Now this is too funny......

[rem33]

If memory serves, but I could be wrong. The CIA had themselves in a fix over looking into American citizens and was slapped pretty hard over it which lead to very restrictive laws to stop such abuses. which in the end lead to not enough, to no intelligence on later terrorist acts such as the first World trade Center and or other attacks on America, or am I of base here?

Akin to the fight ongoing over the home land defense act now.

Or do I need a tin hat too?

 

[Playboypenguin]

Thanks for the insult ,pp. I thought you were a better man than that

It was said "tongue-n-cheek"...hence the smiley face at the end.
I did not seriously think you put too much weight on such a wild conspiracy theory.

I am sure some of the stuff metioned is in practice but this is one of those take a reality and spin it into a horrible extreme as the story snowballs over the years.

 

[badbob]

No harm done, PP. I get a little touchy when I'm accused of wearing a tinfoil hat if I question things, and research them, instead of blindly excepting what I'm told by the media. Sometimes the story is the way it's reported but often it's not. I learned a long time ago not to except anything as fact, without checking things myself.

badbob

 

[physics]

A tin hat can work wonders if you don't want external electric fields messing with your brains, it's called a Faraday cage. (Oh yeah, and there are a lot of external Teslas floating around out there.)

As far as media bias, of course it's biased, every single network. I can say this with certainty, with proof, and here it is: HR 1022. No media coverage, at all. :barf:

 

[RERICK]

Didn't 60 Minutes do a piece about the .50BMG once? I didn't see it, but I think someone here might remember it.

Yeah I think it was them. I could be wrong. I seem to remember them asking questions like well what does the average person need that type of weapon and all the usual crap.

 

[Al Norris]

Centrist? Isn't that what we call goldwater conservatives?

Hmmm, that must mean I'm in good company...

 

[sasquatch]

Playboypenguin

I am afraid I just don't buy into the whole "liberal media" thing.

George Getz, Libertarian Party spokesman.

"Journalists are taught to revere the First Amendment and scorn the Second Amendment. So they use their First Amendment rights to slant and distort the news to attack the Second Amendment."

Extensive Studies Confirm
News Media Bias On Guns

In it’s latest study, the Media Research Center (MRC) confirmed what the gun-rights community already knows -- when it comes to firearm-related stores, the news coverage on the national networks, ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC is decidedly anti-gun. Licensed to use the public airwaves, these media giants are flagrantly promoting an anti-rights agenda.

http://www.gunlaws.com/NewsMediaBiasStudy.htm

I know, I know, it's Wikipedia, but the following is referring to a Zogby poll:

A poll of likely 2008 presidential election voters released on March 14, 2007 by Zogby International reports that 83% of those surveyed believe that there is a bias in the media, with 64% of respondents of the opinion that this bias favors liberals and 28% of respondents believing that this bias is conservative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_bias#Claims_that_media_in_the_United_States_show_liberal_bias

How the Media Vote. Surveys of journalists’ self-reported voting habits show them backing the Democratic candidate in every presidential election since 1964, including landslide losers George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. In 2004, a poll conducted by the University of Connecticut found journalists backed John Kerry over George W. Bush by a greater than two-to-one margin.

Journalists’ Political Views. Compared to their audiences, journalists are far more likely to say they are Democrats or liberals, and they espouse liberal positions on a wide variety of issues. A 2004 poll by the Pew Research Center for The People & The Press found five times more journalists described themselves as “liberal” as said they were “conservative.”

http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp

A Measure of Media Bias

Do the major media outlets in the U.S. have a liberal bias?....Our results show a strong liberal bias. All of the news outlets except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times received a score to the left of the average member of Congress. And a few outlets, including the New York Times and CBS Evening News, were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than the center.

http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

 

[Cogster1]

Examples

Way to gather examples Sasquatch.

 

[sasquatch]

Thank you. I have more......

I sincerely hope that Playboypenguin has a chance to respond before this thread gets shut down for being too-something-or-another.....

 

[Mr. James]

Centrist? Isn't that what we call goldwater conservatives?

Thanks, SecDef, you made my day.

 

[Playboypenguin]

I am still not seeing how anyone is showng a liberal bias as far as news reporting goes.

I see lots of reports that claim the reporters themselves tend to be liberal but that is pretty common since most are college educated and in the 90's there were many studies showing that like 80%+ of all college graduates considered themselves at least somewhat liberal. that does not mean they report the news with a liberal bias. Most of them are white also. Does that mean they report the news with a white bias? Most of them identify as christian. Does that mean they report the news with a christian bias?

I aslo see alot of people confusing opinion shows and talk shows with the news. Those shows are not the news. They are the equivelent of "op-ed" pieces for television and are labeled and designated as such att the beginning and end of the show. Don't confuse the news read by the anchorperson with the opinion pieces done by people like O'Reilly or Donahue. They are there to state their opinions and attract viewers.

The difference between ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX is that the first three keep the opinions in the proper format whereas FOX just has opinion reporting. They are a personality based news source and not a reality based one. They have a set agenda for the entire network and hire people that will further that agenda. The others only show their agenda during the opinion shows.

Show me some stories where the three big networks altered the facts towards a liberal bias? Not just a study that tries to make people think it is bad to be liberal and tries to label reporters with this scarlet letter. None of the studies you linked actually dealt with factual coverage of news events. They mainly tried to discredit the message by calling into question the character of the person reading it which is a tired tactic.

They also try to say something has a liberal bias if the facts more supported the left than the right in the one study. By saying the news was biased becasue the stories reported fell more into line with the political agenda of the left side of the isle is absurd. If the facts support the left that just means the left was correct more often. That is like saying it is a liberal bias to post a show on fossil fuel emissions because that is a pet project of the left. That is not bias it is science. It is not bias to report the truth just because the right does not agree with it.

So once again I would love to see some true examples of stories that were reported with a liberal slant on the three major networks. Stories where they altered or adjusted the facts to make it more liberally biased. Not just how "everyone knows the media is liberal" or studies that show reporters are liberals.

 

[badbob]

A tin hat can work wonders if you don't want external electric fields messing with your brains, it's called a Faraday cage. (Oh yeah, and there are a lot of external Teslas floating around out there.)

As far as media bias, of course it's biased, every single network. I can say this with certainty, with proof, and here it is: HR 1022. No media coverage, at all.

Actually the Faraday cage only works as a full metal enclosure, as I understand it. That's why I sit in a metal garbage can with my computer.

The non-coverage of HR 1022 is an example of the media being biased against any real news getting reported, not just left of right bias. Lou Dobbs is the only one reporting on the NAU. for example, and a lot of other subjects that the other "news" shows won't mention. Sometimes I think he must have incriminating pictures of the CNN execs with farm animals of something.

badbob

 

[Playboypenguin]

Sometimes I think he must have incriminating pictures of the CNN execs with farm animals of something.

I have often wondered that myself. Lou Dobbs, along with Chris Matthews, is one of the few newspeople I see that actually get to speak their minds and have something worth saying.

Most of the three major networks just have monkeys in suits reading the news and FOX just has talking heads trying to make it sound like the talking points of the day they were given is their own opinion and that they are all somehow enraged by the same topics on the same days.

People think that guys like Rush or O'Reily are actually speaking their mind but if you listen to their shows you always see the same talking points, the same blustering, and the same righteous indignation. Just sayinf something loud does not make it a powerful statement. Matthews and Dobbs seem to actually veer of course and say something worthwhile.

 

[sasquatch]

Playboypenguin

Show me some stories where the three big networks altered the facts towards a liberal bias?

I am not talking about "altering facts". I am referring to "bias" in reporting. There is a huge difference, which most folks can see.

If I were to provide individual stories, they would most likely be rejected as anecdotal. Just a guess.

I referenced a study done by two university professors, one from UCLA. That university is not exactly a hotbed of conservative politics.

I guess that those of a liberal bent simply do not see any bias on the part of the networks simply because the way news is presented to them does not appear to "biased". It fits their version of the way things are in the real world.

 

[sasquatch]

Playboypenguin

"If the facts support the left that just means the left was correct more often."

How can one even respond to that?

 

[Playboypenguin]

If I were to provide individual stories, they would most likely be rejected as anecdotal. Just a guess.

Why don't you try and we will see.

For there to be a bias they have to be either altering or ommitting facts that support the other side. I am waiting to see examples.

Not repeating propoganda is not a bias.

 

[sasquatch]

Playboypenguin

None of the studies you linked actually dealt with factual coverage of news events. They mainly tried to discredit the message by calling into question the character of the person reading it which is a tired tactic.

That is 100% pure, unadulterated BS! Did you read the study entitled "A Measure of Media Bias". It appears not. Please show me just one instance of the authors "calling into question the character of the person" reading the news in order to bolster their study.

 

[sasquatch]

Playboypenguin

"For there to be a bias they have to be either altering or ommitting facts that support the other side. I am waiting to see examples. Why don't you try and we will see."

OK. I can predict your response, but I'll give it a go.

I live in western Washington. Our local ABC affiliate here is KOMO (channel 4).

Over the last 10 years there have been numerous instances of news stories on KOMO revolving around "assault rifles", usually when they are in the national news for one reason or another. On at least 4 of those occasions KOMO has included a film clip of the now infamous 1997 North Hollywood shootout between two bank robbers and police. KOMO uses this clip to bolster their argument that people have no business owning "assault rifles", and that they should be banned. Just one problem here......the shooters in the film clip are using fully-automatic weapons, not semi-automatic "assault rifles". This is just one example of the liberal news media slanting a news story in order to justify their political leanings.

By the way, I have sent a letter to KOMO each time they have aired this film clip, and have never received a single reply.

 

[JuanCarlos]

Over the last 10 years there have been numerous instances of news stories on KOMO revolving around "assault rifles", usually when they are in the national news for one reason or another. On at least 4 of those occasions KOMO has included a film clip of the now infamous 1997 North Hollywood shootout between two bank robbers and police. KOMO uses this clip to bolster their argument that people have no business owning "assault rifles", and that they should be banned. Just one problem here......the shooters in the film clip are using fully-automatic weapons, not semi-automatic "assault rifles". This is just one example of the liberal news media slanting a news story in order to justify their political leanings.

If you're going to correct them for using that clip, I wouldn't do it on the fact that the weapons were full-auto. Semi-auto "assault rifles" would have been pretty much equally effective in that situation. I'd say the fact that they're using a vanishingly rare occurrence to influence broad public policies is the real issue there. Same way they want to invoke Columbine whenever talking about firearms bans. But yeah, I'd say that is a pretty decent example of exhibiting a bias without actually reporting anything that's untrue.

Then again, "liberals" are hardly the only ones repeatedly invoking freak occurrences to justify sweeping public policies that are detrimental to our rights...see: 9/11.


Also, out of curiosity, wouldn't full-auto versions of semi-autos currently classified as "assault weapons" also be considered "assault weapons?"

 

[sasquatch]

JuanCarlos

"out of curiosity, wouldn't full-auto versions of semi-autos currently classified as "assault weapons" also be considered "assault weapons?"

The ploy here was to play on the emotions of uneducated viewers in an attempt to make a purely political statement. To use an example of a gunfight where fully-automatic weapons are utilized as a reason why semi-automatic "assault rifles" should be banned is totally dishonest.