Is there a partisan or ideological bias in the United States media?

Not really, if those are the only things he said then he did not offer the one thing that matters: proof.

 

And CBS, USA Today, etc. had proof?

 

Well I'm sure they had a bit more proof than that article gave, or that Tony Snowjob gave.

 

J-Rod

I hope you see the irony in trying to prove bias by using right-wing sources such as Drudge and the Washington Examiner.

And for more irony, here's a Media Matters article on the prescription drug coverage issue:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605110007

Either way, I'd be more interested in reading the articles themselves to determine if they are accurate, had some errors, or are part of that grand liberal conspiracy to give conservatives no voice in any form of media.

 

Murdoch's apparent endorsement of a liberal candidate such as Hilary Clinton is nothing new. He has supported Tony Blair, a Labour Prime Minister, through two elections.

 

Well, the liberal media is at it again.

But hey, I'm sure it's just (yet) another mistake.

 

Haha...I like that. Maybe he'll pick his nose again.


How can you blame this on any sort of ideology? Maybe CNN likes schadenfreude.

 

Alright, if you wanna keep using that excuse.

So what do you think of the NSA phone number collecting "story?" Suddenly most of the companies, such as Bellsouth, Quest, ect. are saying that not only didn't they give out any info but that they were never asked for it in the first place!

Could this be another made up story such as the Gitmo Koran abuse "story" or the Bush memo "story?" I'll bet it is.

 

And you'd still have a hard time proving any sort of bias, J-Rod. Sheesh, you're worse than Hillary Clinton and her 'RIGHT WING CONSPIRACEEEEEE!" Not every thing that's done by the media is a ploy to harm GWB or Republicans.


BTW, here's more liburlle conspiraceeeee!

Oh wait, he broke the law. But it's still dem der liburlles makin' stooreees up.

 

Well, you don't see any fake stories that help the republicans, do ya? You don't think it's kinda incredible that these "mistakes" and false stories are all making the Republicans look bad. Where are the "mistakes" that harm the Democrats?

 

Well, you don't see any fake stories that help the republicans, do ya? You don't think it's kinda incredible that these "mistakes" and false stories are all making the Republicans look bad. Where are the "mistakes" that harm the Democrats?

If Republicans look bad they don't need help from the media in doing so. They look bad on their own. The media just makes their wrongness more apparent.

How about the 'Rats' campaign ad? No, the GOP jams phone lines when they don't want Democrats to win.

 

If Republicans look bad they don't need help from the media in doing so. They look bad on their own. The media just makes their wrongness more apparent.

If that were true the media wouldn't have to make up so many false stories to make the Republicans look bad.

How about the 'Rats' campaign ad? No, the GOP jams phone lines when they don't want Democrats to win.

Sure he broke the law. But unlike Gore and his illegal Chinese campaign contribution, Tobin's going to jail. And he should...right next to Gore.

 

If that were true the media wouldn't have to make up so many false stories to make the Republicans look bad.

You've not proven that any stories have been made-up. Distorted, possibly, but made-up? Highly unlikely.



Sure he broke the law. But unlike Gore and his illegal Chinese campaign contribution, Tobin's going to jail. And he should...right next to Gore.

Tobin's going to jail because they proved beyond a shadow of doubt he broke the law. No so much with Gore, IIRC. It was a bit of a dodgey issue from what I remember. Don't even talk about contributions being illegal. Our current president has had his own contributions from shadey characters.

 

You've not proven that any stories have been made-up. Distorted, possibly, but made-up? Highly unlikely.

No. The Bush memos were completely made up. Nothing real about 'em. The same holds true for the Koran "abuse" at Gitmo.

Tobin's going to jail because they proved beyond a shadow of doubt he broke the law. No so much with Gore, IIRC.

If memory serves, he had to give back the illicit contributions and that was all.

 

No. The Bush memos were completely made up. Nothing real about 'em. The same holds true for the Koran "abuse" at Gitmo.

Yes, the infamous Bush memos. You know, I have a hard time believing that those were fake. Not out of any desire for GWB to be proven to be a draft dodger (which he is). But because it took too much work to put something like that together. If you're going to make a fake document you should have someone working on the historical aspects of it. If any web logger can point out they're fake then you've done a lousy job. It makes no sense to put so much effort into something like that only to have it blown up in your face by some hack web logger. So, while those memos were 'fake' or whatever (no-one will prove it conclusively since it was buried). I do believe that such memos could exist.

As for the Gitmo story that was due to sensationalistic reporting and a bit of truth mixed in. However, that in and of itself isn't bias. And neither were the memos. If your source is shady then your reporting will be as well.



If memory serves, he had to give back the illicit contributions and that was all.

GWB? Of course, he gave up a thousand out of a much larger sum. Yeah, he really gave that contribution back.

 

As for the Gitmo story that was due to sensationalistic reporting and a bit of truth mixed in. However, that in and of itself isn't bias. And neither were the memos. If your source is shady then your reporting will be as well.

My point: Where are the "sensationalist" stories that make the Dems look bad?

Then there's the fact that you still believe stories that have been proven false.

Liberal media:"My work here is done."

GWB? Of course, he gave up a thousand out of a much larger sum. Yeah, he really gave that contribution back.

I don't remember any stories about illegal Bush contributions. Refresh my memory.

 

My point: Where are the "sensationalist" stories that make the Dems look bad?

Well Ted Kennedy still gets harassed for incidents from years ago.

Then there's the fact that you still believe stories that have been proven false.

And you still ignored my reasoning behind it. Bravo, J-Rod. You sure did prove your point.

Liberal media:"My work here is done."

Conservative media: "Uhhh....LIBURRRLLLLEEE!"

See? I play that game as well.

I don't remember any stories about illegal Bush contributions. Refresh my memory

Jack Abramoff (sp?).


BTW, J-Rod. If you'd bothered to read my whole paragraph I specifically stated that those memos could be false but there could still be actual memos out there that contained similar info. See, I read all of your replies, even if I do feel they're ridiculous.

 

Well Ted Kennedy still gets harassed for incidents from years ago.

Sure. He was never prosecuted for manslaughter. He crashed his car into a river, went home and went to sleep, then called the authorities the next day. His passenger was still in the car.

And you still ignored my reasoning behind it. Bravo, J-Rod. You sure did prove your point.

Because all your points were addressed in the aftermath of memogate. Nothing really is left to say.

Jack Abramoff (sp?).

Dems and Republicans were caught up in that scandel. And Bush's part in it was overblown. The discovery that it was overblown was...well..underblown.

 

Sure. He was never prosecuted for manslaughter. He crashed his car into a river, went home and went to sleep, then called the authorities the next day.

Exactly, but he's still harassed for it. And the media did report it. As well as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Because all your points were addressed in the aftermath of memogate. Nothing really is left to say.

See, you didn't read it.

Dems and Republicans were caught up in that scandel. And Bush's part in it was overblown. The discovery that it was overblown was...well..underblown.

However, GWB was given a large sum of money from him and only 'gave' a thousand dollars of it back.

 

Why did Burkett tell CBS News something he now says is not true? CBS News put the question to him.

Dan Rather: "Why did you mislead us?"

Bill Burkett: "Well, I didn't totally mislead you. I did mislead you on the one individual. You know, your staff pressured me to a point to reveal that source.

Rather: "Well, we were trying to get the chain of possession."

Burkett: "I understand that."

Rather: "And you said that you had received them from someone."

Burkett: "I understand that."

Rather: "We did pressure you to say well, you received them from someone ?"

Burkett: "Yes."

Rather: "And it's true. We pressured you. It was a very important point."

Burkett: "Yes ... "

Rather: "For us."

Burkett: "And I simply threw out a name ? that was basically I guess to take a little
pressure off for a moment."

Rather: "Have you forged anything?"

Burkett: "No sir."

Rather: "Have you faked anything?

Burkett: "No sir."

Rather: "But you did mislead us."

Burkett: "Yes, I misled."

Rather: "You, you lie, you"

Burkett: "yes, I did."

Rather:: "You lied to us. Why would I, or anyone, believe that you wouldn't mislead us about something else?"

Burkett: "I could understand that question. I can't. That's gonna have to be your judgment and anybody else's."

Burkett still insists the documents are real, but says he was in no position to verify them.

The source can't prove the docs are real. Because they aren't. CBS can't prove they are real. Because they aren't.

 

The source can't prove the docs are real. Because they aren't. CBS can't prove they are real. Because they aren't.

Brilliant detective work. You figured that all out without doing tests to verify them. Amazing. How can I be as successful with detective work as you?

 

Well, you can start by opening your eyes.

 

I was being sarcastic. Or do you need a or a to 'get' it?

 

??? So was I. LOL do you need a or sumpin?