• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Media....

Shadowless

Banned
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
530
Location
Oakland, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Is not liberal! It isn't really conservative either, the media is a corporate entity. It only cares about ratings which makes their institutions profit. They have no allegiance to any particular ideology. They do have leanings, but this is a veiled attempt to corner down specific market demographics. Their primary function is ratings through advertising, and the use of fear mongering to keep the viewer hooked. Let's please remember this when discussing issues.

:peace
 
Is not liberal! It isn't really conservative either, the media is a corporate entity. It only cares about ratings which makes their institutions profit. They have no allegiance to any particular ideology. They do have leanings, but this is a veiled attempt to corner down specific markets. Let's please remember this when discussing issues.

:peace

Both left and right propaganda outlets are controlled by the same people with the same interests.
 
Its all about sensationalism. Thats what the media sells. Sensationalized events.
 
Its all about sensationalism. Thats what the media sells. Sensationalized events.

While manipulating events and forming a narrative which is promoted. Of course they need to make money as well and that comes with sensationalized events which plays into the wider agenda as well especially in the so called 'war on terror'.
 
While manipulating events and forming a narrative which is promoted. Of course they need to make money as well and that comes with sensationalized events which plays into the wider agenda as well especially in the so called 'war on terror'.

Right, but the agenda makes money for other people in their bubble.
 
Right, but the agenda makes money for other people in their bubble.

Makes money for the minions below them who don't really know the full plan but just implement it as they only deal in a certain area. Just like the Manhattan Project.
 
Is not liberal! It isn't really conservative either, the media is a corporate entity. It only cares about ratings which makes their institutions profit. They have no allegiance to any particular ideology. They do have leanings, but this is a veiled attempt to corner down specific market demographics. Their primary function is ratings through advertising, and the use of fear mongering to keep the viewer hooked. Let's please remember this when discussing issues.

:peace

You can label the main stream news media the "corporate" media, or anything else you like... but that in no way, shape, or form changes the fact that they have today, and have had for the last 40+ years, a very prominent and clear pro-liberal bias in their presentation of the news.

Factors such as profits, ownership, ratings and sensationalism do not change the political slant that has existed for decades in the news they've presented. That would be like saying that FDR was an anti-war president in 1941, with an anti-war majority in the congress and senate, therefore we really didn't fight the Nazi's in WWII.
 
Is not liberal! It isn't really conservative either, the media is a corporate entity. It only cares about ratings which makes their institutions profit. They have no allegiance to any particular ideology. They do have leanings, but this is a veiled attempt to corner down specific market demographics. Their primary function is ratings through advertising, and the use of fear mongering to keep the viewer hooked. Let's please remember this when discussing issues.

:peace

Better the media are a good number of corporations internet sites and some public entities. This is certainly better than mainly public media.
 
You can label the main stream news media the "corporate" media, or anything else you like... but that in no way, shape, or form changes the fact that they have today, and have had for the last 40+ years, a very prominent and clear pro-liberal bias in their presentation of the news.

Factors such as profits, ownership, ratings and sensationalism do not change the political slant that has existed for decades in the news they've presented. That would be like saying that FDR was an anti-war president in 1941, with an anti-war majority in the congress and senate, therefore we really didn't fight the Nazi's in WWII.

If you think the modern day media is liberal, you don't understand what liberalism stands for. I don't say this as an insult, I am saying you really don't understand what liberals believe if you think CNN, NBC, etc. is liberal.
 
Better the media are a good number of corporations internet sites and some public entities. This is certainly better than mainly public media.

We need Independent media, not corporate or government.
 
If sensationalism prevents a network from being biased, then Fox isn't biased.
 
If you think the modern day media is liberal, you don't understand what liberalism stands for. I don't say this as an insult, I am saying you really don't understand what liberals believe if you think CNN, NBC, etc. is liberal.

I think you are parsing words now. There is a political left, a political right, democrats and republicans in this country. When it comes to controversies and issues where there is a divide, the main stream news media's default position is to come down on the side of the left/democrats, or not to side with the right/conservatives. That's not to say it's the case 100% of the time, but the overwhelming majority of the time it is.

Don't confuse op-ed writers, pundits and political opinion hosts with the news. I'm talking about the hard news coverage and the obvious political slant that has existed for decades by mainly ABC, NBC, CBS, along with most of the country's top newspapers.

It's about left and right, and the main stream news media in America definitely slants to the left.
 
I think you are parsing words now. There is a political left, a political right, democrats and republicans in this country. When it comes to controversies and issues where there is a divide, the main stream news media's default position is to come down on the side of the left/democrats, or not to side with the right/conservatives. That's not to say it's the case 100% of the time, but the overwhelming majority of the time it is.

Don't confuse op-ed writers, pundits and political opinion hosts with the news. I'm talking about the hard news coverage and the obvious political slant that has existed for decades by mainly ABC, NBC, CBS, along with most of the country's top newspapers.

It's about left and right, and the main stream news media in America definitely slants to the left.

I can see what you're saying more clearly now. The mainstream press (aside from pundits, etc.) slant left when it comes to social issues because the right wing's positions on social issues ARE out of step with the majority. Social conservatives are slowly disappearing. Now, when it comes to economic issues, the mainstream press slants well right. Have you seen the underhanded sarcasm Bernie Sanders has received? Why did NBC/CNN fire all of their economic left wing journalists? People who are against the TPP, tax cuts for corporations, etc. have been VERY marginalized in favor of a more conservative economic outlook.
 
I can see what you're saying more clearly now. The mainstream press (aside from pundits, etc.) slant left when it comes to social issues because the right wing's positions on social issues ARE out of step with the majority. Social conservatives are slowly disappearing.

That comment right there demonstrates why the majority of people left of center, don't see, or refuse to see, that a liberal bias exists. They agree with your perspective, therefore they are not biased at all.

If what you are saying were true, then how come 30 and 40 years ago when the majority of the public was decidedly against abortion of any kind, against gay rights and against gay marriage, the news media still sided with the left on social issues?


Now, when it comes to economic issues, the mainstream press slants well right. Have you seen the underhanded sarcasm Bernie Sanders has received? Why did NBC/CNN fire all of their economic left wing journalists? People who are against the TPP, tax cuts for corporations, etc. have been VERY marginalized in favor of a more conservative economic outlook.

It does, does it?

Then how come for all of my adult life, good economic news during a Democratic presidency get's far more attention then it does when a republican is in office, and bad economic news get's far more attention when a republican is in the Oval office, than it does when it's a democratic administration?

Good lord... Just look at how many times bad economic news and bad unemployment figures have been labeled as "unexpected" by the main stream news media since Obama took office. Hell, just this week the nations largest insurance carrier put out a press release saying that they may drop out of the obamacare exchanges and 2 out of the 3 broadcast networks completely ignored the story on their nightly news. Something like that is big news because it would have a major negative impact on millions of Americans, but because it also shines a negative light on Obama, the democrats on Capitol Hill and the Obamacare legislation that they were cheerleaders for (which the majority of Americans were against) 2 networks chose to take a pass on including it in their newscast.


.
 
That comment right there demonstrates why the majority of people left of center, don't see, or refuse to see, that a liberal bias exists. They agree with your perspective, therefore they are not biased at all.

If what you are saying were true, then how come 30 and 40 years ago when the majority of the public was decidedly against abortion of any kind, against gay rights and against gay marriage, the news media still sided with the left on social issues?




It does, does it?

Then how come for all of my adult life, good economic news during a Democratic presidency get's far more attention then it does when a republican is in office, and bad economic news get's far more attention when a republican is in the Oval office, than it does when it's a democratic administration?

Good lord... Just look at how many times bad economic news and bad unemployment figures have been labeled as "unexpected" by the main stream news media since Obama took office. Hell, just this week the nations largest insurance carrier put out a press release saying that they may drop out of the obamacare exchanges and 2 out of the 3 broadcast networks completely ignored the story on their nightly news. Something like that is big news because it would have a major negative impact on millions of Americans, but because it also shines a negative light on Obama, the democrats on Capitol Hill and the Obamacare legislation that they were cheerleaders for (which the majority of Americans were against) 2 networks chose to take a pass on including it in their newscast.


.

Well, to address your first point, he country was never against abortion. Only religious zealots wanted to become involved in the political process to stop it. Gay people have always been a part of life, and in the media that was reflected. The media was not the same as it is now when it comes to marriage equality, of course it wasn't promoting that until it got popular. The media likes to play catch up. I am a cannabis user, not until very recently has the media taken a second look at the prohibition, when before they were convinced the drug caused the same effects as heroin, and took the government line about it.

To your second point, in your lifetime (and mine) Democrat economics has been relatively similar to Republican economics. Tax cuts for all, but Democrats want the rich to pay a little more than the Republicans. Both are for disasterous free trade, both are for continuing the current system which disenfranchises millions of people, both support sending jobs overseas. There are outliers in each party like Ross Perot, etc. If you hadn't noticed, capitalism has had booms and busts of which no President has much control unless we steer away from that system. You have to look past petty squabbling over whether we want completely private insurance, or private insurance that;s subsidies (Obamacare debate). That means nothing in the grand scheme of things. The media has been on the same team for a long, long time.
 
Well, to address your first point, he country was never against abortion. Only religious zealots wanted to become involved in the political process to stop it. Gay people have always been a part of life, and in the media that was reflected. The media was not the same as it is now when it comes to marriage equality, of course it wasn't promoting that until it got popular. The media likes to play catch up. I am a cannabis user, not until very recently has the media taken a second look at the prohibition, when before they were convinced the drug caused the same effects as heroin, and took the government line about it.

I was wrong on the abortion issue, but not on the homosexual issue... especially gay marriage.

To your second point, in your lifetime (and mine) Democrat economics has been relatively similar to Republican economics. Tax cuts for all, but Democrats want the rich to pay a little more than the Republicans. Both are for disasterous free trade, both are for continuing the current system which disenfranchises millions of people, both support sending jobs overseas. There are outliers in each party like Ross Perot, etc. If you hadn't noticed, capitalism has had booms and busts of which no President has much control unless we steer away from that system. You have to look past petty squabbling over whether we want completely private insurance, or private insurance that;s subsidies (Obamacare debate). That means nothing in the grand scheme of things. The media has been on the same team for a long, long time.

You didn't address my point of how the main stream news media reports good and bad economic news, depending on what party controls the White House.
 
Back
Top Bottom