Does The Mainstream Media Have An Immoral Liberal Bias?

[WinePusher]

The Networks of the mainstream media are generally CNN, CBS, NBC, and ABC. The newspaper are usually the New York Times and the Washington Post. Are these networks and newspapers NOT covering stories that may be particularly damaging for the Obama administration?

Here are a few stories downplayed or not covered by the mainstream media

1) The Black Panthar Voting Intimidation Case
2) The ACORN corruption case
3) The Sacking of the Marxist, 9/11 Truther Green Jobs Czar Van Jones

However, the state run media seemed to incorporate hours and hours on the ever important story of SARAH PALIN'S CLOTHES. Unbelievable.

1) Does the mainstream media have a liberal bias
2) Is it in the tank for Barack Obama

[WinePusher]

The Networks of the mainstream media are generally CNN, CBS, NBC, and ABC. The newspaper are usually the New York Times and the Washington Post. Are these networks and newspapers NOT covering stories that may be particularly damaging for the Obama administration?

Here are a few stories downplayed or not covered by the mainstream media

1) The Black Panthar Voting Intimidation Case
2) The ACORN corruption case
3) The Sacking of the Marxist, 9/11 Truther Green Jobs Czar Van Jones

However, the state run media seemed to incorporate hours and hours on the ever important story of SARAH PALIN'S CLOTHES. Unbelievable.

1) Does the mainstream media have a liberal bias
2) Is it in the tank for Barack Obama

This is a clear case of your confirmation bias, and probably listening to too much Right Wing radio or tv.

Take the beam out of your own eye before you start accusing others of bias.

Are you incapable of addressing the OP questions? Or would you rather continue the ad hominem attacks about which news stations I listen to? Wyvern posted a nice response addressing my concerns, and if you read the post I am not judging anyone. I ask a question based on the little coverage of the media on those stories, and instead of answering it you would rather attack a straw man. Please answer the OP and try not to derail the thread with rash accusations and judgemental comments.

[Wyvern]

I notice you did not mention Fox news as being part of the mainstream media of which they are certainly part of.

Certainly not. Fox is the network being waged war on by the White House, Network News and the Press.

Please come back to reality, Fox is just as much if not more of a part of the mainstream media than many of the ones you mentioned. Fox news simply is catering to a more conservative audience than most other media outlets. What I find interesting is that the same corporation that airs Fox news also operates the Fox network which is extremely liberal with regards to its programming. Fox news is not at war with anyone Rupert Murdoch simply saw that american mainstream media did not have a news source with a conservative bent so being a billionaire he created one and voila, Foxnews was born capitalism at its finest.

It also seems that they are downplayed by the left in order to defend their president. When one reports on a story that is potentially damaging to the president, that is called objective journalism, not having a liberal or conservative bias.

If a story is created by either the right or the left as the examples you give are then the media outlet that uses them can rightfully be said to have a bias in either direction. You can't have objective journalism when you are being spoonfed the story by a nonobjective source.

A smear campagin? I would regard it smear campaign if somebody attacked Van Jones down syndrome child, or made sexual jokes about his daughters. I do not regard it a smear campaign when one reports on his past sayings, ideas and affiliations which were radical. And it is troubling that Valerie Jarret said she was watching him and that the White House wanted him. The marxist, 9/11 truther was invited into the white house.

Who knows maybe the white house wanted him because they thought he might be good at the job instead of worrying about ideological purity. I remember in america we used to have these things called freedom of speech and the freedom of association but I guess that only counts if you are a conservative republican. Or maybe you simply want to bring back those halcyon days when HUAC was around.

White sheet men with weapons stand in front of a polling booth, do you consider that a story? And then, you have an attorney from the DOJ who says that the Justice Departmetns policy is NOT to prosecute cases where victims are white and
suspects are black. Is that not news worthy? I think that the Americna people have a right to know this, and it isn't the job of the state run media to decide which stories are and are not important.

Sure it was a story, a local story not really big enough for the national networks. And yes the people have a right to know, you found out about it easily enough so I dont think it was buried by anyone. Did you bother searching Philadelphias news outlets for their coverage? From what I gathered reading the news story about it was that it was a very minor event that local police handled quickly and easily, everything after that has been politicized to death and is continually being done.

Is the mainstream media liberal, well some is and some isn't. Unless you want to declare Fox as being liberal I would say definately not all is.

Fox is not apart of the mainstream media. Fox has shows that are conservative and do not claim to be objectivly reporting the news. MSNBC ONLY has liberal anchors on all hours of the day.

Comedy central airs news shows but it isn't claiming to be a news outlet. Just because it is conservative doesn't mean that Fox isn't part of mainstream media in fact because it is conservative is the only real reason why it is part of the mainstream media. If Fox had not catered to an underserved part of the population in order to get viewers it very likely would have cancelled its news service.

[Wyvern]

Are you incapable of addressing the OP questions? Or would you rather continue the ad hominem attacks about which news stations I listen to? Wyvern posted a nice response addressing my concerns, and if you read the post I am not judging anyone. I ask a question based on the little coverage of the media on those stories, and instead of answering it you would rather attack a straw man. Please answer the OP and try not to derail the thread with rash accusations and judgemental comments.

Actually to be technical you are being judgemental given that the title of the OP is does the media have an immoral liberal bias. Sure you put it in the form of a question but using the term immoral implies you are making a judgement about moral standing.

[DeBunkem]

Seems the "liberal" MSM forgot to mention that the Acorn hit job was foisted by Andrew Breitbart, the same FOX crook that did the Jackie Sherrod Big Lie. Acorn has since been exonerated by investigators who found that the film was edited to discredit Acorn.

Now reopen Breitbart's ACORN fraud -- and get the story right
Sherrod's case parallels deceptions used in that other big smear -- and offers a chance to restore lost standards
http://tinyurl.com/29lv3np
Investigations by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, and the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, among others, have served to exonerate ACORN of the most outrageous charges of criminality (while still criticizing ACORN employees and leadership). More important, from the perspective of journalistic ethics, those investigations revealed that the videotapes released and promoted by Breitbart’s website were selectively and deceptively edited to serve as propaganda, not news.

The Harshbarger report, commissioned by ACORN’s own board of directors, pointed to signs of chicanery when it was released last December. Although O’Keefe, his associate and fake "prostitute" Hannah Giles and Breitbart all refused to speak with Harshbarger, his researchers at the Proskauer Rose law fir were able to make preliminary comparisons between audio and video files on the Big Government website:
The videos that have been released appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. A comparison of the publicly available transcripts to the released videos confirms that large portions of the original video have been omitted from the released versions.
Breitbart continued to resist every request that he release the full, unedited ACORN videotapes, which ought to have alerted editors and producers that something was wrong.
But then in the course of the California investigation, Brown struck a plea deal with O’Keefe, who was in jeopardy of indictment for violating the state’s privacy laws. (According to Brown’s final report, "the facts presented here strongly suggests that O’Keefe and Giles violated state privacy laws and provides fair warning to them and others that this type of activity can be prosecuted in California.")
The plea agreement deal forced O’Keefe to turn over the complete set of tapes to state investigators. Brown’s verdict on their misuse was scathing. "The evidence illustrates that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality," he said. "Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor." Much more.....

Poor Dittoheads. FOX deceives, you believe....

Is there a less reliable news source than Andrew Breitbart of the Drudge Report and fiction writer of the Acorn non-scandal and now the Sherrod Stupid White Man dream?
If the Obama Administration is going to fire every great American like Shirley Sherrod who is smeared by weasels like Breitbart they might as well just hand over the keys to the White House to Kangaroo Boy and the Islamo Facist Saudi prince…owners of Fox News.Constructive Anarchy

[SailingCyclops]

Here are a few stories downplayed or not covered by the mainstream media

1) The Black Panthar Voting Intimidation Case

This was a non-story. Not worthy of legitinate media attention. See: ref:Re: Is The Tea Party Racist?
2) The ACORN corruption case
ACORN was cleared of all charges, they were unjustly demonized and destroyed for political gain. This was covered extensively!
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]

3) The Sacking of the Marxist, 9/11 Truther Green Jobs Czar Van Jones

Oh yes, the other unjust smear job by "Fair and Balanced" FAUX News. The relevant portion of this clip starts at abut 4:50.
[youtube][/youtube]

Bob

[Grumpy]

WinePusher

"On Fox News, ex-Civil Rights Division Lawyer Blasts DOJ
By Mary Jacoby | July 2, 2010 1:19 am

Former Civil Rights Division lawyer J. Christian Adams has escalated his war with the Department of Justice, giving a two-part interview to Fox News asserting that racial motivations were behind dismissal of a voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party.

And for the first time, the Justice Department has criticized J. Christian Adams‘ own motivations on the record.

The November 2008 incident at a Philadelphia polling place has become a cause celebre for conservatives. Two members of the anti-white fringe group stood outside the polling place in military-style garb, one of them holding a night stick.

The Obama DOJ dismissed the case last year, citing a lack of a pattern of intimidation and the fact that one of the Black Panthers was a registered Democratic poll watcher. The DOJ obtained an injunction against the Black Panther who carried the nightstick.

“You’re supposed to be able to go vote without somebody with a weapon shouting racist slurs at you,� Adams said in his first Fox News interview on Wednesday. “They said, ‘You’re about to be ruled by the black man, Cracker.’ They called people ‘white devils.’ They tried to stop people from entering the polls.�

In fact, no voters at all in the Philadelphia precinct have come forward to allege intimidation. The complaints have come from white Republican poll watchers, who have given no evidence they were registered to vote in the majority black precinct.

An Associated Press story inaccurately described the scene as one where white voters were being intimidated by the Black Panther members. The only white people at the scene that day appeared to be the Republican poll watchers. And Fox News host Megyn Kelly inaccurately described video taken of the incident as made by a “voter.� In fact, the video was made by Stephen Robert Morse, a blogger hired by the local Republican Party on behalf of the John McCain presidential campaign.

The Philadelphia video also did not capture any racial slurs, although the two Black Panthers were shown in an earlier National Geographic documentary using derogatory terms against whites. The Southern Poverty Law Center has classified the New Black Panther Party as a hate group.

“It is not uncommon for attorneys within the department to have good faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action in a particular case, although it is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda,� Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler told Fox News in a written statement.

Described as a DOJ “whistleblower� by Fox News host Kelly, Adams was hired as a career lawyer under an improperly politicized process during the Bush administration. Adams quit the Justice Department June 4, after officials banned him from testifying before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about the handling of the case.

Asked by Kelly if he thought the DOJ is corrupt, Adams said: “I don’t think the department or the fine people who work there are corrupt.� But he said the decision to dismiss the case was corrupt, and accused the DOJ of having a policy of not pursuing cases where blacks intimidate white voters.

As Main Justice has previously reported, Adams was hired in 2005 by Bradley Schlozman, a Bush-era political appointee who hired “right-thinking Americans� with conservative affiliations in a process the Department of Justice Inspector General concluded was improperly politicized.

Adams has also written a piece for the American Spectator that likened President Barack Obama’s world view to that of Nazi appeasers and argued on a conservative blogging network that health care reform is a threat to liberty."

http://www.mainjustice.com/2010/07/02/o ... lasts-doj/

It seems, given the Acorn lies, the Sherrod lies, the Birthers and racists in the Tea Party(who they have belatedly kicked out)and the lies about this subject that some on the right have a big problem with the truth.

Grumpy

[WinePusher]

Actually to be technical you are being judgemental given that the title of the OP is does the media have an immoral liberal bias. Sure you put it in the form of a question but using the term immoral implies you are making a judgement about moral standing.

Not quite, I consider any network of having a liberal/media/conservative bias that deludes objective journalism as being immoral. Including FOX which has conservative opinion shows, and objective news reporting shows.

[Wyvern]

Actually to be technical you are being judgemental given that the title of the OP is does the media have an immoral liberal bias. Sure you put it in the form of a question but using the term immoral implies you are making a judgement about moral standing.

Not quite, I consider any network of having a liberal/media/conservative bias that deludes objective journalism as being immoral. Including FOX which has conservative opinion shows, and objective news reporting shows.

That being the case then the obvious answer in no. Fox is part of the mainstream news media and they definately do not have an immoral or moral liberal bias.

[Goat]

Actually to be technical you are being judgemental given that the title of the OP is does the media have an immoral liberal bias. Sure you put it in the form of a question but using the term immoral implies you are making a judgement about moral standing.

Not quite, I consider any network of having a liberal/media/conservative bias that deludes objective journalism as being immoral. Including FOX which has conservative opinion shows, and objective news reporting shows.

That being the case then the obvious answer in no. Fox is part of the mainstream news media and they definately do not have an immoral or moral liberal bias.

They have a very decisively immoral conservative bias... and they have a distinct lack of respect for FACTS.

[SailingCyclops]

Actually to be technical you are being judgemental given that the title of the OP is does the media have an immoral liberal bias. Sure you put it in the form of a question but using the term immoral implies you are making a judgement about moral standing.

Not quite ...

Yes quite. When you ask a question which, by default ties "liberal bias" to "immorality", you have already judged it to be immoral. The answer then, can only be with respect to the already judged "immorality". It's the same as if I were to ask you if you have stopped beating your wife.

Bob