And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

[The Rabbi]

And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

no we don't...We got it a long time ago. Its not complicated

Are you thread-farting again? It's all you can do. Maybe see a doctor.

 

[frigidweirdo]

That would be COOL if we could draft a master list of all unfair stereotypes,
signed it as a collective group representing different parties, and issue it to
all major media and political parties NOT to promote these stereotypes but stick to issues.
Wow. that would be cool!!!

Unfair stereotype? Is it a stereotype to suggest that someone who supports civil rights for all is "gayloving"?

I don't think so, or at least not in my world it isn't.

I'm asking the question of why someone doesn't support civil rights.

 

[frigidweirdo]

* not to assume "marriage equality" means pushing gay rights above other people's

How in the hell does marriage equality push gay rights above other people's?????

Probably because it some how takes away their "rights" to abuse gay people by legitimising gay people are real human beings with feelings and potentially having souls.

 

[NoNukes]

This finding is no surprise whatsoever.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago.

majority of American journalists identify themselves as political independents although among those who choose a side Democrats outnumber Republicans four to one, according to a new study of the media conducted by two Indiana University professors.

Write Lars Wilnat and David Weaver, professors of journalism at Indiana,*of their findings:

Compared with 2002, the percentage of full-time U.S. journalists who claim to be Democrats has dropped 8 percentage points in 2013 to about 28 percent, moving this figure closer to the overall population percentage of 30 percent, according to a December 12-15, 2013, ABC News/Washington Post national poll of 1,005 adults. This is the lowest percentage of journalists saying they are Democrats since 1971. An even larger drop was observed among journalists who said they were Republicans in 2013 (7.1 percent) than in 2002 (18 percent), but the 2013 figure is still notably lower than the percentage of U.S. adults who identified with the Republican Party (24 percent according to the poll mentioned above).


The great thing about this survey, called "The American Journalist in the Digital Age", is that its been conducted four previous times -- in 1971, 1982, 1992 and 2002. That allows for some fascinating comparisons of how partisanship (or the lack thereof) among reporters has evolved over that time.

Back in 1971, the first time this survey was conducted, there was simply more partisanship among reporters. *More than one in three (35.5 percent) said they were Democrats while more than one in four (25.7 percent) described themselves as Republicans. At that point, 32.5 percent called themselves independents.

Over the last several decades, three things have happened: 1) The number of Democratic-identifying reporters increased steadily prior to a significant drop in the latest survey 2) The number of Republicans has steadily shrunk with that number dipping into single digits for the first time ever in the new survey c) more and more reporters are identifying as independents. *What seems to be happening -- at least in the last decade - -is that journalists are leaving both parties, finding themselves more comfortable as unaffiliateds.

These numbers will likely affirm the belief in conservative circles that "all" reporters are secretly Democrats. (The study was conducted via online interviews with 1,080 reporters.) *While I am not in the business of disputing the study's finding, I would note two caveats:

1. This is among*all*reporters not just political reporters. While that may seem like a minor issue, it's worth noting that assuming these party ID numbers are true for those of us -- like me -- who cover politics day in and day out may not be entirely accurate.

2. The movement toward independent status among reporters is in keeping with a similar move in the broader electorate as they find the two parties increasingly rigid and, therefore, less welcoming.

The entire study, which details that journalists are less happy in their jobs than ever before and that most believe the industry is headed in the wrong direction, is*worth reading in its entirety.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Journalists are educated people.

 

[NoNukes]

This finding is no surprise whatsoever.

Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago.



Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That?s far fewer than even a decade ago.

Is your position that a person with a political point of view is incapable of being objective?

Not necessarily, but when you have the media so over-represented on one side the likliehood that there's an overall slant in one direction is great.

Or, it could mean that liberals are right, and educated, informed people realize this.

 

[NoNukes]

yeah, thank God they discovered monica. I mean the country would have fallen had we not learned of the "stain." Proud moments in journalism.

And Monica is being resurrected to use her against Hillary. That damned liberal media.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is this thread meant to be proof that Foxnews has a conservative bias?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

yeah, thank God they discovered monica. I mean the country would have fallen had we not learned of the "stain." Proud moments in journalism.

This is why journalists fail in their job because this is what you think Clinton was impeached for - a stained dress.

 

[zeke]

Is that the same liberal media that was in-bed-with the military, and was cheer leading for the Bush led invasion and occupation of Iraq?

How many Democrats supported the war in Iraq? I mean at least until it became unpopular and they tried stabbing our troops in the back.

Hey Rabbit, why don't you answer your own question? I mean every time the start of the Iraq war is mentioned, you or those like you like to trot out how so many of the Dems voted to go to war in Iraq.

So, how many Dems was it that supported the war in Iraq?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Is that the same liberal media that was in-bed-with the military, and was cheer leading for the Bush led invasion and occupation of Iraq?

How many Democrats supported the war in Iraq? I mean at least until it became unpopular and they tried stabbing our troops in the back.

Hey Rabbit, why don't you answer your own question? I mean every time the start of the Iraq war is mentioned, you or those like you like to trot out how so many of the Dems voted to go to war in Iraq.

So, how many Dems was it that supported the war in Iraq?

It's a valid argument. Every major Democrats supported the war in Iraq until it became inconvenient.

 

[zeke]

How many Democrats supported the war in Iraq? I mean at least until it became unpopular and they tried stabbing our troops in the back.

Hey Rabbit, why don't you answer your own question? I mean every time the start of the Iraq war is mentioned, you or those like you like to trot out how so many of the Dems voted to go to war in Iraq.

So, how many Dems was it that supported the war in Iraq?

It's a valid argument. Every major Democrats supported the war in Iraq until it became inconvenient.

You mean they supported it till it became glaringly obvious that the war wasn't going as promised. There was no celebration of being liberated.

Then when Rumsfeld had our troops driving around waiting to be blown up in un armored HumVees, yea many Dems decided that they had make a bad mistake.

Which was at least honest (to admit a mistake). Unlike the fucking Repubs who support the invasion of Iraq to this day.

Facts never have bothered a Repub from what I can tell. Make believe works much better for them. They still make believe Iraq was a success. Like you do. Fool.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You mean they supported it till it became glaringly obvious that the war wasn't going as promised. There was no celebration of being liberated.

Then when Rumsfeld had our troops driving around waiting to be blown up in un armored HumVees, yea many Dems decided that they had make a bad mistake.

Which was at least honest (to admit a mistake). Unlike the fucking Repubs who support the invasion of Iraq to this day.

Facts never have bothered a Repub from what I can tell. Make believe works much better for them. They still make believe Iraq was a success. Like you do. Fool.

Maybe they supported it until they realised that Bush govt didn't have a clue what it was doing and making a total mess of things.
Who supports their govt making a total mess of things?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

And you wonder why we call it the "liberal media" ?

Actually no one ‘wonders.’

Everyone knows for a fact that ‘liberal media’ is a lie contrived by the partisan right for some perceived political gain, likely as red meat for the radical rightwing base.

That ‘the media’ report facts and truth that conflict with subjective conservative dogma doesn’t make them ‘liberal.’

‘Liberal media’ is one among many other conservative myths, such as ‘political correctness,’ ‘entitlement mentality,’ and ‘voter fraud.’

Oh please, don't try to sit there and claim the ones writing the stories, and actually doing the reporting would not identify as being liberal.
You actually want us to believe the journalism classrooms across this country are pumping out conservatives ?

The boardrooms of the media giants might not be filled with liberals, but don't even try to claim the ones putting the stories together are not.