Media biased toward Democrats -- Harvard Report

2minkey said:
on another note... i wonder how much of the quoted figures are the result of there being a very unpopular republican regime in power at the moment. perhaps things may have been different during the carter administration..?
Click to expand...

You don't remember Dan Rather's heyday? The man all but wore a cheerleading outfit with a big C on it during the Klinton years. CBS' coverage of the two party conventions was the event that opened my eyes to media bias in the first place. Every word from every Demonrat mouth was met with body language similar to an acolyte mopping up the bread of life from the sensai. Conversely, the looks of incredulity on the faces of every network talking head during the Republicam convention was sickening. Rather threw his credibility and his career away trying to score points for the Demonrats against Bush years after the fact.

And the unpopular regime in power today is a Demonrat congress and a Republican president. This exists by will of the people, who I continue to assert are made up of predominantly morons. Hence any dissatisfaction people feel lies with Demonrats moreso than anyone else and regardless, is their own damn stupid fault. Run out and vote for another idiot next time, people. Don't bother taking time to research anything beyond Media Matters or MoveOn or (God bless and protect us) You Tube's debate coverage. By all means allow Rosie O'Asshole and Sean Penn to continue to dictate your feelings on world issues for you. Michael Moore, who never saw a buffet line he didn't like, is a perfect choice for social commentator. Yep, the status quo is just fine, you fucking sheep.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Yep, the status quo is just fine, you fucking sheep.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much the definition of a Redumblicker.

And the unpopular regime in power today is a Demonrat congress and a Republican president. This exists by will of the people, who I continue to assert are made up of predominantly morons. Hence any dissatisfaction people feel lies with Demonrats moreso than anyone else
Click to expand...

Usually when someone says "hence" there's something preceding that proves what they are going to say next. All you've done is make a bunch of ignorant remarks.
 
actually i found his comments quite entertaining, particularly the latter section.

and nope, i really don't remember dan rather's heyday... that was the time when i owned no TV or it was a "house" TV that tended to be tuned to the simpsons and little else. it's actually only fairly recently that i've watched or read maintream media.
 
. . . and regardless, is their own damn stupid fault. Run out and vote for another idiot next time, people. Don't bother taking time to research anything beyond Media Matters or MoveOn or (God bless and protect us) You Tube's debate coverage. By all means allow Rosie O'Asshole and Sean Penn to continue to dictate your feelings on world issues for you. Michael Moore, who never saw a buffet line he didn't like, is a perfect choice for social commentator. Yep, the status quo is just fine, you fucking sheep.
Click to expand...
spike said:
Usually when someone says "hence" there's something preceding that proves what they are going to say next. All you've done is make a bunch of ignorant remarks.
Click to expand...

Well thank you in the fine follow-up and being the qualifying proof for it, for him.


I feel quite simiular SnP. After sharing a pot of coffee with my homosexual-liberal buddy this morning, I'm convinced liberalism is a diagnosable mental condition. His undrailable ranting on and on about the oil war and that he is still fairly convienced 9/11 was an inside job (Bush Cheney). As ususal, our time together came to an end when I wisely informed him that... "I'm gonna sock you in the next fifteen minutes"

...So being the good friends we are (and by prior agreement), he accepted that as gospel. He's going to drop off a SATA cable for me later tonight.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Well thank you in the fine follow-up and being the qualifying proof for it, for him.
Click to expand...

Yeah right, since I've visited those sites about twice. :laugh: Unlike the WND fans here.

I'm not sure you understand the concept of "proof".

Conservativism seems to be an untreatable mental disorder. Gullible sheep that should just be put out of their misery.
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
You don't remember Dan Rather's heyday? The man all but wore a cheerleading outfit with a big C on it during the Klinton years. CBS' coverage of the two party conventions was the event that opened my eyes to media bias in the first place. Every word from every Demonrat mouth was met with body language similar to an acolyte mopping up the bread of life from the sensai. Conversely, the looks of incredulity on the faces of every network talking head during the Republicam convention was sickening. Rather threw his credibility and his career away trying to score points for the Demonrats against Bush years after the fact.

And the unpopular regime in power today is a Demonrat congress and a Republican president. This exists by will of the people, who I continue to assert are made up of predominantly morons. Hence any dissatisfaction people feel lies with Demonrats moreso than anyone else and regardless, is their own damn stupid fault. Run out and vote for another idiot next time, people. Don't bother taking time to research anything beyond Media Matters or MoveOn or (God bless and protect us) You Tube's debate coverage. By all means allow Rosie O'Asshole and Sean Penn to continue to dictate your feelings on world issues for you. Michael Moore, who never saw a buffet line he didn't like, is a perfect choice for social commentator. Yep, the status quo is just fine, you fucking sheep.
Click to expand...





I am not saying I disagree here but I would say both sides of the coin are guilty of this. Both sides refuse to hear the other side, both sides refuse to hear anything they don't want to and gobble up what the politicans or whatever cause tells them to take up. The right do it as much as the left. And both sides say THINK. But as soon as you do think, they try to belittle it unless you agree with it. Which is why I keep hoping that somehow both sides will shut their fucking traps and for once let the people get all the facts and make their own decisions.
 
freako104 said:
I am not saying I disagree here but I would say both sides of the coin are guilty of this. Both sides refuse to hear the other side, both sides refuse to hear anything they don't want to and gobble up what the politicans or whatever cause tells them to take up. The right do it as much as the left. And both sides say THINK. But as soon as you do think, they try to belittle it unless you agree with it. Which is why I keep hoping that somehow both sides will shut their fucking traps and for once let the people get all the facts and make their own decisions.
Click to expand...

True enough. I personally don't care who anyone votes for so long as they know why they voted for that candidate. I respect someone's opinion more if they say something I disagree with than if they say something asinine. "Clinton was cool, he smoked pot and played a saxophone" is asinine. "Gore is concerned about the environment" is not how I see it, but it at least shows a little thought. "Obama has refreshing ideas" could be either. "Thompson is a Republican" is useless. "Gulianni showed leadership during the September 11 attacks" might not be how I see it, but again it shows at least a little effort to think. "I don't trust none of 'em so I'm going to vote (Libertarian, Green Party, whatever)" is a waste of time IMO. "I support Hillary because..." is all I need to hear to discount anyone's opinion, because I honestly do not believe anyone can think about any issue and support that harpy at the same time, unless they got to the polling place on a camel.

I continue to hold out some hope that a viable candidate will eventually emerge. I've seen 1 1/2 so far split three ways...Paul, Thompson, and Romney. None of them have done (notice I said done, not said) enough to earn my vote yet, and if I decide to simply cast a protest vote it'll be a write-in for Jefferson Davis because God above knows a dead man could do a better job than 80% of those on the ticket so far.
 
And the public perception of the 'popular press' continues to decline. Yep. I can remember when you could switch on the TV and actually believe what you heard on the news. Back when facts were checked, and double-checked, and editorial comments were constrained to the last 5 minutes of the broadcast, or, strangely enough, on public television. Its a sad state of affairs when the majority no longer trust the mainstream media. The only exception seems to be the sports page...not counting Barry and Roger, of course. ;)

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe traditional journalism is out of touch, and nearly half are turning to the Internet to get their news, according to a new survey.

While most people think journalism is important to the quality of life, 64 percent are dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in their communities, a We Media/Zogby Interactive online poll showed.

"That's a really encouraging reflection of people who care A) about journalism and B) understand that it makes a difference to their lives," said Andrew Nachison, of iFOCOS, a Virginia-based think tank which organized a forum in Miami where the findings were presented.
Click to expand...
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
True enough. I personally don't care who anyone votes for so long as they know why they voted for that candidate. I respect someone's opinion more if they say something I disagree with than if they say something asinine. "Clinton was cool, he smoked pot and played a saxophone" is asinine. "Gore is concerned about the environment" is not how I see it, but it at least shows a little thought. "Obama has refreshing ideas" could be either. "Thompson is a Republican" is useless. "Gulianni showed leadership during the September 11 attacks" might not be how I see it, but again it shows at least a little effort to think. "I don't trust none of 'em so I'm going to vote (Libertarian, Green Party, whatever)" is a waste of time IMO. "I support Hillary because..." is all I need to hear to discount anyone's opinion, because I honestly do not believe anyone can think about any issue and support that harpy at the same time, unless they got to the polling place on a camel.
Click to expand...

So you just got hypocritical all in one paragraph. You chastise others for saying asinine things that took no thought to justify who they support. Then you follow it up with an asinine statement that showed no thought whatsoever to justify not supporting someone.
 
"I have no respect for your opinions but I do think you should follow yours" is not hypocritical in the least.
 
No even close.

That would have a completly different meaning than:

"I respect someone's opinion more if they say something I disagree with than if they say something asinine.

...not how I see it, but it at least shows a little thought. "

After which he said something completely asinine which showed no thought.
 
I miss news that was unbiased, now it is all editorials & opinions.

That is why I like BBC

and Al-jeezerha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top