Did anyone see the ABC exec admit they have a liberal bias?

Question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-5eQCa55U0

Answer 1

who needed to hear him admit this?...anyone with eyes, ears, and half a working brain already knows this...

Answer 2

So? I am always surprised by how much people are shocked by a news organization showing some bias... they are all run by people who have strong opinions. Some are liberal but some are just as conservative... if you prefer a conservative broadcast then watch FOX news. There are scores of Roger Ailes (head of FOX News) memos stressing that the Swift Boat group gets a lot of air time. That is his right. So why would a different network show a different bias? Why is it ok for FOX but not ABC?

And FOX news is now a part of the main stream media... so everyone can stop talking about the "liberal MSM" like its the boogeyman coming for your children.

Answer 3

You don't seem very interested in asking a question but in rolling out a detaiuled list of facts, half-facts and opinions for others to wade through (complete with a pre-emptive accusation that anyone who doesn't have the time to go through all this but can see what you are doing is a "fascist". But to answer your question more simply and directly, evidence of who is trusted or who supported Obama is not relevant to the matter of whether Fox presents news and opinions in a biased way or not. Many who watch Fox may well do so because they want to see what the latest right-wing screed is on various subjects. As the saying goes, keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

Answer 4

The Right to Lie in the "News"
If ever we needed to know why the biggest media consumers in the world are so badly informed, this pretty well tells it all. The Media Can Legally Lie.
According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts.
Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.
Akre and Wilson sued the Fox station and on August 18, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” about the widespread use of BGH in dairy cows.
[...] FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation."
In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
OK, pick your jaw up off the floor. That some court thinks they CAN is bad enough, that these people assert their right to do so pretty well kicks it all down the hole. And these guys wonder why their credibility is in the toilet and the net is burning them left right and centre.
Oh, and February 2003, 30 days before Iraq.

Answer 5

I don't think this really surprises anyone. What would shock me is if Fox News were to admit that they not only have a conservative bias, but that they consult with the GOP in order to do what's best for the GOP.

Answer 6

Of course. Liberals don't have a problem being and admitting to being liberal. I'm liberal and proud of it. Anyone at Fox News going to man up and admit to being conservative? Doubt it. O'Reilly had the chance and just looked down at his desk.

Answer 7

And ABC definitely has the fairest national news of the broadcasters!

I give them credit for admitting it.

Answer 8

Did not see, but it does not take an exec to state something that most everyone already knows!

Answer 9

Old news, one man's opinion, and wrong. The supposed "old liberal media" reported relentlessly on the swift boat veterans, when it was clear they were lying, they reported relentlessly on Clinton getting a bj. His claims are ludicrous. Pathetic attempt to sell a book.

Answer 10

I think that its about time that all media just admit they are slanted. That way we can determine what to watch based on our own biases.

Answer 11

Why would anyone have to see the executive say it. I think it's common knowledge for networks to lean left always. Um, there are a few exceptions.. not many!