So much for "liberal media".

[Oldstyle]

OK, I went to the site that was provided...watched the Gregory/Reid interview...and all I can say is if THAT is what you consider an "attack" then you're even sillier than normal, Deanie.

 

[Oldstyle]

You don't think.

MSNBC is no more credible than FNC. That is not my opinion. It is the view of researchers from non-partisan institutions. That research reaches very different conclusions to your opinions. Whether it suits you or not, it is what it is.

Provide us a list of those institutions.

She won't do it, because she doesn't have anything to back up her statement.

However...........there IS a study from a non partisan institution about Fox news viewers.....

If Fox News viewers want to be informed about current events, they might as well turn off the TV.


A poll released by Fairleigh Dickinson University on Monday found that people who get their news from Fox News know significantly less about news both in the U.S. and the world than people who watch no news at all.


In a survey of 612 New Jersey natives, Fox News fans flunked questions about Egypt and Syria when compared with people who don't watch the news. Fox viewers were 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians toppled their government and 6 points less likely to be aware that Syrians have not yet overthrown theirs.

Fox News viewers less informed than those who don?t watch news at all: study - New York Daily News

Gee, did FOX News not carry nightly news about Egypt and Syria for months at a time? So what the survey really illustrates is that quite a few people in New Jersey don't care very much about either Egypt or Syria. It does nothing to prove that FOX's coverage was any better or worse than anyone else's. I'd also be very curious to know how many people it was that didn't watch any news at all. Was it five people? Ten? How many of the 612 were FOX viewers? And I love this little tidbit from the same survey..."Fox News, however, wasn't the only cable news network to confuse some of its viewers. Watching MSNBC, for instance, was associated with a 10-point increase in the likelihood of misidentifying the Occupy Wall Street protesters as predominantly Republican." Gee, so the people watching MSNBC think that the OWS protesters are predominently Republican? How freaking STUPID would you have to be to think that?

 

[daveman]

Liberals dominate the commercial media?

If so, wouldn't that be because they're better at it?

Maybe if conservatives took the trouble to develop some business acumen, they might be able to dominate the commercial media.

I gotta admit, the Air America business plan was sheer genius.

1. Screech incoherently 24/7 about BOOOOOSH!!

2. ?????

3. Profit!!!

Are you saying that liberals don't dominate the media? I guess all your rightwing pals are full of shit then.

That's what we've been trying to tell them.

No, I'm saying liberal talk radio was and is a dismal failure.

I'm also saying there is a definite slant to print and television news. And it ain't to the right. Witness the latest Newsweek cover. Do you really consider that hard-hitting, objective journalism? Because it's not.

 

[editec]

The media bias is whatever the media's masters tell it to be.

I note that Ron Paul seemed to be the media's forgotten man, for example.

That's not an accident.

 

[California Girl]

You don't think.

MSNBC is no more credible than FNC. That is not my opinion. It is the view of researchers from non-partisan institutions. That research reaches very different conclusions to your opinions. Whether it suits you or not, it is what it is.

Provide us a list of those institutions.

She won't do it, because she doesn't have anything to back up her statement.

However...........there IS a study from a non partisan institution about Fox news viewers.....

If Fox News viewers want to be informed about current events, they might as well turn off the TV.


A poll released by Fairleigh Dickinson University on Monday found that people who get their news from Fox News know significantly less about news both in the U.S. and the world than people who watch no news at all.


In a survey of 612 New Jersey natives, Fox News fans flunked questions about Egypt and Syria when compared with people who don't watch the news. Fox viewers were 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians toppled their government and 6 points less likely to be aware that Syrians have not yet overthrown theirs.

Fox News viewers less informed than those who don?t watch news at all: study - New York Daily News

Anyone who sites a study of 612 NJ natives as legitimate is really not intelligent enough for me to bother 'disputing'.



Now, I suggest you research some (because there are plenty - all from non partisan sources) that reach very different conclusions to the one you 'chose'. My study of media research considers a wide variety of sources - with results based on decades of research.... and considerably more than 612 people in New Jersey.

But you carry one quoting that half-assed 'study'... even though it is laughable.

 

[Truthseeker420]

You would think for for Ivy League students they would have a little more understanding and intelligence.

Poor Dinnerjacket. So misunderstood.

I doubt many (if any) people in the audience spoke Persian. What I understood him to say is there is not an openly gay society in ultra conservative Iran as there is America.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Liberals dominate the commercial media?

If so, wouldn't that be because they're better at it?

Maybe if conservatives took the trouble to develop some business acumen, they might be able to dominate the commercial media.

I gotta admit, the Air America business plan was sheer genius.

1. Screech incoherently 24/7 about BOOOOOSH!!

2. ?????

3. Profit!!!

Exactly it's more profitable to preach Corporations should own Americam and working people shoulkd be thankful to them and bend over for them. Corpoatation love to hear that BS.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm watching Meet the Press with David Gregory.

I'm amazed watching him grill Harry Reid. Attacking, Attacking, Attacking.

But then when Lindsey Grahame and other Republicans are on, no interruptions, all softball questions and he lets them go on endlessly with their message.

MSNBC can have "opinion anchors" like Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz, but when it comes to the "serious" interviews, like with David Gregory, it's all "conservative" and "fluff". Unless you're a Democrat.

And the right is always screaming about "liberal bias". I just don't see it.

Then check the research done by UCLA and Harvard.

They both made it clear that FOX is just to the right, while CNN is off to the left and MSNBC is far left whacks.

don't like the research results? Take it up with the academics.

 

[California Girl]

I'm watching Meet the Press with David Gregory.

I'm amazed watching him grill Harry Reid. Attacking, Attacking, Attacking.

But then when Lindsey Grahame and other Republicans are on, no interruptions, all softball questions and he lets them go on endlessly with their message.

MSNBC can have "opinion anchors" like Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz, but when it comes to the "serious" interviews, like with David Gregory, it's all "conservative" and "fluff". Unless you're a Democrat.

And the right is always screaming about "liberal bias". I just don't see it.

Then check the research done by UCLA and Harvard.

They both made it clear that FOX is just to the right, while CNN is off to the left and MSNBC is far left whacks.

don't like the research results? Take it up with the academics.

I find it fascinating that the left never site that research. Perhaps because it was based considerably more than 612 New Jersey natives? Or because it covers decades of regular, academically solid, outcomes? Or maybe they're just too fucking dumb to look further than the media to be spoon fed the 'results'? Or... maybe the truth just doesn't suit their partisan agenda?

Personally, based on my observational research, I believe it may be that they are just plain stupid.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm watching Meet the Press with David Gregory.

I'm amazed watching him grill Harry Reid. Attacking, Attacking, Attacking.

But then when Lindsey Grahame and other Republicans are on, no interruptions, all softball questions and he lets them go on endlessly with their message.

MSNBC can have "opinion anchors" like Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz, but when it comes to the "serious" interviews, like with David Gregory, it's all "conservative" and "fluff". Unless you're a Democrat.

And the right is always screaming about "liberal bias". I just don't see it.

Then check the research done by UCLA and Harvard.

They both made it clear that FOX is just to the right, while CNN is off to the left and MSNBC is far left whacks.

don't like the research results? Take it up with the academics.

I find it fascinating that the left never site that research. Perhaps because it was based considerably more than 612 New Jersey natives? Or because it covers decades of regular, academically solid, outcomes? Or maybe they're just too fucking dumb to look further than the media to be spoon fed the 'results'? Or... maybe the truth just doesn't suit their partisan agenda?

Personally, based on my observational research, I believe it may be that they are just plain stupid.

Funny thing is the research looks like Harvard copied UCLA. The numbers are almost exactly the same.

 

[daveman]

You would think for for Ivy League students they would have a little more understanding and intelligence.

Poor Dinnerjacket. So misunderstood.

I doubt many (if any) people in the audience spoke Persian. What I understood him to say is there is not an openly gay society in ultra conservative Iran as there is America.

Makes you wonder why do many on the left support the man.

 

[California Girl]

Then check the research done by UCLA and Harvard.

They both made it clear that FOX is just to the right, while CNN is off to the left and MSNBC is far left whacks.

don't like the research results? Take it up with the academics.

I find it fascinating that the left never site that research. Perhaps because it was based considerably more than 612 New Jersey natives? Or because it covers decades of regular, academically solid, outcomes? Or maybe they're just too fucking dumb to look further than the media to be spoon fed the 'results'? Or... maybe the truth just doesn't suit their partisan agenda?

Personally, based on my observational research, I believe it may be that they are just plain stupid.

Funny thing is the research looks like Harvard copied UCLA. The numbers are almost exactly the same.

There is a plethora of solid, legitimate, media research out there for anyone who is intelligent enough to read the actual research instead of some (usually biased) media article that purports to represent the findings.

In fact, internationally, there are hugely respected institutions that also study the influence of the media in the US. Their studies are fascinating.... to anyone with a brain to read them.

Why am I not surprised that idiots keep resorting to the same bullshit - even after that bullshit has been proved to be bullshit on a variety of occasions.

It's like some people are not capable of learning. Hmmm.

 

[daveman]

Liberals dominate the commercial media?

If so, wouldn't that be because they're better at it?

Maybe if conservatives took the trouble to develop some business acumen, they might be able to dominate the commercial media.

I gotta admit, the Air America business plan was sheer genius.

1. Screech incoherently 24/7 about BOOOOOSH!!

2. ?????

3. Profit!!!

Exactly it's more profitable to preach Corporations should own Americam and working people shoulkd be thankful to them and bend over for them. Corpoatation love to hear that BS.

I see you're totally ignorant about how the radio business works.

 

[California Girl]

Liberals dominate the commercial media?

If so, wouldn't that be because they're better at it?

Maybe if conservatives took the trouble to develop some business acumen, they might be able to dominate the commercial media.

Because they're 'better at it'? No. It's because the left have Soros - and he pores considerably amounts of money into it. He does that so people like you don't think for yourselves. I can understand that... it's so much easier to have your opinions provided for you instead of acknowledging that your media is bought and paid for by people who prefer for you not to think.

 

[Truthmatters]

Liberals dont think for themselves?


how can you keep up with that idiot line Cali?

 

[Truthseeker420]

I'm watching Meet the Press with David Gregory.

I'm amazed watching him grill Harry Reid. Attacking, Attacking, Attacking.

But then when Lindsey Grahame and other Republicans are on, no interruptions, all softball questions and he lets them go on endlessly with their message.

MSNBC can have "opinion anchors" like Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz, but when it comes to the "serious" interviews, like with David Gregory, it's all "conservative" and "fluff". Unless you're a Democrat.

And the right is always screaming about "liberal bias". I just don't see it.

Then check the research done by UCLA and Harvard.

They both made it clear that FOX is just to the right, while CNN is off to the left and MSNBC is far left whacks.

don't like the research results? Take it up with the academics.

I find it fascinating that the left never site that research. Perhaps because it was based considerably more than 612 New Jersey natives? Or because it covers decades of regular, academically solid, outcomes? Or maybe they're just too fucking dumb to look further than the media to be spoon fed the 'results'? Or... maybe the truth just doesn't suit their partisan agenda?

Personally, based on my observational research, I believe it may be that they are just plain stupid.

But they have, there are many critics of the UCLA research

 

[Truthmatters]

The entire media is corporate

 

[Truthseeker420]

UCLA Study:A Measure of Media Bias-Rigging the Numbers

Think Again: Rigging the Numbers

 

[California Girl]

Liberals dont think for themselves?


how can you keep up with that idiot line Cali?

Never said that. But your comment goes some way to providing yet more evidence that some people lack the capability to employ basic comprehension.

 

[California Girl]

UCLA Study:A Measure of Media Bias-Rigging the Numbers

Think Again: Rigging the Numbers

Cool, one study demonstrating the difficulties of researching this topic - or at least a liberal biased source about it... kinda does make my point. Stop accepting the 'truth' from one side.... the 'truth' does not have a side. It just is.

If one honestly wants to understand the influence of the media, I suggest that intelligent people will make an effort to read ALL the research from ALL the sources and develop an informed opinion.

This is where I wander off the 'biased' reservation... I read a whole shitload of research and do not form my opinions from biased sources.

And y'all wonder why I call some people stupid? Really? Why? I speak as I find.