It gets a little old. Obviously Bush has made some mistakes. But the media almost always casts Bush in a negative light while showing democratic politicians in a glowing white light.
Take Hurricane Katrina for instance. Ray Nagin can sit around doing nothing while a hurricane wipes out his town knowing that there were 500 school busses sitting in a parking lot that could have evacuated people and then go on TV and make racist comments about "chocolate cities" and the media pretty much gives him a pass.
Bush on the other hand, who warned people 2 days before to evacuate, doesn't personally fly down and hold the floodwaters back himself gets beaten by the media for over a year.
2006-09-23 17:35:09 · 18 answers · asked by songndance1999 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The media reports negative things in general mostly because it is (1) easier, and (2) more captivating to viewers. Also, journalism has a history of uncovering scandal (muckraking). So don't expect the media to report a bunch of good news.
As far as media having a liberal bias, that's true. But it doesn't mean that the president was not due criticism in that situation.
2006-09-23 17:41:58 · answer #1 · answered by stevejensen 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i'm not sure what news you watch or what newspaper or magazine you read, but the media has been by far, way tooooooo nice to Bush and his cronies....the war is a mess, his leadership during 9/11 was mediocre at best, when he had a chance to show the American people that he really cared about them with the Katrina disaster, he decided to let others, who were sorely underqualified run the show...he's without a doubt, a disgrace to our country...the dixie chicks were right...as for Nagin...he's a big mouth that got all the blacks riled up at a time when he too could have shown more concern about people than race...but he wanted greyhound buses, not school buses...where's the logic there?
2006-09-23 17:57:00 · answer #2 · answered by Mario B 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's pretty much true and deserved, IMO. When the President starts a war on faulty intelligence and roughly 3000 of our daughters and sons are killed in such a fraudulent conflict, it needs to be addressed.
re: Nagin and buses....just because there were 500 buses there doesn't mean there were resources (drivers, gas, routes, access) to have utilized them. And Bush/FEMA were slacking off on resources and response time, to a degree no federal government should have. This "blaming the victim" tactic is a tired old conservative ploy that never sells.....Congress has yet to fully spend all of its promised relief funding on Katrina.
It's not media bias.....it's just one of the worst administrations in US History. Thank God for the media (even FOX trashed the administration on Katrina) for highlighting the failings in both the Gulf and Iraq.
2006-09-23 17:39:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I do not know what station you are watching but I see just the opposite they usually try to play down the bad he is doing and promote fear and hate!
As far as Katrina is concerned Bush adm was blamed because of their response to the disaster! He has pored so much money into homeland security so USA can be prepared for a terrorist attack. where was the preparation? It was a total disaster and it showed how unequipped the government is as a whole for a large scale natural or man made disaster! Trillions of dollars which have gone into killing Iraqis should have been used for his own people!
2006-09-23 19:22:51 · answer #4 · answered by rose 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The media reports all the negative because THERE IS NO POSITIVE. Bush and his cronies have done absolutely NO GOOD for the country since he illegally took office in 2001 in what amounted to a coup without a shot being fired. This ****** and his cronies are the closest thing this country has ever had that even remotely resembles a fascist dictatorship and anyone who supports them needs to be in a room with rubber walls.
2006-09-23 17:49:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
how much power do you think Nagen had? As the president, it is his job to protect Americans whether it be terrorism, or natural disaster.....We can get our special forces teams anywhere in the world in 6 hours, it took 4 days..... if you were one of the people listening to your children cry, you would have a different outlook. Hurricane Katrina, the Iraq war, the shady dealings after 9/11, come on, what do you need ?
2006-09-23 17:53:04 · answer #6 · answered by jessica w 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There just isn't a lot of good news to report. Bin Laden is still at large. Iraq looks like second graders are running the show. Thousands of people are dying in Sudan & Chad. North Korea is out of control. Everywhere we have cameras people seem to be getting killed in dozens. Katrina was handled like nobody gave a damn. When Bush talks he sounds like an uneducated good ol' boy who can't pronounce the language. What good news is there to tell most days?
2006-09-23 17:47:36 · answer #7 · answered by Gene Rocks! 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Big Brother media control in action, of course! We never get the whole truth. And yet the media reports where our troops are and then the troops are killed! Looks like they need to be controlled on how they report war news! Especially on things like troop postioning and what we will do next! It is crazy! Stir us up and put down Bush and let one of the Democrats in and they will not secure our borders or protect us from terrorists any better.It will more of the same with a different label!
2006-09-23 17:42:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The media is extremely liberal/democratic. With a few exceptions such as fox news channel, and the blue collar guys on comedy central the media sides to the left. My suggestion watch Fox News Channel, some of it may be extremely to right. However, as they say "We report, You Decide"
P.S. The blue collar guys aren't a rreliable source for information.(OF COURSE)
2006-09-23 17:44:35 · answer #9 · answered by Peter Griffin 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I suppose they could report weapons and oil profits. Or the profits of artificial-limb makers.
I agree with you regarding racist comments. Why should Schwarznegger get away with his recent racist comments about blacks and hispanics?
2006-09-23 17:47:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋