DeeJayH

because you area partisan hack who is asking a question akin to :

Prove I breath air because i do not see it

nobody is going to waste their time throwing facts to a blind troll

__________________
These days it seems that the deadliest place on earth for an American to be is inside the womb. - Joshua P. Allem

Sir Loin

Nobody has bothered to give the thread or the topic much respect have they? Hey Pete, so enticing is this offer of yours that I suggest you immediately start holding your breath, waiting for those links you are so hungry for someone to supply you with.

__________________
Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be.

PeteEU

Instead of calling me names how about providing examples of left wing bias?

There has been provided plenty of examples of right wing bias in many threads, some clear as daylight, some not. However where are the clear examples of left wing bias that people on the right have been claiming for years?

Like it or not, not reporting every single criminal being caught in Baghdad is not bias. Commenting "Terrorist fist jab" about Obama is clear bias, either intended or unintended.

So again, show us examples of left wing bias in the main stream media.

__________________
PeteEU

DarkWizard12

NewsBusters.org | Exposing Liberal Media Bias
Media Bias Basics

There, all the liberal media bias ever exposed.

Oh wait, thats right, their big conservative think-tanks because they bother to track this stuff and expose bias. How dare they disagree with the media

PeteEU

You calling Newsbusters.org a "big conservative think-tank"? Do they even think on that site?

Interesting site, with some interesting stories. But like Newsbusters.org, much of their "exposing" is basicly bashing media or people for disagreeing with them or the "ideal conservative" view of the world. There is hardly any evidence presented to back up their views. At least with places like Mediamatters.org (which actually goes after all major news outlets) there is more than often links to prove the bias.

Take the comments about ABC and CBS going in panic mode over the economy. I know fully well that conservatives have promoted the idea that there is no recession and all is well and its all "in the head". Technically yes there is no recession as we have not had 2 quarters of negative growth, but all is hardly well and hardly "in the head" of people. One day of good gains on the Dow does not make up for the weeks of poor performance. A few days of oil falling does not make up for the high price.

Does that mean that CNBC is liberal because they also are reporting "issues" with the economy? And that is despite them promoting common right wing debunked stories like that China drilling off Cuba?

So not much then?

Oh you see that's the problem. Bias is not "disagreeing" with the media or people. Bias is when a news organisation promotes openly a left or right wing agenda.

Take the "terrorist fist jab" comment on Fox News. Or a news anchor or organisation openly backing or promoting a political ideology/party/person over the other. Take AP and their love with McCain at the moment. Or openly downplaying negative issues of one party/person/ideology while promoting the negative issues of the opposite. The Foley scandal was a great example.. was a democrat or a republican now?

An example of bias is on the Mediaresearch website. They attack the MSNBC for being critical of Jesse Helms. Helloooooooooo.. Jesse Helms was a homophobic hypocritical racist and yet the site defends this man by attacking someone critical of him? What's next defending Foley or Cunningham and promoting them as right wing heroes?

Just because the networks does not promote the right wing view of the world, does not mean they are left wing biased, but that's exactly what the two sites you posted are promoting over and over again.

The closest I could see on "bias" was on the Iraq reporting by CBS and ABC, but even here the attacks were partisan as hell. Not only do they promote their own study that supposedly proves bias, they forget to mention other studies that show that Fox News has the lowest reporting on stuff going on in Iraq, that Fox had more on the Anna Nicole Smith death than on Iraq (at the time of the report)? How can one take that site seriously when its so obviously biased in its bias hunting of the American media and uses its own "investigations" to prove its own points, without any 3rd party information......

There might be true bias evidence there, but its buried in partisan attacking of people based on disagreeing with their views of the world.

But yes I will give you one thing. American media does not report the positive stuff in Iraq nearly as much as they should, but this goes for Fox or CNN. Al Jazeera has more on positive things in Iraq than Fox for peak sake. But what side of the bias meter is that?.. left or right wing?

DeeJayH

fine here is one you can dig yourself up that my mother has noticed

the way mcCain is pictured vs the pictures of Obama
obama's pics always seem to be taken from below like he is some saint or JC

PeteEU

Had not noticed that but then again I don't go much up in pictures of the candidates.

But saying that I have seen pictures of McCain taken from below. In fact of the sites I usually visit show plenty of McCain pictures (flattering and not) taken from "below", so I don't think there is anything in it. Its actually a way many politicians prefer their picture being taken, hence they stand high on a podium while people take pictures of them.

DeeJayH

was just trying to give you some busy work

mikhail

How about Chris matthews coming in his pants to Obamas "gettysburg address" like speech on race nobody can remember a word of except racist grandma.

__________________
The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

Sir Loin

Yes, I mean actual responses from journalist themselves; surveys and numerous listed studies and polls are “hardly any evidence” at all. You seem to have not read anything at the site. Choosing instead to offer up a rationalized dismissal to the very answers you claim to want to see. And in the same breath, as you pretend not too see the piles of correlated data and surveys of actual working journalist over the last twenty years, you offer up Media Matters to buttress your willing ignorance.

Just on the cover page to the website, you are offered links to pages and pages of cited and quoted sources, studies and more than a few “admissions” by major players in the media. Yet this to you, is “interesting stories”?

Example: 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.”

Your "thoughtful" answer? Interesting “stories” mumble mumble Media Matters, mumble mumble much of this “exposing” is basically media bashing……………mumble mumble………….Media Matters…………..mumble mumble………….Fox News biased….brain fart……………mumble mumble.

My God what a truly pathetic partisan hack you really are.