• 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!

Why do conservatives complain about media bias?

Roycarn

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
200
Reaction score
77
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?
 
Last edited:
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?

That has influenced my information sources somewhat, in fact.
 
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?

Why would "free market ecnomics" dictate any of this? The market doesn't hold your assumptions. You assume people actually want unbiased news. You shouldn't.
 
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?

For one the environment of the 'mainstream media' ( I kind of hate that term but that's another subject ) is far from a free market. As to turning to other media sources. Some do of course. I suppose that's how Fox came to be. well until the murdochs kids got a hold of it now its turning away so I hear.
Myself, I got sick of news media years ago. I will watch vid clips and read articles. I always when possible check multiple sources.
 
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?

The complaint is in certain organizations PRETENDING to be professional news (and then their biased viewers doing the same)...on one hand...and then in the other resorting to mafia-Esque tactics to blackmail and bully people into not espousing opposing viewpoints. And of course blatant lies and misleading the public and creating a narrative that gets people shot or some people accused of racism and compromising their right to a fair trial (Zimmerman NBC edited audio).
 
When the masses are being brainwashed in a dishonest way, about the most important topics, do you really need to ask why people are opposed to it?
 
Why would "free market ecnomics" dictate any of this? The market doesn't hold your assumptions. You assume people actually want unbiased news. You shouldn't.

Because that's the impression you get from reading the posts in this forum. CNN, ABC, NBC etc. are all assumed to have some "liberal bias" while Fox, Breitbart and others are assumed to be relatively free of it. Most people clearly feel that way about their political views, or they wouldn't have herded themselves into camps like they do.

Obviously, news networks with biased audiences will deliberately avoid stories that question their viewers biases, but that doesn't mean the stories they do aren't worthy, legitimate pieces of journalism. I just find it hard for someone to fathom how major Mainstream Media outlets can be biased when sites like Drudge Report aren't. The alternative is to go ahead and say "well, all media is biased" and that clearly isn't the case.

My point here is that you can have channels like Fox or MSNBC that deliberately filter out information that doesn't subtract from the legitimate journalism these outlets are essentially forced to do because of their viewership. You can't reach millions of people while only catering to the biases of a select few all or most of the time.
 
Last edited:
Why would "free market ecnomics" dictate any of this? The market doesn't hold your assumptions. You assume people actually want unbiased news. You shouldn't.

If the vast majority of the press is biased isn't this what the vast majority of the public wants?
 
For one the environment of the 'mainstream media' ( I kind of hate that term but that's another subject ) is far from a free market. As to turning to other media sources. Some do of course. I suppose that's how Fox came to be. well until the murdochs kids got a hold of it now its turning away so I hear.
Myself, I got sick of news media years ago. I will watch vid clips and read articles. I always when possible check multiple sources.

How is it not the free market? Doesn't the highest rated shows make the most money?
 
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?

Probably for the same reason liberals hate Fox and are always complaining about Fox. People for the most part want a news station that reinforces their political beliefs. Fox does that for Conservatives, MSNBC and CNN does that for liberals. But each ideology complains about the other network/s that doesn't toe their political ideology.

I'm all in favor of the remote. Don't like one, switch the channel. No need to complain, just switch and carry on.
 
Why would "free market ecnomics" dictate any of this? The market doesn't hold your assumptions. You assume people actually want unbiased news. You shouldn't.

How true, most people want their political ideology reinforced by whatever news station or channel they are watching.
 
Because that's the impression you get from reading the posts in this forum. CNN, ABC, NBC etc. are all assumed to have some "liberal bias" while Fox, Breitbart and others are assumed to be relatively free of it. Most people clearly feel that way about their political views, or they wouldn't have herded themselves into camps like they do.

Obviously, news networks with biased audiences will deliberately avoid stories that question their viewers biases, but that doesn't mean the stories they do aren't worthy, legitimate pieces of journalism. I just find it hard for someone to fathom how major Mainstream Media outlets can be biased when sites like Drudge Report aren't. The alternative is to go ahead and say "well, all media is biased" and that clearly isn't the case.

My point here is that you can have channels like Fox or MSNBC that deliberately filter out information that doesn't subtract from the legitimate journalism these outlets are essentially forced to do because of their viewership. You can't reach millions of people while only catering to the biases of a select few all or most of the time.

You've moved some distance from your OP, then.
 
Just a couple of points here:

1. What makes you think that news media is "successful" in any economic sense these days? Newspapers are closing up shop on a regular basis, laying off staff regularly, losing advertising revenue at alarming rates and generally no longer trusted by those who were their regular customers/audience. As for those on the airwaves, they are losing audience share on a regular basis as well. The younger generation is incredibly disinterested in what the news media has to offer and it is never more evident than in their failed attempt to make news reporting "entertaining" and forgetting about what journalism was and is all about.

2. Not sure if the US is the same as Canada, but the government here, and I suspect in the US as well, controls not only who has access to the limited slots available on the airwaves but also regulates what can be carried over those airwaves. As such, politics and ideology are intertwined with content and thus open to charges of bias.

There was a time when journalists like Walter Cronkite were watched and trusted world wide to report the news in an unbiased and straight forward manner. Those days are long gone.
 
Just a couple of points here:

1. What makes you think that news media is "successful" in any economic sense these days? Newspapers are closing up shop on a regular basis, laying off staff regularly, losing advertising revenue at alarming rates and generally no longer trusted by those who were their regular customers/audience. As for those on the airwaves, they are losing audience share on a regular basis as well. The younger generation is incredibly disinterested in what the news media has to offer and it is never more evident than in their failed attempt to make news reporting "entertaining" and forgetting about what journalism was and is all about.

2. Not sure if the US is the same as Canada, but the government here, and I suspect in the US as well, controls not only who has access to the limited slots available on the airwaves but also regulates what can be carried over those airwaves. As such, politics and ideology are intertwined with content and thus open to charges of bias.

There was a time when journalists like Walter Cronkite were watched and trusted world wide to report the news in an unbiased and straight forward manner. Those days are long gone.

My question has always been....If the left wing controls the media how did the right wing get so weak and powerless in this area?
 
Why would "free market ecnomics" dictate any of this? The market doesn't hold your assumptions. You assume people actually want unbiased news. You shouldn't.

So what you're saying is that maybe our news shouldn't be subject to market forces?
 
When the masses are being brainwashed in a dishonest way, about the most important topics, do you really need to ask why people are opposed to it?

is there a honest way to brainwash folks? just sayin' .............
 
What on Earth gives you that idea?

Well, because maybe news isn't something that should be subject to the whims of people, maybe it should be subject to truth and honesty...
 
My question has always been....If the left wing controls the media how did the right wing get so weak and powerless in this area?

You have to appreciate that much of the media, including the news, is populated by the left wing. I can't remember the exact percentages, but there have been surveys of "journalists" that show upwards of 80% plus consider themselves liberals and Democrats in the US. Here in Canada, it's much the same. Likewise with the entertainment industry. Likewise, in government, those who are in politics and those in the civil service in institutions like the FCC have largely been left wing.

One should never underestimate the extent to which the left wing hive has penetrated the levers of power in communications.
 
Well, because maybe news isn't something that should be subject to the whims of people, maybe it should be subject to truth and honesty...

So what do you suggest?
 
You have to appreciate that much of the media, including the news, is populated by the left wing. I can't remember the exact percentages, but there have been surveys of "journalists" that show upwards of 80% plus consider themselves liberals and Democrats in the US. Here in Canada, it's much the same. Likewise with the entertainment industry. Likewise, in government, those who are in politics and those in the civil service in institutions like the FCC have largely been left wing.

One should never underestimate the extent to which the left wing hive has penetrated the levers of power in communications.

And how did the right wing get so little representation in the media? And if a media outlet can get rich with a right wing bias....why wouldn't they do it?
 
According to free market economics, bias in the mainstream media shouldn't be a thing. If a news company produces one biased report, then consumers would be turned off and consume some other, competing, non-biased news source, which would subsequently be consumed by more people. That would be bad for the news company, which has had to invest significant time and resources to produce these reports. So why is it that conservatives only distrust news companies that have clearly succeeded in this system such as ABC, NBC, CNN etc.?
Because most often than the others tell them the fake news they want to hear.
 
How is it not the free market? Doesn't the highest rated shows make the most money?

They government (FCC) regulates them. There have been government stipulations as to what is and is not media which sometimes plays favorites.
 
They government (FCC) regulates them. There have been government stipulations as to what is and is not media which sometimes plays favorites.

So was the media conservative biased under Bush?
 
So was the media conservative biased under Bush?

Good question. Answer is yes... well for some of the years.

In the lead up to the 2nd Gulf War, the US media was nothing but a propaganda arm of the GOP and the Bush administration. Anyone who questioned the great leader of the time, was deemed unpatriotic and worse. Just look at what happened to the Dixie Chicks when they protested the war... and ironically they were right.

The Bush administration first term is a classic example of when media fail to do their job.

The free market should not exist in news media. There should be one rule.. report the facts and ALL the facts, and let the people decide. Problem with US news these days, is that it is full of so called opinion shows that bleed bias into the real news reporting. Fox News is especially bad, but they are all doing it. If you get a chance, you should watch the CNN and then CNN International.. they are miles apart reporting style wise.
 
Back
Top Bottom