Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and how Conservatives

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

You --and these sources-- are confusing partisanship with ideology. I'm talking about an actual Left-wing ideological bias which is in favor of Left-wing policies and values, and supporting the politicians and policymakers behind them. To reiterate my point, many of these sources are listing the Wall Street Journal as "left-wing." The Wall Street Journal is not ideologically "left-wing" under any coherent notion of "left-wing."

Click to expand...

These sources do have left wing ideological bias - they just aren't as left wing as you are. The latest example is the mainstream media - predictably excluding right-of-center Fox News - are categorically refusing to cover the Obama/Hizbollah scandal. Obama was a neo-Marxist in many respects and the media are continuing to cover for him. They do this while making viral coverage speculating about whether or not Trump's latest tweet is going to start WWIII.

I understand your argument completely. When I was a Marxist, I viewed Democrats as right wing, Republican Lite.

As I've said, many of the media elites support the pro-Establishment wing of the Democratic party (which they've pumped a lot of money into controlling), but that wing of the Democratic party is ideologically center-Right on economic issues and center-Left/center on social issues. Again, you should notice that this wing of the media also have uniform antipathy towards the Sanders/Warren wing of the Democratic party. It was pretty ****ing conspicious during the whole of 2015/2016/2017.

Click to expand...

So basically you're trying to split hairs about what constitutes liberalism while you're admitting that many media elites do in fact support the Democrats. You're essentially disagreeing with my argument while agreeing with it and reiterating it.

You've noticed what I've noticed in essence: That the media is not only heavily skewed toward the left, but specifically on social issues. Trashing Christianity-influenced culture, pushing alternative lifestyles and puking on the traditional family is well beyond "center left" and is in the territory of classical Marxism.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

So spare me this whole "The Media has a Left-wing bias" bull****.

Click to expand...

You mean leftist anticapitalist bias. There is a variety of left wing view points outside of anticapitalism.

There are many overlapping biases in the media with left wing movements that the media shares. Fixating on the economic aspect of it doesn't void the rest of it.

The Democratic Party is moving continuously farther left as time goes on.

The Democrats declared 1983 the "Year of the Bible" and are now going out of their way to avoid mentioning God in their conventions while many of their number openly crap on Christians. There was a time when Democrats were against gay marriage and for the traditional family unit. Now they go out of their way to support LGBT anything and take feminist dumps on traditional families.

There was a time when Democrats were pro-blue collar American and as part of that, were against mass immigration so as to protect US wages and opportunities. Now they smear American workers against open borders as xenophobes and look to import millions of future voters to as to make the US a one-party state.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

trouble13 said:

Feel free to show all the time covers portraying a republican positively.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

See Time + Reagan, HW Bush and W, in case you never heard of them.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

You mean leftist anticapitalist bias. There is a variety of left wing view points outside of anticapitalism.

There are many overlapping biases in the media with left wing movements that the media shares. Fixating on the economic aspect of it doesn't void the rest of it.

The Democratic Party is moving continuously farther left as time goes on.

The Democrats declared 1983 the "Year of the Bible" and are now going out of their way to avoid mentioning God in their conventions while many of their number openly crap on Christians. There was a time when Democrats were against gay marriage and for the traditional family unit. Now they go out of their way to support LGBT anything and take feminist dumps on traditional families.

There was a time when Democrats were pro-blue collar American and as part of that, were against mass immigration so as to protect US wages and opportunities. Now they smear American workers against open borders as xenophobes and look to import millions of future voters to as to make the US a one-party state.

Click to expand...

Oh, for Christ's sake. This post is such rubbish.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

calamity said:

Oh, for Christ's sake. This post is such rubbish.

Click to expand...

I admire your highly substantive post.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

calamity said:

See Time + Reagan, HW Bush and W, in case you never heard of them.

Click to expand...

Yeah I found a great one.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

calamity said:

See Time + Reagan, HW Bush and W, in case you never heard of them.

Click to expand...

Im not going on some goose chase. Show what you found.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

trouble13 said:

Im not going on some goose chase. Show what you found.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

calamity said:

Click to expand...

Ok you got me. I looked and they did give reagan his fair share of positive coverage. The bush stuff looks pretty mixed but thats fair.

You have succeeded in refining my opinion about time. They are not as bad as i thought.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

Fraggle Rock said:

I love the Conspiracy theorist. They must wear a diaper 24/7 as they seem to pee themselves over every little thing. Really all the media , the CIA, the FBI, everyone is lying except Trump. you guys kill me. Go join a cult and may I suggest a fine vintage kool aid. Bottom ups Con-servatives.

Click to expand...

just remember

you guys did this to yourself

we have tried to tell you about the bias numerous times...to deaf ears

and for the millenials, maybe it doesnt matter

but for mom and pop regular voter....it does

remember...trump didnt win last year, Hillary LOST....

most of his votes were against her and her machine....

or go ahead....and repeat the same things....i dont like trump, but i like the conservatives in power

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

Rogue Valley said:

If today's "conservatives" (they aren't) weren't such assholes (Trump/Ryan/McConnell/ etc) they would get more favorable coverage.

They create their own bad Karma.

Click to expand...

I was a Republican and I approve this message. Then there are also these idiots who find every video on Youtube about media bias and claim that it's insightful and tells the truth about "what's really going on." :lamo

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

They aren't pro-Left. They certainly have specific biases that are shared by the Left --like hating Trump, tending to support multiculturalism, etc-- but it's just intellectually dishonest to pretend like that means they're "pro left."

Click to expand...

Full stop right there, if they allow it to affect their coverage, they are biased. Agree or disagree?

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

Click to expand...

The left is incapable of seeing left wing media corruption as something bad. It's is only a means to an end, that end being the destruction of those don't believe as they do.

What I do, it take out the subscription cards tucked liberally in every issue and send more subscriptions to the office i find them in, checking the "Bill me Later" option! LOL

Ref Post #33 - Calamity

That was when Time was run by an entire different group of people in a completely different media era.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

calamity said:

Click to expand...

That was from 2004 when Reagan died, not when he was in office. ffs

.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

OpportunityCost said:

Full stop right there, if they allow it to affect their coverage, they are biased. Agree or disagree?

Click to expand...

There's likely no point in having this conversation if you can't even read that I already pre-agreed that they had biases, and discussed a load of them (including several instances). But if you want to try to turn this into some "gotcha" statement, go for it. Yes, that is tautologically my definition of "bias."

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

Grim17 said:

That was from 2004 when Reagan died, not when he was in office. ffs

.

Click to expand...

So the **** what?

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

You mean leftist anticapitalist bias. There is a variety of left wing view points outside of anticapitalism.

Click to expand...

Well, what I said was far more broad than "anti-capitalism." Being concerned with and wanting to discuss economic populism issues spans from delusional ideologies like communism all the way to socially conservative Labor/union movements, and the huge extend of views in between.

In the US, we have sort of adopted this terribly vague (basically the point of being useless) language where we treat everything from "being a multi-cultural corporate career-class white collar worker to a Libertarian Socialist" as all being "Left-wing." It's only in the past thirty years that people have just taken it for granted that the Democratic party would just start absorbing the liberal Republicans, moderate multicultural libertarians, and multicultural corporatists. Now all of these fundamentally center-Right, pro-establishment figures are suddenly considered "wildly liberal."

There are many overlapping biases in the media with left wing movements that the media shares. Fixating on the economic aspect of it doesn't void the rest of it. The Democratic Party is moving continuously farther left as time goes on.

Click to expand...

At the moment it is --as in, within the last year or two. Prior to that, for more than 40 years the party had consistently gotten far more Right-wing on economics. The only sense in which they have gotten "far more Left" as time has gone on is very specific social issues --mostly on gay marriage (not necessarily on any other LGBT issues. I would say on the whole they've grown even more timid on gun rights (remember in the 70's there was a serious public discussion of banning hand guns --I can't even imagine this conversation being allowed now!).

So, yeah, sort of. In areas on specific social issues that don't cause an inconvenience to corporate interests, the Democratic party has grown timidly more to the Left of their 1980's positions.

The Democrats declared 1983 the "Year of the Bible" and are now going out of their way to avoid mentioning God in their conventions while many of their number openly crap on Christians. There was a time when Democrats were against gay marriage and for the traditional family unit. Now they go out of their way to support LGBT anything and take feminist dumps on traditional families.

Click to expand...

This whole "there's a war on Christmas!" bull**** really has to stop. No one cares about Christmas. No one is seriously offended by Christmas. The most that has been requested within working environments and official government apparatus is saying "Happy holidays" over "Merry Christmas." Personally, I consider Christmas to be a secular holiday at this point, despite its ostensibly-but-not-actually religious-sounding name.

All of this stupid hullabaloo by Fox News over treating LGBT people with respect and trying to make work spaces safer for women and minorities is a waste of emotional bandwidth. Everyone agrees that the obnoxious arm-chair activists and the most hypersensitive SJW's are a problem, but it's not like they're "equally" as problematic as White Nationalists marching openly and murdering people by running them over with cars, or supporting a history of lynching and racial segregation and genocide.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

There was a time when Democrats were pro-blue collar American and as part of that, were against mass immigration so as to protect US wages and opportunities. Now they smear American workers against open borders as xenophobes and look to import millions of future voters to as to make the US a one-party state.

Click to expand...

1.) Personally, I'm okay with having a serious discussion about protecting our borders --as long as the conversation is a serious one about applying sane, rational measures to secure our borders and the conversation isn't a giant proxy for being a racist asshole.

I would estimate that among the core and invested supporters of Trump, at least half of them are brazenly racist (so I dunno, at least 10% of the country). Personally, I think that if we want to have a socially democratic society that takes care of it's citizens and where people treat each other with respect and really work to help one another, that means securing the borders and monitoring our population growth to make all of this financially sustainable. But where I'm not interested in starting this conversation is as a jumping off point for how we need to use ICE to break up family's, or at the extreme end how we can use immigration policies and forced deportation to make the US a white ethno-state. And I think this is why there's so little push back among his supporters about basic contradictions in Trump's proposals (e.g. like >70% of undocumented immigrants fly into the US and overstay their visa's, making it absurd to pull money from homeland security to pay for The Wall), because for a lot of these people this is just about punishing brown Americans.

2.) There's the other element of this that blaming Latinos for illegally entering the US is just absurd --NAFTA and our drug laws are the predominant reasons why they're here. NAFTA destroyed their farming industry, and left millions of Mexican farmers without a job, and many others come from trying to flee the drug cartels that were created to supply the US illegal drugs, because we refuse to legalize and regulate these black markets out of existence. And the reason this hit the US blue collar workers so hard is the affects of NAFTA and the unequal impact of the US's changing over from an industrial/independent farming-based economy to a primarily financial "industry"/healthcare-based economy. It's hit some regions of the US, like the Rust Belt, disproportionately hard. And after 2008, there's huge lingering issues of income inequality throughout the country.

worksforpigs said:

Obama was a neo-Marxist in many respects and the media are continuing to cover for him.

Click to expand...

This is just simply delusional.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

So you're crying intellectually lazy while admitting media are in political partisan corners?

Fox is the only one that leans right. Everyone else leans toward the Democrats and this video illustrated especially Time Magazine's propensity to do that.

Click to expand...

You mean among major TV outlets?

Check out Sinclair Broadcast Group. They now own 70% market penetration nationwide, and they're about six steps to the Right of FOX.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

worksforpigs said:

Do you not understand that it's not the media's place to so bias their coverage? Your agreeing with it doesn't validate it.

Why did they put Limbaugh on the same cover with Stern? So as to draw a false equivalency.

Click to expand...

They did? Must have missed that, although it would be entirely appropriate, seeing as both of them are clowns.
One of them, however, does not attempt to portray himself as a news guy at all, he just makes dick and fart jokes for a living.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

There's likely no point in having this conversation if you can't even read that I already pre-agreed that they had biases, and discussed a load of them (including several instances). But if you want to try to turn this into some "gotcha" statement, go for it. Yes, that is tautologically my definition of "bias."

Click to expand...

Its not a gotcha statement, its boiling down you overly wordy paragraphs into a sentence. There's likely no reason to have the conversation if you feel the need to obscure the truth with multiple paragraphs when a single sentence conveys the message.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

I would estimate that among the core and invested supporters of Trump, at least half of them are brazenly racist (so I dunno, at least 10% of the country). Personally, I think that if we want to have a socially democratic society that takes care of it's citizens and where people treat each other with respect and really work to help one another, that means securing the borders and monitoring our population growth to make all of this financially sustainable.

Click to expand...

Half are racist? Hilarious. People on the one hand complain of sprawl but then turn around and support an immigration policy which gives out some 1 million Green Cards per year and in which we currently have some ~30 million foreign-born in the country.

This doesn't count the unfriendly employment environment for low-skilled American workers who are either dealing with depressed wages in labor pools glutted by immigrants or are outright displaced from the industry altogether.

But where I'm not interested in starting this conversation is as a jumping off point for how we need to use ICE to break up family's,

Click to expand...

ICE doesn't break up families. Law-breaking does. I see no reason to go along with media propaganda urging us to have pity and blame law enforcement when the consequences of being here illegally come to a head. Should we also wail that jailing car thieves "breaks up families"? This is a political talking point that people have taken seriously and should not be.

If they don't want their families broken up, then they can stay home where they should be.

or at the extreme end how we can use immigration policies and forced deportation to make the US a white ethno-state. And I think this is why there's so little push back among his supporters about basic contradictions in Trump's proposals (e.g. like >70% of undocumented immigrants fly into the US and overstay their visa's, making it absurd to pull money from homeland security to pay for The Wall), because for a lot of these people this is just about punishing brown Americans.

Click to expand...

Brown Americans aren't being deported, what are you talking about?

Again this looks like you're taking DNC talking points too seriously. We have about 12 million illegals here from south of the US. No way those people are flying their way here. This doesn't count the heroin epidemic in no small way tied to poor border control. They ship in drugs and take back stolen cars, etc. Worrying about non-existent "punishment of brown people" is not a reason to not secure the border to protect Americans on multiple levels.

2.) There's the other element of this that blaming Latinos for illegally entering the US is just absurd --NAFTA and our drug laws are the predominant reasons why they're here.

Click to expand...

Oh, did someone put a gun to their head and make them come here, thus removing any blame for their conscious actions which followed conscious decisions? Really?

It seems to me that all the energy these people and their advocacy groups put into demanding amnesty would be better placed and more productive by demanding change back home.

NAFTA destroyed their farming industry, and left millions of Mexican farmers without a job, and many others come from trying to flee the drug cartels that were created to supply the US illegal drugs, because we refuse to legalize and regulate these black markets out of existence.

Click to expand...

Yeah because somehow legalizing poison makes it all better. I see no reason to legalize poison and sell it corner stores because Pablo in Guanajuato lost his farm. No, you fix the conditions that caused them to be here; you don't legalize the poison they're dealing without regard to how many more Americans will be addicted and immiserated.

And frankly, yes, we need to execute the people that manufacture, smuggle, and deal this poison. We should also do that with governmental officials who purposely stop investigations and thus aid groups bringing it in.

Trump doesn't like NAFTA, he's trying to change it to make it fairer, and he keeps getting attacked for it.

And the reason this hit the US blue collar workers so hard is the affects of NAFTA and the unequal impact of the US's changing over from an industrial/independent farming-based economy to a primarily financial "industry"/healthcare-based economy. It's hit some regions of the US, like the Rust Belt, disproportionately hard. And after 2008, there's huge lingering issues of income inequality throughout the country.

Click to expand...

And because **** loads of cheaper foreign laborers are brought here to displace US workers and provide a cheaper alternative to domestic labor. And we need to get rid of trade agreements which send jobs to China as well, which Trump wants, and is being attacked for.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

FieldTheorist said:

Well, what I said was far more broad than "anti-capitalism." Being concerned with and wanting to discuss economic populism issues spans from delusional ideologies like communism all the way to socially conservative Labor/union movements, and the huge extend of views in between.

Click to expand...

This has what to do with left-of-center media bias?

In the US, we have sort of adopted this terribly vague (basically the point of being useless) language where we treat everything from "being a multi-cultural corporate career-class white collar worker to a Libertarian Socialist" as all being "Left-wing."

Click to expand...

Anything against conservatism and traditionalism is left of center, so why split hairs? Many Democrats who are pro-capitalist also have a Marxian social outlook with regard to the family and traditional morals. Neo-Marxist views on race relations are wildly popular in the Democratic Party.

At the moment it is --as in, within the last year or two. Prior to that, for more than 40 years the party had consistently gotten far more Right-wing on economics. The only sense in which they have gotten "far more Left" as time has gone on is very specific social issues --mostly on gay marriage (not necessarily on any other LGBT issues. I would say on the whole they've grown even more timid on gun rights (remember in the 70's there was a serious public discussion of banning hand guns --I can't even imagine this conversation being allowed now!).

Click to expand...

What's wrong with people owning handguns? I've never seen leftist groups categorically denounce firearms ownership like they do capitalism. Getting rid of private ownership of weapons certainly makes it far easier for a tyrant to control the country.

Obama and Hillary were pushing for gun bans for years, openly, as have the media. I don't know what you're talking about. The NYT is the latest to publish an editorial calling for outright firearms bans.

What is right-wing on economics? I've seen communist parties equally support globalism.

So, yeah, sort of. In areas on specific social issues that don't cause an inconvenience to corporate interests, the Democratic party has grown timidly more to the Left of their 1980's positions.

Click to expand...

The establishment of both parties are corporate whores. You seem to not distinguish that from capitalism in general. They are not necessarily joined at the hip.

This whole "there's a war on Christmas!" bull**** really has to stop.

Click to expand...

Atheists are always suing somebody somewhere to rip down Christmas displays. In European countries with high levels of immigration, such as Italy, crucifixes and other religious symbols are being taken down to pander to the sensibilities of migrants, specifically Muslim ones.

Yes, the traditional cultural character of Western countries is under attack.

All of this stupid hullabaloo by Fox News over treating LGBT people with respect and trying to make work spaces safer for women and minorities is a waste of emotional bandwidth.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Everyone agrees that the obnoxious arm-chair activists and the most hypersensitive SJW's are a problem, but it's not like they're "equally" as problematic as White Nationalists marching openly and murdering people by running them over with cars, or supporting a history of lynching and racial segregation and genocide.

Click to expand...

I've never seen white nationalist groups support lynching, segregation, or slavery or genocide for that matter. I've seen a few individuals proclaim that they want to expel non-whites from the US and there are other ones that want to carve out a non-white homeland from the territory of the US and physically separate in that way. Such people are a few thousand in number and have no influence anywhere. The number of white nationalists who want genocide number extremely few.

But to proclaim that SJW groups are less of a threat is hilarious. Antifa is a multinational movement of millions that support genocidal nutjobs that Joseph Stalin, associate with international Marxist movements, riot on a regular basis, attack law enforcement officers, attack peaceful protesters, commit vandalism and arson, and some of who are under FBI investigation. Marxist organizations are allied with BLM and they're all staging protests race-baiting the president and everything else they can get away with.

White nationalist groups aren't the ones endlessly staging mass protests and engaging in riots in numerous countries. SJWs are doing that.

I'm sorry, there's no comparison between a KKK clown car and Joseph Stalin. These people want to bring back the Red Terror.

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

Checkerboard Strangler said:

You mean among major TV outlets?

Check out Sinclair Broadcast Group. They now own 70% market penetration nationwide, and they're about six steps to the Right of FOX.

Click to expand...

Of the TV stations that SBS owns, they all have affiliation with the national networks. They also air all those national sitcoms that lean left.

And their influence isn't as large as you claim it is. TV Stations |

Re: Ron Robinson: How the Media Portrays Progressives and Conservatives

Checkerboard Strangler said:

They did? Must have missed that, although it would be entirely appropriate, seeing as both of them are clowns.
One of them, however, does not attempt to portray himself as a news guy at all, he just makes dick and fart jokes for a living.

Click to expand...

And regardless of your personal view of them, they aren't comparable, and it's an attempt to smear Limbaugh by classing him with a fart joke person. The bias there is clear.