toldailytopic: Why do you suppose most major media outlets are so overwhelming libera

[Town Heretic]

Here's one:

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...of-running-liberal-agenda-20110530-1fbl6.html

Sesame Street has previously been accused of being left wing. In 2009 an episode mocked Fox News. The segment showed the character of Oscar as a reporter for the Grouch News Network and had a viewer telling him: "From now on I am watching 'Pox' News. Now there is a trashy news show."

The Public Broadcasting Service ombudsman later said he "didn't know what was in the head of the producers" and that they should not tell people what to think "through the kids".​

Oh, I thought you meant pushing particular liberal ideas at kids.

That's reaching back a bit though for a fairly mild bit of nudging. You think kids will have that nugget lodged in their noggins and associate it with Fox News if they ever get around to watching it? Sounds more like the sort of thing parents get irked by.

I appreciate the effort though. :e4e:

 

[sky.]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for August 6th, 2012 10:40 AM

toldailytopic: Why do you suppose most major media outlets are so overwhelming liberal in their reporting?

TV doesn't tell us anything that the Bible hasn't already warned us of. So what.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Okay, I understand corporate profits driven by ratings. Take that away.

Either the content is accurate, or it's not. Either it's being driven by an agenda, or it isn't.

Looking specifically at the content, it's easy to see when it's being spun, and by whom and for what purpose.

Can I ask where you consider to be the best and most objective sources for news?

 

[annabenedetti]

Of course it is. Biased "conservative" news shows get more viewers than accurate "conservative" news shows.
But they have to deliver it in a way that doesn't overtly expose itself as biased pandering. And that's what FOX "News" is all about. It's about being deliberately biased, but not so overtly biased that it loses it's "believers". FOX is pandering to a specific "conservative" audience.

The other networks do it, too, but they are mostly pandering to the "mainstream" audiences. That is, they want to offend as few people as possible while attracting as many as possible. They aren't "liberal" or "conservative" because their target is the mainstream. So they have to pretend they are delivering "unbiased" news shows, even though they're really just cheap pretend news shows pretending to be unbiased all the while trying to entertain and titillate.

Because almost everything on TV, the radio, and in newspapers is all about making as much money as possible, now, we aren't getting much real news, anymore. And as a result, we Americans are becoming really stupid when it comes to what's actually going on in the world. Even in our own country.

Greed ruins everything it touches. And that includes the dissemination of information.

OK, so everything is biased. On that I can agree.

 

[GuySmiley]

but they're not memes, its actual fox coverage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl6ekkvWnOE

watch that clip for example, no has interfered with that. It's actual, official fox reporting on the terrible liberal bias of the Muppets and how their brainwashing the children!


That's the type of thing I'm surprised they get away with. it's completely insane! If I didn't know better I would have thought it was a comedy sketch

That clip isn't Fox News. Its "Follow the Money" with Eric Bolling. He's not a reporter on a news show. This is like criticising Oprah for not being fair with the news. Guess what, its not a news show.

 

[annabenedetti]

Can I ask where you consider to be the best and most objective sources for news?

I'd say the internet, because while some sites are still profit-driven, there are a lot of independent voices out there.

 

[annabenedetti]

Oh, I thought you meant pushing particular liberal ideas at kids.

That's reaching back a bit though for a fairly mild bit of nudging. You think kids will have that nugget lodged in their noggins and associate it with Fox News if they ever get around to watching it? Sounds more like the sort of thing parents get irked by.

I appreciate the effort though. :e4e:

Gee thanks. :e4e:

 

[Arthur Brain]

I'd say the internet, because while some sites are still profit-driven, there are a lot of independent voices out there.

Ok, and I can run with that. I do think the BBC has one of the most impartial records in regards to news reporting but I still think cross checking with independent sources is recommended as well. There's plenty of crass journalism from left to right IMO and most of it emanates from the tabloid (gutter) press. In fact sometimes both 'sides' shift whichever way the 'wind is blowing' as and when it suits....

 

[annabenedetti]

Ok, and I can run with that. I do think the BBC has one of the most impartial records in regards to news reporting but I still think cross checking with independent sources is recommended as well. There's plenty of crass journalism from left to right IMO and most of it emanates from the tabloid (gutter) press. In fact sometimes both 'sides' shift whichever way the 'wind is blowing' as and when it suits....

The BBC has come under a lot of criticism for its liberal bias, though, hasn't it? I believe it's own commission found some evidence of that, but I don't know the details.

Yes, I've seen just as much spin from the right as from the left, so much so that I'm a lot better at asking questions now than I used to be, but most of that is web-based. Regarding major television media outlets in the U.S., Fox is the only news outlet up against ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and CNN. So the coverage is overwhelmingly tilted one way.

 

[Town Heretic]

Gee thanks. :e4e:

Well, it was three years or so back and a bit wan...

But like I told Knight, if most of America gets their news from Fox there isn't really a liberal bias in terms of impact. If anything, there would be a conservative bias in play.

Just saying. :cheers:

 

[Arthur Brain]

The BBC has come under a lot of criticism for its liberal bias, though, hasn't it? I believe it's own commission found some evidence of that, but I don't know the details.

Hmm, can't say I'm aware of such criticism overall really to be honest. As with any other corporation there's bound to be some kind of bias to an extent but being too "liberal" isn't one that comes to mind. Then again I live in a country with a "Conservative/liberal democrat" coalition *government* which must sound like an oxymoron to you's across the pond... Actually it sounds like one to plenty of us in it as well....lain:

Yes, I've seen just as much spin from the right as from the left, so much so that I'm a lot better at asking questions now than I used to be, but most of that is web-based. Regarding major television media outlets in the U.S., Fox is the only news outlet up against ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and CNN. So the coverage is overwhelmingly tilted one way.

I think it's best to presume that there's a hell of a lot of news and salient stuff left out of most reporting for various reasons from major networks. If folk are happy hearing the "headlines" from such without investigating or interested in further then that goal is reached. Sometimes however, I think the press plays on the divide between left and right to obscure issues and "press" that divide yet further. Politics is as fickle and impersonal as it gets when it suits...

 

[annabenedetti]

Well, it was three years or so back and a bit wan...

I grabbed the first thing I found.

Given my knowledge of your track record, I'll bet you didn't even click the link to see the name of the book. lain:

But like I told Knight, if most of America gets their news from Fox there isn't really a liberal bias in terms of impact. If anything, there would be a conservative bias in play.

Just saying. :cheers:

If they do, and do you have stats? then there would be a centrist bias in play.

Just saying. :cheers:

 

[annabenedetti]

Hmm, can't say I'm aware of such criticism overall really to be honest. As with any other corporation there's bound to be some kind of bias to an extent but being too "liberal" isn't one that comes to mind.

Here's something that may interest you.

Then again I live in a country with a "Conservative/liberal democrat" coalition *government* which must sound like an oxymoron to you's across the pond... Actually it sounds like one to plenty of us in it as well....lain:

I've given up trying to make comparisons between your terminology and ours. And a major difference is you've got far more than a two-party system which makes it that much more complicated.

I think it's best to presume that there's a hell of a lot of news and salient stuff left out of most reporting for various reasons from major networks. If folk are happy hearing the "headlines" from such without investigating or interested in further then that goal is reached. Sometimes however, I think the press plays on the divide between left and right to obscure issues and "press" that divide yet further. Politics is as fickle and impersonal as it gets when it suits...

I'd agree with that assessment. :e4e:

 

[PureX]

OK, so everything is biased. On that I can agree.

I don't think most news shows are biased, so much as they're inane. Fox is biased. I think NPR is biased. I'm not familiar enough with MSNBC to know if their biased or just inane. Or maybe both.

Keep in mind that part of Fox's schtick is to label all OTHER news sources unreliable and "liberal" (i.e. you must only watch Fox if you want the "truth"). But of course it's Fox that's actually biased, the others are mostly just inane. And of course it's all pretense, anyway.

It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[Town Heretic]

I grabbed the first thing I found.

:chuckle:

Given my knowledge of your track record, I'll bet you didn't even click the link to see the name of the book. lain:

There was a link? :think:

If they do, and do you have stats? then there would be a centrist bias in play.

That's what Fox News claimed...are you saying I shouldn't believe them? :shocked: Not trust "America's News HQ"?

Fox Press Release:

FOX News Channel (FNC) achieved a rare television milestone today in clinching ten years as the number one news network in cable television. Having surpassed CNN in January 2002, FNC has now reigned over the cable news universe for an entire decade while continuing to outpace both CNN and MSNBC combined in total viewership, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Remarking on the feat, FOX News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes said, “We are extremely proud of the phenomenal achievement created by the hard work and talent of the FOX News Channel employees and recognize how difficult it is for a cable network to sustain this level of dominance for a decade. America has clearly embraced fair and balanced news.”​

And it makes sense, when you think about it. They have the number one ranked cable news network running 24/7 and they have a competitive local news, traditional affiliate program.


Why do you suppose most major media outlets are so overwhelming liberal?

'B' answer, as always--volume. lain:

 

[Quincy]

All the news media outlets have an agenda back by big money. For me I go for whichever one doesn't give much opinion which is none of them...... I just want the facts of the story, not slant or bias.

So I don't really watch or read any news channels or papers. I actually learn about a lot of stuff on here .

 

[annabenedetti]

There was a link? :think:

When it comes to links, you're hopeless. I should have known better.

FOX News Channel (FNC) achieved a rare television milestone today in clinching ten years as the number one news network in cable television. Having surpassed CNN in January 2002, FNC has now reigned over the cable news universe for an entire decade while continuing to outpace both CNN and MSNBC combined in total viewership, according to Nielsen Media Research.

So if Fox is influencing so many people with its conservative bias, why aren't there tons of converts to conservativism?

Or is it that Fox is centrist, and thus acceptable to a wider range of viewers?

 

[Town Heretic]

When it comes to links, you're hopeless. I should have known better.

You kids and your fancy shmancy links and your tweeters. lain:

So if Fox is influencing so many people with its conservative bias, why aren't there tons of converts to conservativism?

If there's this pervasive liberal influence why isn't most of the country on board? Same answer. I think that sort of thing mostly whips up the fan base. I've never been particularly sold on it being much more than reflective and encouraging.

Or is it that Fox is centrist, and thus acceptable to a wider range of viewers?

I like the actual news. Smith is entertaining. But looking at the line up of personalities and their time slots will answer you on the notion of Fox being anything other than a conservative friendly hot spot.

 

[Cracked]

If you have a narrow worldview, everything that challenges it will seem liberal. Now, I won't say that some pundits and even news organizations (e.g., MSNBC) don't support a liberal agenda. However, I do not categorize all media outlets as, the demonized, "liberal" (queue dramatic music).

In addition, the only beyond obviously biased media that I know is Fox News.

 

[LKmommy]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for August 6th, 2012 10:40 AM

toldailytopic: Why do you suppose most major media outlets are so overwhelming liberal in their reporting?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

They hope the majority are dumb enough to believe what they are told? They hope to lower morality standards of the weak, lost, or uneducated?

Trickery? Evil? Depection? Deception by not provding ALL the information instead of bits and pieces? Pushing unnatural and immoral ideas (homosexuality) or abortion? Hoping the masses will become so lazy that they no longer seek the truth on their own but buy the koolaid/lifestyle/morality/whatever it is the media is trying to sell? :devil:


Today's Personal Anecdote:
I asked this question to myself when watching my local evening news tonight 6pm CST. All they said about the shooter in Sihk Temple in WI was his age, gender, race, Army Veteran serving from 1992-1998 and ineligle for renlistment and a General Discharge.

They repeated his career choice from 1992-98 and nothing else. I myself wondered .....

WHAT was this guy doing from 1998-2012??

If I was an antimilitary, antibush/antirepublican, antichristian, antigun, liberal who wanted to decieve and distort facts and truths....well heck, I will just assme he was a crazed Army veteran with a gun that he should not have had.

I sure hope he was not a Baker, a Customer Service Guy, a Landscaper because GEE one would THEN HAVE to conclude that:
all bakers, customer service guys, and landscapers are crazed people with evil hidden racial and religous issues. :hammer: