'Media Bias' Discussion

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

Latest from a friend:

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

Bias? What Bias?

As a history teacher, I must strive for objectivity. However, I know itâ??s not possible for a thoughtful person to study history, politics, or economics and not develop biases. Best practice would be do disclose those biases to students because itâ??s inevitable that Iâ??ll teach concepts I believe in with more enthusiasm than concepts I donâ??t believe in. Itâ??s human nature.

To detect this, students would need to understand the left/right political spectrum and the terminology used to describe it, so I sketched one out and taught it. Then I advised them point out my bias when they detect it. Those exercises train them to identify and to be aware of a presenterâ??s political perspective when any sort of information is promulgated.

Full Story (with recent examples of biased ‘reporting’):

82

A forum with rules? LOL!

I get my sources from CNN, Fox News, WSJ, AJC, and various random sources I may run across… I do most of it online. I never ever ever watch TV news. I hate it with a passions that is unknown to mankind. I have shit smarter people.

As far as bias, most biases are left, with out a doubt. People bitch about Fox leaning right, well they are the biggest because people are sick as shit of all the left leaning media.

Look at the ACORN story, this was huge and managed to take down an organization. Not only that but an organization with strong ties to the President. Yet, hardly a peep from the main stream media. If it were not for Fox news, ACORN would be co-running the census this year…That alone should scare the shit out of you. Icould go on and on about media bias. I have read books by Goldstein and Sthephanopolos that really shed light on how media bias works.

The main way the bias functions it by focus and omission rather than altering or changing facts. So if they don’t find a story favorable to their views, they’ll either down play it, or simply ignore it, while give issues they care about more time and focus. This way they cannot be faulted on facts of the story, but they control the flow of negatives about their point of view and and increase the positives towards their point of view. The flow of info is not even. That’s why talk radio and fox news exploded on the scene. It was the only place to get the kind of information the regular media would suppress. And we are all better for it. If it hits Fox, millions of people instantly know about it.

83

I get most of my news from the BBC.co.uk and Military.com.
–I like the BBC because they still bother to do indepth analysis or a historical summary (although incomplete). They also have links to relevant old-news stories.

I also check out CNN.com and Fox.com if I want to read more on a domestic issue.

I only read print media when class start becuase I get it for free at my Univ’s library. Most of the time I read the Washington Post and New York Times. I stopped reading USAToday after a blatenly stupid economic/political article.

84

Honestly you should be getting your news from print sources rather than TV if your concern is objectivity.

The content of news consists of words, images, and video reportage of events. But when you watch a news show, you’re watching anchors and pundits, watching the newsroom, hearing theme music and logos, watching ads; there’s a lot of distraction.

And more than distraction: what does it do to your idea of war, for instance, to spend years getting used to the notion that a war can have its own theme music and design elements?

Neil Postman writes a lot about this. He has a reputation of being an anti-television killjoy, but he’s not as much against TV entertainment as against TV news, and the way it makes the news into a show.

I tend to think video is deceptive. You can debate a written argument, but you can’t debate a montage or a sequence of quick cuts. Video has an experiential quality – it can convey a vague feeling without saying anything intelligible. I don’t even watch politicians’ speeches much any more; I read transcripts. That’s a little loony, I know, but I think it matters.

85

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Honestly you should be getting your news from print sources rather than TV if your concern is objectivity.

The content of news consists of words, images, and video roportage of events. But when you watch a news show, you’re watching anchors and pundits, watching the newsroom, hearing theme music and logos, watching ads; there’s a lot of distraction.

And more than distraction: what does it do to your idea of war, for instance, to spend years getting used to the notion that a war can have its own theme music and design elements?

Neil Postman writes a lot about this. He has a reputation of being an anti-television killjoy, but he’s not as much against TV entertainment as against TV news, and the way it makes the news into a show.

I tend to think video is deceptive. You can debate a written argument, but you can’t debate a montage or a sequence of quick cuts. Video has an experiential quality – it can convey a vague feeling without saying anything intelligible. I don’t even watch politicians’ speeches much any more; I read transcripts. That’s a little loony, I know, but I think it matters.[/quote]

Very good points, AlisaV
Politics, news, finance and big business have all turned into a cult of personality. It is style over substance. Debates have morphed into beauty pageants with an emphasis on the spokes model segment. The last decade (or two) have been the Decade of the Con.

I could never stand on stage and compete with Obama for the hearts and minds of an audience. I have neither the charm, looks, or charisma. But put us both in an essay contest with the authors unknown before judging, I like my chances.

Religion used to be the opiate of the masses. Now it is reality TV. Ask the average person to list the names of the cast of Jersey Shores. Now ask them who the Secretary of State is. Any doubt to the outcome?

86

jeaton- i’m fairly sure obama would demolish you in an essay contest. “Membership in the Harvard Law Review is limited to second- and third-year law students who are selected on the basis of their performance on an annual writing competition.” If you recall, Obama was the president of this organization. you are either an arrogant douchebag or…an arrogant douchebag.

87

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
jeaton- i’m fairly sure obama would demolish you in an essay contest. “Membership in the Harvard Law Review is limited to second- and third-year law students who are selected on the basis of their performance on an annual writing competition.” If you recall, Obama was the president of this organization. you are either an arrogant douchebag or…an arrogant douchebag. [/quote]

Hey buddy! Long time, no hear from.
And there you go again with the douchebag. I like it, but you need a few more weapons in your arsenal. You’re in danger of becoming boring and predictable.

I will say, having seen all ten of your posts, that I do not consider you a qualified judge of my, Obama’s, or for that matter, anyone’s writing. But keep reading. You might eventually learn something.

As to the much vaunted Harvard. This is the school where approximately 91% to 95% (depending on the source) of the graduates graduate with honors, correct? Doesn’t seem that hard of an accomplishment.

Also, having sealed virtually everything else, I do not know if I can get a peak at any of his college papers. I know that he has written none of his own work for a very long time. Without a teleprompter he looks quite lost. Ghost writers on his books. Who exactly would I be competing with?

Ah… Butt I jut figured you out. You are the Jackass that puked on his third ever post. Insulted a current member and then sputtered something unrelated to the post.
BTW, I fixed that for you. You might go back and get help. Knowledge is free. Effort is not.

But it is nice to know that I got your attention that last time. I bet you have just been waiting in the shadows for you opportunity at revenge.

But I am tiring of the douchbag. Let’s try something new. How about “Senor Douchbag.” It has more of an international flair.

88

Obama wrote Dreams from my Father himself.

89

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Obama wrote Dreams from my Father himself.
[/quote]
You are correct, AlisaV. He wrote it sometime before 1995.
Nothing like a little hyperbole to get the troops stirred up ;D

90

jeaton, he got his BA at columbia, not harvard. those honors statistics aren’t from the law school.

also, i wasn’t “waiting around for revenge.” this is the internet. i don’t care for internet revenge; however, when someone says that they are capable of beating a University of Chicago law professor, and former president of the Harvard Law Review (whose job it is to edit and manage the best legal publication in America) in an essay competition, they deserve to be called out.

p.s. get off john s’ penis.

91

thefederalist,

I decided to check my facts to determine if I was being fair in my judgment of you. This is what I found.

Your body of work consist of the followiing:

  1. if glenn beck is informing your worldview i wish you good luck.
  2. actually beck is a brilliant satirist silently laughing at all the fools who think that echoes their views.
  3. As a christian who lived in the middle east for several years, I can tell you that I see far more intolerance in America than I ever did abroad.
  4. Short sighted? Republican cash accounting is what’s shortsighted. You are further proof that we need an IQ test for voters.
  5. Bush Sr. is not considered as successful as Reagan for one reason in particular: he had to increase taxes to pay off Reagan’s debts. Also, even John S. could lead the U.S. to relative prosperity after a World War.
  6. jeaton, the idea that the confrontational tone of my post is out of the ordinary on here is laughable. you call me out for making a legitimate albeit vague point with a playful insult thrown in. oh, and warren g. harding wasn’t a part of the topic at hand either, you ass. because i didn’t quote the author, or more likely because your history is weak, you may have missed the fact it was he to whom i was referring.
    7)the fact that you think that another president, particularly a regan model president directly and immediately inheriting reagan’s legacy isn’t relevant betrays one of two things: 1) you came here to mutually masturbate with other like-minded people. 2) the little we thought you knew about politics is a gross overestimation of your actual knowledge.
    i love how conservatives who don’t oppose some of the vile posted on here come out of the woodworks when we halfheartedly insult reagan or a poster who makes silly arguments. douche.
  7. you are an idiot.
  8. as a left-of-center dude, i’d vote for a ron paul ticket.
    10)jeaton- i’m fairly sure obama would demolish you in an essay contest. “Membership in the Harvard Law Review is limited to second- and third-year law students who are selected on the basis of their performance on an annual writing competition.” If you recall, Obama was the president of this organization. you are either an arrogant douchebag or…an arrogant douchebag.
    11)jeaton, he got his BA at columbia, not harvard. those honors statistics aren’t from the law school.also, i wasn’t “waiting around for revenge.” this is the internet. i don’t care for internet revenge; however, when someone says that they are capable of beating a University of Chicago law professor, and former president of the Harvard Law Review (whose job it is to edit and manage the best legal publication in America) in an essay competition, they deserve to be called out.
    p.s. get off john s’ penis.
    12)Georgia’s 9th district?!?!? What a surprise that this would come from the great state of Georgia!
  9. shame on McKinney for trying to help Katrina victims…

So what do we have.
A total of thirteen post.
Twelve of which have a negative slant, either insulting a poster or your country.
Nine posts are either one or two sentences in length.
Four are directly insulting me (I guess I should feel special).

While I understand that some instances only require a one line post, when it becomes the norm you are no more than a drive by shooter. Ignorant at best. Cowardly at worse. Half of your posts seem to be written for the purpose of using idiot, douche, douchebag, arrogant douchebag, and ass as descriptors.

You use the name of thefederalist. I assume you think of yourself as some sort of constitutional scholar. However, you have yet to make any meaningful contribution to this forum other than insults and snipes.

I could care less if you are liberal, socialist, communist, conservative, etc. If you can express you opinion with facts and reason you have my respect. So far, I haven’t seen anything close to this.

92

nice.

93

I typically only read news sites that allow comments. I love the comments. So WSJ usually gets my ad revenue.