Yes, John, they would do that.
Do you know that ABC, CBS, CNN and FNC all belong to the same news sharing service (Network News Service, or NNS)?
They share news footage every day.
Irony is not a small appliance used to press clothing.
I find it hilarious that all through this Fox is being called "Fascist".
Fascist is what the Democratic party tried to do to Joe Lieberman.
Fascist is a group of people trying to shut down Fox news, for having the audacity to present news favorable to the right- when it's highly unlikely those who don't recognize the media bias to the left as such today, would recognize ANYthing as left of their own narrow view in the first place.
"In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican. A survey by the Pew Research Center and Project for Excellence in Journalism in 2004 found 34% of journalists describing themselves as liberal, 54% as moderate, and 7% as conservative."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Med...e_United_States
Maybe john t. will see that link.
Use "google"? Right.
I'll stick to reality, thanks.
I "know" because I have been in broadcasting since 1978.
I "know" because I have fed out B-roll footage of political debates and events since the 1980 election.
That is how I "know".
Hey, watch it. That is the next sexual perversion that you SP will start promoting, INCEST, you know like with your family, etc. You probably think that you have gotten the homosexuality thing normalized so you should start pushing for the acceptance of incest and bestiality. Now, wasn't that what led to the devastation of the Roman Empire. You know, the men all became effeminate and did not want to fight the Vandals, Goths and Franks. The effeminate Romans said, look at those big, hunky men coming here to pillage and plunder and kill. Oh, lets negotiate with them and then we can turn them, right?????
Yakki.PsD, just so I am perfectly clear on this; are you saying FNC would somehow restrict video of the debate from other news outlets, and/or would manipulate the debate to serve their own corporate needs?
I really want to know if you believe that.YOur article says: "FOX offered PTV a live feed, with the FOX branding and logo, without offering PTV any opportunity to use the content in any other way. Worst of all, FOX demanded that PTV’s participation be via live webcast only, and that PTV not post any clips from the debate in archival or other form."
Yea. Exactly, and every other broadcaster and cablecaster have similar language. Haven't you ever seen another network's logo on another's air?
Is THIS what you are talking about when you say "restrictions"????????
Of course. FNC, and every single other television network!
Good Grief!
I have never made it any secret I worked for Turner Broadcasting at a point during my broadcasting career.
OF COURSE on a presidental debate!
PBS hosted one during the last election cycle; the PBS logo was all over CNN, FNC and the others.
Come on!
So Democrats are afraid of a candidate being man-handled by Bill O'Reilly? Now, I understand. Boy, that Presidential hopeful is the kind of powerful presence I would like representing MY country when they make a pitch for our side at the UN....someone who shrinks on camera to the likes of Bill O'Reilly!
Like I said before, the more I think about this the more I think this entire episode will help the conservative movement and harm the liberal movement. As more and more "Average Americans" hear the Moveon.org and their ilk spearheaded the democrats to cancel the FNC debate, the more the "Average American" will identify today's Democratic Party with those kooks.
And that is what we want; we want anyone and everyone that hears about a Democrat to immediately think about moveon.org, Daily Kos, and yes, the NewsHounds.
A little FYI... independent studies show wikipedia is more accurate than Emcyclopedia Brittanica in a number of catagories, though they were more objective than the minefield of politics. Moreover, you must provide sourcing, and if I were to start adding passages to their pages of content that was fictional just to substantiate internet arguments, I'd have my ISP address blocked in no time.
A credible rebuttal would be proving the polls I cited were never taken. Those have been cited on that wiki page for a good year or so, I stand by them as factual and if you would like to contest them I will be here all night with bells on if you'd like to go toe to toe to see who can google up the original polls.
The question as to whether the MSM is left-biased or not has been answered for a long time. A large portion of the democratic party acknowledge it, as do many editors in the MSM.
I'm sorry, I didn't know I was even on the ballot in 2008? Why didn't I get that memo?
Seriously, you go off on a rant about Ann Coulter's "faggot" remark, isn't there about a dozen threads on that here at Newshounds? Was she a moderator? She is no more a spokesperson for the party than the Democratic pundit who recently made an offensive remark about Cheney being dead, perhaps we shall have the whole democrat party arrested by the secret service?
If right wing groups were successful in campaigns to prevent the GOP candidates from having to appear in any forums unfriendly to them,would you be okay with that? Moreover, how does that serve the democratic process?
I assume you are referring to commentary shows? Like Larry King? Broadcasters are in the business to make money. Why would one air a show that gets low ratings (AAR for instance, on radio).
Frank, your list was made up of almost all commentary publications. How about the NYT, the LA Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and PBS?
My how things have changed!
In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative.'
A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative.
In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative.
Now,in 2004, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.
To continue:
Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.
Those who still doubt the press needs fresh, preferably conservative, blood, should consider these numbers: In 1999, 12 percent of journalists said fairness and balance were a big problem for the media. Now, in the Pew survey, only 5 percent say so--this, after further proof of liberal dominance and noisy debates about liberal bias. And in 1999, 11 percent said ethics and standards were a major concern. But after high-visibility scandals involving fabricated stories and controversies about plagiarism, only 5 percent agree today. The case for ideological realignment of the media is closed.
Frank C, a list of a handful of names in an industry that large is hardly proof of anything, as if you could ever get anyone to admit or even recognize bias.
One thing that is far more readily determined is the political affiliations of those working in said industry, that is why I cited those figures- such demographic polls invariably fall very heavily to the left.
If you don't like newsbusters.org, you can always try
http://www.mediaresearch.org/
or
Timeswatch.org
or several others.
Even though he is semi-retired, are you telling me Ted Turner is not liberal?
Please, tell me. I am waiting with baited breath for this one.
You may now leave the debate in shame for questioning Ted Turner's poliitcs as anything but lunatic left.
The guy is nuts.
I actually like his idealism, dangerous as it is.
I worked for Ted. I last spoke with him in January at my Dad's funeral.
I know what he believes politically. He is very, very left-wing.Again, Frank, every single person you cite, with the exception of Brit Hume, are COMMENTATORS.
They are supposed to express their opinions...THAT IS THEIR JOB.
Naw, I remember your posting in that, you actually found faults in the details of a few of my talking points. Proved them wrong.
Because of that, I was able to adjust them accordingly and now when I relay the story as I know it of Wilson's lies, I offer a few less toeholds for the opposition to grab onto.
As I always say, "I invite the opportunity to be proven wrong, for I will then learn something I did not know."
This is why I spend my time 10:1 here and about a dozen other left leaning sites, to Free Republic. I'd learn nothing solely in the company of "yes" men.
No comments:
Post a Comment