Politicizing the media to further an agenda

There was some point in my life when journalism went from telling the story to telling our story. I am not sure when that was. The press hated Nixon but I dont remember him being demonized in prime time. Reagan had his fair share of negative stories, but not the overwhelming run that came later. The press covered for Clinton and Ted Kennedy, even as they excoriated Republicans like Bob Packwood. But it really hit the fan with Bush. The press just was out to get him. He could do no right. Similarly with Obama he can hardly do any wrong. They protect him from tough questions and let him pass on difficult issues. Where is the Woodward/Bernstein team investigating the White House? Those doing it are like Breitbart and other non traditional journalists. This is why TV and print news are losing customers.

Proof that the MSM is grossly biased and puts its' mouth where it's money is!!!!

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed
more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the
Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.
The average Republican contribution was $744.

Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller

Now If 1,160 (85%) of 1,353 employees of ABC,CBS & NBC gave $1.02 million (88%) to Democrats do you think these donors are stupid?
If you don't think they are stupid, then do you think they wanted the Democrats to win?
If they want them to win would they put news favorable or unfavorable to democrats i.e. Obama? Duh!!!
FACTS:
In 1964, 94% of media professionals voted for Democrat Lyndon Johnson over Republican Barry Goldwater.
In 1968, 86% voted for Democrat Hubert Humphrey over Republican Richard Nixon.
In 1972, 81% voted for Democrat George McGovern over the incumbent Nixon.
In 1976, 81% voted for Democrat Jimmy Carter over Republican Gerald Ford.
In 1980, twice as many cast their ballots for Carter rather than for Republican Ronald Reagan.
In 1984, 58% supported Democrat Walter Mondale, whom Reagan defeated in the biggest landslide in presidential election history.
In 1988, White House correspondents from various major newspapers, television networks, magazines, and news services supported Democrat Michael Dukakis over Republican George H.W. Bush by a ratio of 12-to-1.
In 1992, those same correspondents supported Democrat Bill Clinton over the incumbent Bush by a ratio of 9 to 2.
Among Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, the disparity was 89% vs. 7%, in Clinton’s favor.
In a 2004 poll of campaign journalists, those based outside of Washington, DC supported Democrat John Kerry over Republican George W. Bush by a ratio of 3-to-1. Those based inside the Beltway favored Kerry by a 12-to-1 ratio.
In a 2008 survey of 144 journalists nationwide, journalists were 8 times likelier to make campaign contributions to Democrats than to Republicans.
A 2008 Investors Business Daily study put the campaign donation ratio at 11.5-to-1, in favor of Democrats. In terms of total dollars given, the ratio was 15-to-1.
Research on Media Bias - Discover the Networks
 
Oh my God, you blamed Carter's loss on Kenedy

and then say Reagan's accomplishments would have been done by Carter


Jesus you're an idiot....no wonder you usually just say "pub crap"

Libs will never admit the media is biased. If they did, the propaganda wouldn't work any longer. Who is going to believe something when the source tells you it's bullshit?

No Libs acknowledge bias exist. They just don't get into the conspiracies. We usually leave that up to the left wing nut jobs who will battle you guys til hell freezes over .. from global warming

libs don't get into the conspiracies? Who killed JFK? 9/11 was an inside job. Oil man Bush attacked Iraq to get their oil. no not at all they don't :cuckoo:
 
Libs will never admit the media is biased. If they did, the propaganda wouldn't work any longer. Who is going to believe something when the source tells you it's bullshit?

No Libs acknowledge bias exist. They just don't get into the conspiracies. We usually leave that up to the left wing nut jobs who will battle you guys til hell freezes over .. from global warming

I can understand why you would want to forget all about the "Journolist" scandal.

Left wing media hacks plotting how they would be presenting the news in their various publications and media outlets really looked ugly.
:eek: Columnists and opinion writers, editorial writers? wtf are you jibber jabbering about now
 
Libs will never admit the media is biased. If they did, the propaganda wouldn't work any longer. Who is going to believe something when the source tells you it's bullshit?

No Libs acknowledge bias exist. They just don't get into the conspiracies. We usually leave that up to the left wing nut jobs who will battle you guys til hell freezes over .. from global warming

libs don't get into the conspiracies? Who killed JFK? 9/11 was an inside job. Oil man Bush attacked Iraq to get their oil. no not at all they don't :cuckoo:

Oh I forgot you were one of those right wing idjits who link the far left with liberals.

never mind
 
No Libs acknowledge bias exist. They just don't get into the conspiracies. We usually leave that up to the left wing nut jobs who will battle you guys til hell freezes over .. from global warming

libs don't get into the conspiracies? Who killed JFK? 9/11 was an inside job. Oil man Bush attacked Iraq to get their oil. no not at all they don't :cuckoo:

Oh I forgot you were one of those right wing idjits who link the far left with liberals.

never mind
the left are sheep. there isn't much variance in how they bleet. they still bow and pray to a man who has continued bush policies. but they are ok now, because he is a democrat
 
Who sank Ted Kennedy's Presidential aspirations in 1979? Your liberal media

With Clinton, who pick up the story from fringe sources and ran with it? Your liberal media

Without the msm Ted Kennedy would have become President in 1980 (Reagan beat Carter with a small minority in 1980) and Clinton would not have had so many bullshit fights on his hands that involved his wife, his aide's suicide, his personal life, .....and on and on and on...

Without Kennedy, Carter could have gotten some Reaganesque things done and been reelected, and we could have missed the hate and pandering to the rich disaster that was and is Reaganism.

Liberal Media my butt, just cowardly and controversy and ratings mad more and more....amoral marketing majors and loudmouth morons,, not liberals running things for years now. That's the problem.


Oh my God, you blamed Carter's loss on Kenedy

and then say Reagan's accomplishments would have been done by Carter


Jesus you're an idiot....no wonder you usually just say "pub crap"

Since you're 14, you wouldn't remember. Carter wanted spending cuts, but Dems in Congress, led by Kennedy, wanted to make up for 8 years of GOP on many pet projects.
 
MSNBC is not biased on facts- Fox, Pubs, and the rest of the Pub Propaganda machine lie all the time- see sig pp3. Bengazi and Fast and Furious "scandals" are a total figment...
 
ABC, NBC, CBS,CNN all lean democrat.
Fox news leans republican.
MSNBC leans liberal/progressive.

Leaving aside the opinion shows that are supposed to be biased I'm more concerned about the shows that are presented as straight news. The bias (either obvious or sublime) is shown in a myriad of ways. However, usually the bias is most stark when the news organization decides which story to tell (where to shine the spotlight). My favorite example of this was about seven years ago when Bush was president. Cindy Sheehan was giving a speech on why she was against the war in Iraq. As I was channel hoping I noticed the part of the speech MSNBC was focusing on was the part where Sheehan was talking about her son who died as a soldier in Iraq. Your heart couldn't help but go out to her. No parent should outlve their children. I can't think of a bigger hell to endure. Meanwhile, FOX news showed Cindy Sheehan answering reporters questions after her speech. It was obvious that Sheehan didn't have much knowledge about American politics and history and Sheehan simply seemed ignorant and flakey. Both stories are correct. No reporter was lying while presenting the story. Sheehan was accurately quoted. It was obvious though that bias was being shown by deciding what part of the speech to focus on. Of course there are more blatant examples of bias such as MSNBC's record of creative editing which MSNBC personnel have been fired for. Still continues though.
 
Last edited:
No Libs acknowledge bias exist. They just don't get into the conspiracies. We usually leave that up to the left wing nut jobs who will battle you guys til hell freezes over .. from global warming

I can understand why you would want to forget all about the "Journolist" scandal.

Left wing media hacks plotting how they would be presenting the news in their various publications and media outlets really looked ugly.
:eek: Columnists and opinion writers, editorial writers? wtf are you jibber jabbering about now

Pretending ignorance eh?

I don't blame you... It was the smoking gun how the media was colluding in getting Obama elected..

Just as the before the Romney Press Conference where the reporters were caught on an open mike organizing their questions and follow ups in order to play "gotcha" with him.
 
Did you see that poll? 7% believe O-care has been overturned by the SC, 12% that it was repealed- etc etc. Our media is cowardly and just plain suqs. Not to mention the ignorance of the people.

Only 35-40 are well informed- most DEMOCRATS and some indies. GOP who believe they're informes are DUPED to one extent or another. NOT the party of small gov't, business acumen, or family values.
 
Last edited:
libs don't get into the conspiracies? Who killed JFK? 9/11 was an inside job. Oil man Bush attacked Iraq to get their oil. no not at all they don't :cuckoo:

Oh I forgot you were one of those right wing idjits who link the far left with liberals.

never mind
the left are sheep. there isn't much variance in how they bleet. they still bow and pray to a man who has continued bush policies. but they are ok now, because he is a democrat

Funny, even the right wing blowhards on cable and radio and blogs would bet Romney would win because the conservatives were like a flock of animals and the Democrats were all over the place
 
FOX News Big Wig Chris Wallace admitted FOX is there to balance out a perceived liberal bias. That is an admission FOX is a conservatively biased news org.

:rofl:

gawd, people are stupid

and fox news has the highest ratings because people are sick of the liberal bias

Good gawd!!! :rofl: "fox news has the highest ratings" :rofl:

Better check that one out bozo

who told you that, Bill O'Reilly? :laugh2:
:thewave:

most people do NOT get their news from cable 'news' stations like FOX

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Good Gawd, you probably should have looked at the top of the page you linked and clicked on the little tab labelled "Cable News ratings"

:cuckoo:

Ratings - TVNewser


  • Total day: FNC: 236 | MSNBC: 115 | CNN: 161 | HLN: 187

  • Primetime: FNC: 308 | MSNBC: 160 | CNN: 172 | HLN: 264
 
FOX News Big Wig Chris Wallace admitted FOX is there to balance out a perceived liberal bias. That is an admission FOX is a conservatively biased news org.

:rofl:

gawd, people are stupid

and fox news has the highest ratings because people are sick of the liberal bias

and fox news has the highest ratings because people are sick of the liberal bias

Good gawd!!! :rofl: "fox news has the highest ratings" :rofl:

Better check that one out bozo

who told you that, Bill O'Reilly? :laugh2:
:thewave:

most people do NOT get their news from cable 'news' stations like FOX

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Good Gawd, you probably should have looked at the top of the page you linked and clicked on the little tab labelled "Cable News ratings"

:cuckoo:

Ratings - TVNewser


  • Total day: FNC: 236 | MSNBC: 115 | CNN: 161 | HLN: 187

  • Primetime: FNC: 308 | MSNBC: 160 | CNN: 172 | HLN: 264

Stupid. Do you not get the point Dante linked to? FOX does not have the highest ratings on news shows. The premise with the foolish comment form the right wing nut was that most people do not watch the 'liberal media' because FOX is now on.

context: Chris Wallace admitted FOX was there to balance out the media, not other cable news stations.

See? gawd, you must be a FOX News watcher
 
Last edited:
I can understand why you would want to forget all about the "Journolist" scandal.

Left wing media hacks plotting how they would be presenting the news in their various publications and media outlets really looked ugly.
:eek: Columnists and opinion writers, editorial writers? wtf are you jibber jabbering about now

Pretending ignorance eh?

I don't blame you... It was the smoking gun how the media was colluding in getting Obama elected..

Just as the before the Romney Press Conference where the reporters were caught on an open mike organizing their questions and follow ups in order to play "gotcha" with him.

Conspiracies are sooooo...

boring
 
FOX News Big Wig Chris Wallace admitted FOX is there to balance out a perceived liberal bias. That is an admission FOX is a conservatively biased news org.

:rofl:

gawd, people are stupid

and fox news has the highest ratings because people are sick of the liberal bias

Good gawd!!! :rofl: "fox news has the highest ratings" :rofl:

Better check that one out bozo

who told you that, Bill O'Reilly? :laugh2:
:thewave:

most people do NOT get their news from cable 'news' stations like FOX

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Evening News Ratings - TVNewser

Good Gawd, you probably should have looked at the top of the page you linked and clicked on the little tab labelled "Cable News ratings"

:cuckoo:

Ratings - TVNewser


  • Total day: FNC: 236 | MSNBC: 115 | CNN: 161 | HLN: 187

  • Primetime: FNC: 308 | MSNBC: 160 | CNN: 172 | HLN: 264

Stupid. Do you not get the point Dante linked to? FOX does not have the highest ratings on news shows. The premise with the foolish comment form the right wing nut was that most people do not watch the 'liberal media' because FOX is now on.

context: Chris Wallace admitted FOX was there to balance out the media, not other cable news stations.

See? gawd, you must be a FOX News watcher

I watch "The Five" on FOX. That's it.
Just posting "the rest of the story", Paul

After toggling between the Network and the Cable ratings it's obvious that no Cable news network is "the leader".
Network news is more readily available, of course.

I always liked CBS,
Cronkite was THE MAN.
Dan Rather was great, IMO, for a long time. In later years his bias really started to show and even 60 minutes started to sound like "The Factor" in later years.

Nowadays I just come here and Google around to find all sides of a story
 
Republicans remind me of the logic used by some murderers and rapists. When asked why they did things they'll often accuse the victim of being a whore, lowlife etc. They don't care if that is actually true, that's their justification and That's why they targeted them.

Republicans accuse the entire media of being against them, that's why they have Fox News. Who cares if it's true or not, that's their justification.
 
Well I tried indoctrination(public school, religion, Scouting, military, corporate world employment) and didn't like it. I preferred a bag of weed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top