Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Media bias

The link is in the title, with another example below.

http://www.mrc.org/projects/worst/welcome.asp

The media, or at least the main stream media is extremely biased, biased towards the socialist views of the left. It has been stated that up to 90% of reporters are liberal. How can those on the left say it is biased the other direction. It is only the advent of the internet, talk radio, and FOX news that has allowed a different, less biased view of the news.

Here is the way to handle extreme partisan reporters or news outlets.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

17 Comments:

At 11:02 AM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

FEEL THE LOVE

“You're evil, horrible people. You're awful people. You represent horrible ideas. God hates you and He wants to kill your children. You should all burn."

- PBS reporter Rachel Buchman in a recorded voice-mail message to a conservative activist group over the Thanksgiving weekend. Buchman has resigned from PBS-affiliate WHYY-FM in Philadelphia after the phone
message was made public.

 
At 12:24 PM, Blogger Ian said...

Hi, I like this site.
Us Liberals say that there is no bias because this kind of story just doesn't get carried by the main stream media. Could it be that while reporters maybe 90% liberal, editors and execs aren't?

So, as a result these kinds of facts get sent around and a feeling a rumor gets a ttached to them
"
Voting in the USA -

20 amazing facts. If any one of them seems to
threaten your vote worry about it. Then act!
We are not talking conspiracy here, but we are talking
sensible, valid, prooveable voting procedures.

1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two
companies:
Diebold and ES&S.

2. There is no federal agency with regulatory
authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine
industry.

3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of
ES&S are brothers.

4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush
campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that
he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its
electoral votes to the president next year."

5. 35% of ES&S is owned by Republican Senator Chuck
Hagel, who became Senator based on votes counted by
ES&S machines.

6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a long-time friend
of the Bush family, was caught lying about his
ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics
Committee.

7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George
W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.

8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in
the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.

9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no
paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is
no way to verify that the data coming
out of the machine is the same as what was
legitimately put in by voters.

10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and
ticket machines, all of which log each transaction
and can generate a paper trail.

11. Diebold is based in Ohio.

12. Diebold employs 5 convicted felons as developers.
These are the people who write the voting machine
computer code.

13. Diebold's Senior Vice-President, Jeff Dean, was
convicted of 23
counts of felony theft in the first degree.

14. Diebold Senior Vice-President Jeff Dean was
convicted of planting back doors in his software and
using a "high degree of sophistication" to
evade detection over a period of 2 years.

15. None of the international election observers were
allowed in the polls in Ohio.

16. California banned the use of Diebold machines
because the security was so bad.
(call us crazy! but we did!)

17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on
unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no
paper trail.

18. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine
errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor
of Bush or Republican candidates.

19. Florida's governor, Jeb is Bush's brother.

20. Major voting anomalies in Florida -- again always
favoring Bush --have been mathematically demonstrated
and questioned by experts.

The odds of some of these amazing voting anomalies
were the equivalent of statistical miracles. Was it
God? or was it Diebold...?
"
Just think about the fact that there may be a bias against giving information, not just a Left leaning, or a Right leaning. Maybe something more sinister is taking place.

 
At 2:41 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

Very interesting Ian. Where did you get this information? I knew about the Jeb/George connection already, but if the rest was true we should won alot more of the elections around the country. Send me web sites.

 
At 4:46 PM, Blogger Ian said...

I got it in an email - thus the rumor part - but it is on the web at several places. I quickly found it here. Not a news source, but:
http://www.drudge.com/discuss/viewTopic.php/22741

A really great site on this issue is
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
Before the elections they even had instructions about how to rig the machines yourself. Just hit the 'submit vote' button twice. And then they discussed how to erase the computer log to hide your tracks.

The rumored reason why W. didn't win by more was that there was an attempt to keep hidden the actual fraud so as not to nullify the results. So, it is a little here, a little there. Newsweek this week, somewhere in it, points out that at one place the machine had almost 5,000 votes for Bush when only 664 people were voting. Oops, just a little bug. But a lot of little bugs can add up, and get looked over.

The left is really loud about this issue mainly because they are so afraid that their voices, no - that all our voices really, are being lost to technology and corruption. Their request? Just a paper trail. That's all.

I feel that people on the left and right have common ground. It just takes a bit of dialog to realize we all want the same thing, a better America. A lot of stories on the left don't get picked up by the main stream, just as on the right. If you would like to read more about some of these issues (if you can stomach them -sometimes they are too much for me) you could visit
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/

Thanks for not deleting my posts. Other conservative blogs I have seen have deleted comments, and no 'Liberal' voices. I promise to keep a cool head - this is your site- and I like the feeling here. Nice Blog.

 
At 8:16 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

Welcome back Ian. Rest assured I only delete the complete idiots and insulting people that come here. My blog is open to everyone (except said idiots), just so long as everyone rtemembers that this is my place to vent and put down my opinions, and write about things that interest me. Hence the "runes", "sports" and "star trek" posts. I don't think their is any validity to the conspiracy theory about a rigged election because it was a well known fact that Kerry had lawyers spread across the nation looking for it, not to mention all the non-partisan groups looking for fraud too. In addition the news organizations would LOVE to break a story like that....you know, like Watergate. It has not happened so I assume the rumors to not be substantiated. I too have quoted/cited the drudge web site here, but some of his stuff is strictly opinion. Thanks for stopping by. I'll look at your post again later for additional comment.

 
At 4:53 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

OK as promised I am back. I looked at your "sources", nice one with the "drudge" vs Drudgereport". Your source was funny, and it is a blog, or in other words, someones opinion, just like this blog is.
I am not sure what to make of the blackbox site.
The last site did not offer any fraud evidence, did not even discuss it as a matter of fact. They actually look a little like a conspiracy theory site, I was waiting to see "proof of UFO's".

Well I promised to revisit your post, and have done so. I really don't think there is any wide spread fraud in voting. Not enough to throw a nation wide election, maybe a county or district, but I even doubt that considering the run offs they are still having here in NC for secretary of agriculture (why do political parties matter with plants?)
And since I worked for the Lee County GOP during the elections I had access to the voting rolls, about 1/3 of the dems in this county voted for Bush.

 
At 4:07 PM, Blogger Ian said...

A note on this topic. You mentioned that newer sources (such as Fox) are now available to offer an unbiased view, but I counter that no sources are required to tell the truth (and Fox doesn't).
I offer two links.

http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/11.html
The media can lie.

http://wildrant.blogspot.com/
Again about Fox.

Thanks again.
I'll be looking for your response.

 
At 9:06 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

Ian, I know that Fox probably leans further right than most of us have been used to in the "CNN only" years, but that is the way I like my news, and apparently so do alot of others, as FOX has beat the competition, in all major news stories in the recent past (elections for one). Got to go, baby needs to go to bed.

 
At 10:51 AM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

OK, I'm back. Actually you misquoted me. I never said they were not biased, I said less biased. Look at the news with that question asked by a soldier of Rumsfeld. The reporter set it up. That kind of media we can live without. And as stated before, I prefer a slight right bend, as it makes me feel better. Ever notice how liberals (including the media) are always negative and pessamistic? Especially when there is a republican in the Whitehouse. (present poster excluded of course Ian, you are the epitome of politeness) Conservatives tend to be more optimistic, regardless of who is in the Whitehouse.

 
At 11:37 AM, Blogger Ian said...

Thank you. That's a very nice this to hear. This page certainly allows for politeness. I really respect that. And sorry for the misquote.
I would like to point out that I have heard extremely attacking an hateful comments from people on both sides. It doesn't help to share ideas when people try to out shout each other, cast insults, or otherwise put people down.

And on the topic of the soldier who asked the question to Rumsfeld, he is denying that he was set up. Maybe someone is trying to remove the pertinance of the question by casting doubt with the use of an untruth. . . thus the crux of my comment. The media doesn't have to tell the truth.
Thanks again. I am getting so much out of your page. Keep it up.

 
At 2:11 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

I don't know the mind set of the soldier in question, maybe he likes the spotlight and does not want to be seen as a patsy. But one of them is lieing. The newsman embedded says it was his question, and if he filed a story in his paper to that effect, then he is either not telling the truth, or he is. I came up with that conclusion all by myself ;)
I am violating my own rule by discussing this under the wrong thread.

 
At 2:16 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/world/2940661

Here is another site that discusses the reporters role.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display
.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000735326

And another.

And to top it all off.....
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1471&u=/ibd/20041210/
bs_ibd_ibd/2004129issues01&printer=1

 
At 2:28 PM, Blogger Ian said...

Its probably a little bit of every one telling the truth. Good links, though.
Hey, uhm. I accidently posted a comment to the wrong thread. I put this under "Ironic", but intended it for here. I hope the double posting is OK. And of course I will not be offended if you erase this one's twin. I wanted to continue the input I made to this thread earlier.
-> here it is (with minor additions) ->

This link might proove to be more useful on the topic of Voting I introduced earlier.

http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/12/35548.php

Its a conglomeration of a bunch of Lefty (and some not so Left) journals, but still enough to cause me to ponder the possiblilities.
Thanks again.

 
At 4:35 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

I saw this post under "Ironic", looked at the link and saw it was the same info you had posted here earlier so I opted not to respond to it. Thanks for catching/correcting your boo boo.

 
At 12:17 PM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

http://www.eyeonthepost.org/110examples.html

A great link to a site that points out the bias in the Post. Good reading.

Here is a poll done by the Pew Research group that breaks down politcal leanings.......

http://usconservatives.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.
htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=usconservatives&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fpeople
-press.org%2Freports%2Fdisplay.php3%3FPageID%3D829

 
At 7:35 AM, Blogger Ian said...

I am willing to admit that the majority of reporters are Liberal as indicated in cited studies. But that does not mean Editors - Publishers - and producers were included in that study.
2 things.
There is still the point that just because a journalist writes it, doesn't mean it gets published / aired. Editors - Publishers - Advertizers - all have a say in what gets sent to the presses or on air.
With the recent Rumsfeld / soldier in Iraq Q/A event, CBS said of the matter, "And Rumsfeld gave as good as he got". As if it was debate and they were rating him favoribly.
There are as many issues not in the media from the Lefts perspective as probably on the right, as this is due to a lock down of information by advertizers. Think of all the sex and violence on TV. I got a kid, and I won't let her watch TV. We can't blame a Liberal left for that - we have to blame advertisers, and ultimately ourselves as consumers - for the kind of droll that we are willing to stand for in our society.

The other thing is: Why are more journalists Liberal? Is it something about being Liberal? Or is it something about being a jounralist? Maybe it is something to do with being Conservative.

 
At 9:03 AM, Blogger Richard Nixon said...

I think it does Ian. Why wouldn't publishers and editors in the media field follow the same pattern as the reporters? Look at the power some reporters get and the influece they have, i.e. Dan Rather. He was able to run with that falsified story about the Presidents service without verification. And at the end he still said that he thought "the message was more important the the messenger" (my words to portray his thought). However, when someone leaked a memo from the intelligence committee showing Senator Rockefellers desire to use the non-partisan committee to hinder the President at every turn, the big story was not the content, but how was the memo linked. Clearly a double standard.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home