate from the welfare program, which was started by democrats and managed with this percentage for years by democrats as well as republicans.
Why is 16% waste not acceptable after a few months of an unexpected catastrophe, but 10% waste after 30 years in progress seems to them to be O.K.?

2006-07-01 03:08:28 · 13 answers · asked by chuck3011 3 in Politics & Government Politics

13 answers

They are a bunch of idiots.

It's like anything else, it all has to do with money.

What ever makes the money, thats how they operate.

2006-07-01 03:12:52 · answer #1 · answered by You may be right 7 · 0 0

Conservatives will always say it's too liberal, and liberals will say it's too conservative. With the exception of Fox "News" (a network created soley for the benifit of the Republican party) the networks are neither. The only thing they care about is the bottom line...... what gets them viewers so they can generate more advertising dollars. If the "missing cute white teenage girl" show hosted by a shrill woman will get them viewers every night, then that's what they put on.

It's just like everything else in the US now. It's all about what will make the corporation more money and nothing else.

Bankster: 500 14 year old cans of Mustard gas do not constitute "a grave and urgent threat to the United States", as Pres. Bush called WMDs. The Duffler report remains unchanged....there were no WMDs in Iraq. Saddam didn't sneak them into Syria, and he didn't bury them. They were destroyed before Bush got selected. This administration lied and "cherry picked" intelligence in order to bring about the stated neocon goal of establishing a permanent US base of operations in Iraq so the US (and US corporations) would have a strong military presence in the middle east.

Even Fox "News" has dropped this. Santorum was just using it for political gain. Santorum didn't talk about it last week, it was almost 3 weeks ago.

2006-07-01 03:49:34 · answer #2 · answered by BarronVonUnderbeiht 3 · 0 0

In reality, the majority of press in this country isn't liberal, it's conservative.

55% of newspapers have conservative editorial pages. The vast majority of television and radio stations are owned by large corporate interests, which are, by their nature conservative.

I do think a lot of the people who work lower in the organizations are more liberal.

I think the result is that the "fourth branch" has become too lazy and simply follows what the press releases tell them to do. True investigative journalism uncovering corruption in government and the corporate world is dead.

The whole concept of the "liberal media" was invented during the Bush 1 campaign. It's been used ever since. It's the "keep harping on the referees and you'll get the calls you want" strategy. It's effective because it's a myth that many Americans believe. As a result, the mainstream media has become more and more conservative.

2006-07-01 05:31:45 · answer #3 · answered by WBrian_28 5 · 0 0

Way, way to the left and way liberal. Anything on the network news channels is so one sided It makes me sick to watch it. They bash President Bush to no end and when something positive happens in his favor it's played down to nothing with no credit going to the president. Did you even know there were 500 WMD's found in Irag last week??? FIVE HUNDRED ROUNDS! I didn't even hear about this on a news channel because they said they were the wrong kind. LOL. It makes me laugh how far to the left and how liberal all news on TV is. The only news I can stomach to watch is the world news. At least for the most part it is unbiased.
Good question, but don't worry to much. Bush knows he's on track and doesn't want or expect a pat on the back from the media or any Dem's for that matter. And I think that pisses them off more than anything else because less and less people are listening to their news their views and there rhetoric. It is getting old.

2006-07-01 03:32:50 · answer #4 · answered by bankster 3 · 0 0

The government is slanted to the Right - many important questions need to be answered by this administration and are not being asked. In England, the prime minister goes before the house of commons each week and answers questions from the delegates. Tony Blair has no idea what the questions would be, but he has to answer without the help of his political strategists. It would be a sad sight to see our president try to answer questions in a forum such as this.

Also, if a person feels inclined to complain about welfare in this country, complaining about the small percentage of poor people who abuse it is like complaining about a mouse in the garage while there is a horse in the living room. 86% of quote "welfare" in this country does not go to the poor who were intended to recieve the assistance, which as you said "which was started by democrats and managed with this percentage for years by democrats as well as republicans."

2006-07-01 03:24:53 · answer #5 · answered by Mark R 1 · 0 0

It depends on what you consider "the press". Commentators like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O' Reilly, and Al Franken should not be considered reporters, or members of the press. They are pundits who have a highly partisan view of current events. News networks also employ quite a bit of punditry in their programming, making it less of a news broadcast and more of a forum for opinions. Some people consider the mere reporting of facts, such as the Iraq War death toll, to be political bias in news. Technically speaking, bias is in the eye of the beholder. Viewers of FOX News and listeners of NPR each base their preferences on how factual subject matters are presented. Both FOX and NPR present facts that are undisputed, but each organization takes a different tone when presenting those facts. Perceived bias will always exist as long as mankind has a diverse range of opinions on current events.

2006-07-01 03:24:26 · answer #6 · answered by Mike F 1 · 0 0

While Limbaugh, O'Reilly and other right-column gasbags keep explain how "liberal" the press is, in fact the majority of our local American T.V. stations are owned by goose-stepping right-column fascists.

The Faux news goons repeatedly try to tell us the media is "left-wing) anytime the major news agencies print anything that doesn't mentally masturbate the right column. Professional gasbag and comedian Rush Limbaugh usually takes whatever unfavorable article is being discussed and tries to blame it on Clinton.

I am amazed that our present white house occupant has found that he doesn't have to take responsibility for anything he's done. From the couple of hundred thousand Iraqi civilians he's killed to the raping of our country's budget and the attempted rape on our public parts.

All the little richkid does is point the finger at others. According to our court appointed commander in chief, he's done nothing, even though his own hand picked supreme court finds him in violation of the laws he swore to uphold.

If you or I tried to get away with the shenanigans that this administration of liars has, we be in prison.

2006-07-01 03:24:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The media is owned by a bunch of capitalitic, selfish, self-centered, self-serving individuals who are oil thirsty and the biggest hypocrites on the planet, not democrats.

2006-07-01 03:34:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's too conservative. Most newspapers (although not major ones) have conservative editorial pages. And FOX "News" is an insult to journalism.

2006-07-01 03:12:53 · answer #9 · answered by wmp55 6 · 0 0

Too conservative. They should be screaming out their lungs for the resignation and or impeachment of W.

2006-07-01 03:13:00 · answer #10 · answered by commonsense 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers