• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Jon Stewart Delivers Blistering Takedown of Obamacare Rollout

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
shadow9d9 said:
Well, it is. Since you ignored it the first time: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...company-all-discussions-of-media-bias/257961/

Feel free to provide EVIDENCE to the contrary. Your gutt doesn't count and the talking points you've been taught don't count.

What evidence of Stewart's bias are you guys going to bring up next? A neo Nazi wh ois upset that his organization didn't get free advertising?
Click to expand...

Here you go.

http://www.journalism.org/2012/11/02/winning-media-campaign-2012/

Your article was from May 31 2012, Romney wasn't even nominated till August.
 
Matt1970 said:
Here you go.

http://www.journalism.org/2012/11/02/winning-media-campaign-2012/

Your article was from May 31 2012, Romney wasn't even nominated till August.
Click to expand...

My article was regarding all candidates, yes.

From your own article, "Most of the advantage in coverage for Obama, however, came in September in the form of highly negative coverage for Romney. This was a period when the GOP nominee was losing ground in the polls, he was criticized for his comments about Libya, and a video surfaced in which he effectively dismissed 47% of the American public."

Yes, you will get negative publicity when you say that 47% of the country are lowlives. THIS is why you use a study that has multiple candidates.. so if one sticks their foot in their mouth, you get more accurate data overall!

Additionally, Obama is middle/right, and more right than any democrat in the last 25+ years... hence, using the republican healthcare, continuing spying, etc etc.

Anyhow, your claim was a substantial media bias "left"..."Liberal Media" implies heavy bias. Even if that were Obama, you have failed to prove it, even going by your own article, which merely shows a tie if you disclude when Romney insulted half of the country(the same amount of which ended up voting for him).
 
Last edited:
shadow9d9 said:
My article was regarding all candidates, yes.

From your own article, "Most of the advantage in coverage for Obama, however, came in September in the form of highly negative coverage for Romney. This was a period when the GOP nominee was losing ground in the polls, he was criticized for his comments about Libya, and a video surfaced in which he effectively dismissed 47% of the American public."

Yes, you will get negative publicity when you say that 47% of the country are lowlives. THIS is why you use a study that has multiple candidates.. so if one sticks their foot in their mouth, you get more accurate data overall!

Additionally, Obama is middle/right, and more right than any democrat in the last 25+ years... hence, using the republican healthcare, continuing spying, etc etc.
Click to expand...

Well, you wanted to use a small window of coverage of Presidentail candidates, I linked to an overall rating many months later. Either way, you are trying to argue against water being wet. You had a nice link that showed if you don't stick your toe in the water it won't seem wet. Just stop it. Go back to watching the ultra-conservative Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes or Lawrence O'Donnell. They will set you straight.
 
Matt1970 said:
Well, you wanted to use a small window of coverage of Presidentail candidates, I linked to an overall rating many months later. Either way, you are trying to argue against water being wet. You had a nice link that showed if you don't stick your toe in the water it won't seem wet. Just stop it. Go back to watching the ultra-conservative Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes or Lawrence O'Donnell. They will set you straight.
Click to expand...

Umm, your OWN story showed them in a dead heat outside of when Romney not only called half of the country low lives, but also mishandled his trip abroad(or was it Libya). The 47% comment was probably the biggest political mistake made in the last 20 years. The fact that ANYONE voted for him after that is shocking. My study showed that it was way more negative toward Obama. Either case disproves your claim.

It only appears "water is wet" to you because you want sooo desperately for it to be true and you subscribe to the idea that if an echo chamber repeats a lie often enough that it becomes truth.

I don't watch tv news btw.

You see, if you make a claim, ESPECIALLY one that the entire media is biased, be prepared to show substantial data to prove it. I provided to the contrary, and you provided one showing even coverage.
 
Last edited:
Matt1970 said:
Then shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...

YOU made a CLAIM. Back it up. Don't deflect or name call. Provide EVIDENCE!!!

You see, if you make a claim, ESPECIALLY one that the entire media is biased, be prepared to show substantial data to prove it. I provided to the contrary, and you provided one showing even coverage.
 
Matt1970 said:
Then shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...

This is the advanced level of political discourse and reasoned argument that I frequent these forums for. Subtle, nuanced, yet forceful and compelling; an impassioned response that cuts through the chaff of political discourse to arrive at a reasonable conclusion everyone can agree on.
 
shadow9d9 said:
YOU made a CLAIM. Back it up. Don't deflect or name call. Provide EVIDENCE!!!

You see, if you make a claim, ESPECIALLY one that the entire media is biased, be prepared to show substantial data to prove it. I provided to the contrary, and you provided one showing even coverage.
Click to expand...

Actually you made the claims, I proved you wrong with no deflection or name calling but you tried to explain why the media was biased toward Obama.
 
Atomic Playboy said:
This is the advanced level of political discourse and reasoned argument that I frequent these forums for. Subtle, nuanced, yet forceful and compelling; an impassioned response that cuts through the chaff of political discourse to arrive at a reasonable conclusion everyone can agree on.
Click to expand...

Well I normally don't make comments like that but he is such an expert on something he doesn't even watch.
 
Matt1970 said:
Probably nowhere near as often as he does. I like the The Colbert Report more. Difference is I can tell which way the stations/commentators lean. It's not like a lot of them really hide it.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I was hoping you'd say never, so I could point out your hypocrisy in saying that you shouldn't claim to be an expert in something you never watch, then turning around and claiming to be an expert on Jon Stewart's show. Then I was going to tell you to "shut the fuck up" per your earlier suggestion. You pretty effectively took the wind out of my sails by admitting to at least occasionally watching the Daily Show. We blew a golden opportunity for comedy gold there. Maybe next time.
 
Atomic Playboy said:
To be honest, I was hoping you'd say never, so I could point out your hypocrisy in saying that you shouldn't claim to be an expert in something you never watch, then turning around and claiming to be an expert on Jon Stewart's show. Then I was going to tell you to "shut the fuck up" per your earlier suggestion. You pretty effectively took the wind out of my sails by admitting to at least occasionally watching the Daily Show. We blew a golden opportunity for comedy gold there. Maybe next time.
Click to expand...

Sorry. Left or Right Stewart is a funny man. Stephen Colbert is funnier though.
 
Matt1970 said:
Actually you made the claims, I proved you wrong with no deflection or name calling but you tried to explain why the media was biased toward Obama.
Click to expand...

You claimed there was an extensive liberal media bias.

My study proved otherwise.

Yours showed that in that one instance that they were essentially tied.

Repeating a lie won't make it true. Notice how you don't even address the discrepancy between what you claimed and what the quote from your own article said? Pathetic.

I don't watch news commentary or news. I do watch the occasional clip of Stewart and have watched a few episodes over the years.
 
shadow9d9 said:
You claimed there was an extensive liberal media bias.

My study proved otherwise.

Yours showed that in that one instance that they were essentially tied.

Repeating a lie won't make it true. Notice how you don't even address the discrepancy between what you claimed and what the quote from your own article said? Pathetic.

I don't watch news commentary or news. I do watch the occasional clip of Stewart and have watched a few episodes over the years.
Click to expand...

liberal paper says liberal papers aren't liberal.
 
shadow9d9 said:
You claimed there was an extensive liberal media bias.

My study proved otherwise.

Yours showed that in that one instance that they were essentially tied.

Repeating a lie won't make it true. Notice how you don't even address the discrepancy between what you claimed and what the quote from your own article said? Pathetic.

I don't watch news commentary or news. I do watch the occasional clip of Stewart and have watched a few episodes over the years.
Click to expand...

Actually I didn't make that claim. You are pulling that out of thin air. You just asked for evidence to the contrary of what you said. You on the other hand claim "The mainstream media actually leans further right than left" and then the even funnier "MSNBC is middle/right at best." Let's skip to the latter. I wonder, how did you come to the conclusion that "MSNBC is middle/right at best" when their whole evening lineup is well established liberals? Wikipedia and just about everyone on the planet knows they are quite Liberal.

Beginning in the mid-2000s, MSNBC assumed an increasingly liberal stance in its opinion programming. In October 2010, it publicly acknowledged this with a marketing campaign it called "Lean Forward". Further, in September of 2013, MSNBC launched its revamped official website under the tagline, "What Progressives Have Been Waiting For."
Click to expand...

Prove "MSNBC is is middle/right at best" and then we can move on to the MSM.
 
Last edited:
michal1980 said:
liberal paper says liberal papers aren't liberal.
Click to expand...

"drawing on Pew analyses of positive, negative, and neutral press coverage of all Republican candidates and of President Obama through this past year."

The charts are straight from Pew you fool.

Facts have a liberal bias.

It is almost like you DID NOT EVEN READ IT! That is truly SHOCKING!
 
Last edited:
Matt1970 said:
Actually I didn't make that claim. You are pulling that out of thin air. You just asked for evidence to the contrary of what you said. You on the other hand claim "The mainstream media actually leans further right than left" and then the even funnier "MSNBC is middle/right at best." Let's skip to the latter. I wonder, how did you come to the conclusion that "MSNBC is middle/right at best" when their whole evening lineup is well established liberals? Wikipedia and just about everyone on the planet knows they are quite Liberal.



Prove "MSNBC is is middle/right at best" and then we can move on to the MSM.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I am mistaken then. That can be easily clarified right here. Do you believe that the media is liberal, conservative, balanced, or somewhere in between?


The democrats are middle/right, and since the media is hell bent on doing the "let's present both sides as equally sane," it is probably between that and the insane right.

We went to afghanistan and Iraq with NO QUESTIOSN ASKED! Healthcare debate for a year? They didn't debunk the Republican lies about death panels... 3 years later and the "liberal media" still hasn't bothered spending five minutes explaining to the the people... There is nothing "liberal" about the media in this country.
 
Last edited:
The Daily Show's mission is to point at the absurdity of the political system. The only shocking thing is that it's only on for half an hour four nights a week when obviously there whole hours of the day that could be filled by mocking the horrors within that machinery.
 
Jon Stewart is the most apolitical commentator on tv. Conservatives don't understand that him and Colbert point out absurdity no matter which party it comes from. However, conservatives just give comedians alot more material. Thats probably why theres so few conservative comedians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top