Liberals Shun Opposing Views Because They're Used to Controlling the Media

[monovillage]

You seriously can't read your own quotes. Media bias has been studies at great length, significant bias has not been found.

You don't want to believe this because it hurts your ability to feel persecuted and victimized, and the right wing thrives on a culture of victimhood.

If I can show you a peer reviewed study that admits there is media bias, even though it's small, will you admit that there is media bias?
Just a yes or no answer, it's simple enough even a partisan Democrat like yourself can answer it.

 

[fskimospy]

If I can show you a peer reviewed study that admits there is media bias, even though it's small, will you admit that there is media bias?
Just a yes or no answer, it's simple enough even a partisan Democrat like yourself can answer it.

I'm not playing your game. What you're going to do is link to a study that I have mentioned before that concludes the following:

A meta-analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta-analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.

Then you're going to try and dishonestly spin that into being evidence for the type of media bias that you regularly complain about when the two are clearly nothing alike to anyone who can read and understand that abstract.

You'll do this because you can't win on the merits and because you're invested in continuing to believe you're a victim. If you need to feel like a victim to excuse your ideology's failings, go ahead. Don't expect us to play along though.

EDIT: I have a great plan though! I will freely admit there is media bias if you admit that it is small but probably insubstantial. So long as you put that before all your statements of media bias I'm 100% behind you! I'm sure you will have no problem with this because remember, you're interested in what the research says, not in pretending you're persecuted.

 

[monovillage]

So you admit there is media bias even though you think it's small and probably insubstantial. Thanks, that's all I wanted.

 

[fskimospy]

So you admit there is media bias even though you think it's small and probably insubstantial. Thanks, that's all I wanted.

So long as you admit that media bias is small and probably insubstantial we're on the same page. Will you admit this or are you requesting that I accept evidence that you will not accept yourself?

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

[monovillage]

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Sorry, I was having too much fun reading Panic 2012 a journalist from Rolling Stone, Michael Hastings views of the 2012 presidential election where he makes the observations.

"We were all, on some level, deeply obsessed with Obama, crushing hard, still a little love there. This was nerd heaven, a politico's paradise, the subject himself moving among us -- shaking our hands, slapping our shoulders!"

LOL, great stuff.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/michael-hastings-reporters-obama_n_2550054.html

yeah, media bias is small and probably, maybe, could be insubstantial.

 

[fskimospy]

Sorry, I was having too much fun reading Panic 2012 a journalist from Rolling Stone, Michael Hastings views of the 2012 presidential election where he makes the observations.


LOL, great stuff.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/michael-hastings-reporters-obama_n_2550054.html

yeah, media bias is small and probably, maybe, could be insubstantial.

Oh good, anecdotal evidence. I hear that's really useful.

I'm happy to hear you are willing to accept evidence on this matter. I expect you in the future when talking about media bias to include the fact that the only medium in which any has been seen is TV, and in that case it was small and likely insubstantial.

Your embrace of facts has really made my day! Finally another person willing to look at this rationally.

 

[shadow9d9]

Of course there is bias... every person on the planet has a bias. The media in the US is middle right, considering the democrats are middle/right and the republicans are off the cliff right.. the media is somewhere in between all the way up to Fox.

 

[monovillage]

Oh good, anecdotal evidence. I hear that's really useful.

I'm happy to hear you are willing to accept evidence on this matter. I expect you in the future when talking about media bias to include the fact that the only medium in which any has been seen is TV, and in that case it was small and likely insubstantial.

Your embrace of facts has really made my day! Finally another person willing to look at this rationally.

The real quote you were looking for is small, but measurable media bias and probably insubstantial, and that was only in terms of presidential elections and they started measuring in 1948 with no data from Obama's two terms. So glad I'm able once again to school you on the facts.

 

[gingermeggs]

I just enjoyed the hypocrisy of Powers attacking "liberals" for ignoring facts and data while she, herself, offered no actual facts or data. All she did is tell O'Reilly what she feels to be true. She is welcome to her opinions, of course, but without any substance behind it her comments are just more feel-good reassurance for the right-wing fringe that they really do know best, no matter what reality shows.

Bang on mate!
both sides of the centre don't have a clue.......

 

[fskimospy]

The real quote you were looking for is small, but measurable media bias and probably insubstantial, and that was only in terms of presidential elections and they started measuring in 1948 with no data from Obama's two terms. So glad I'm able once again to school you on the facts.

Lol.

If you want to cling to the idea that the media suddenly became biased when Obama showed up I still view that as progress for you.

I'll be watching for it.

 

[klinc]

Allegations allegations allegations

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Meanwhile, the political director for CBS news advises Obama to go for the throat.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._the_president_should_declare_war.single.html

 

[soulcougher73]

The conservative playbook:

1) Deflect
2) Attack source
3) Insults

FTFY. See how easy this game is. All you suckers with blinders on.

LOL @ you.

 

[fskimospy]

Meanwhile, the political director for CBS news advises Obama to go for the throat.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._the_president_should_declare_war.single.html

How dare the political director of a news organization accurately analyze obama's political situation. Didn't he know his job as a journalist was to make vacuous, high minded appeals to bipartisanship, regardless of history or experience?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

How dare the political director of a news organization accurately analyze obama's political situation. Didn't he know his job as a journalist was to make vacuous, high minded appeals to bipartisanship, regardless of history or experience?

Just adding a little color to the media bias discussion.

“ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.” - CBS President and CEO Les Moonves

http://www.mediaite.com/online/cbs-...anship-is-very-much-a-part-of-journalism-now/

 

[actuarial]

He barely has any intelligence, Just look at his posts which are mostly rants, he sounds like an angry white guy

 

[IGBT]

it's obvious to the most casual viewer and listener the liberal agenda has loads of willing accomplices and useful idiots in and out of the media and academia.

 

[actuarial]

it's obvious to the most casual viewer and listener the liberal agenda has loads of willing accomplices and useful idiots in and out of the media and academia.

When you use terms like "liberal agenda" it becomes very hard to distinguish you from all those useful idiots and willing accomplices.

 

[Bowfinger]

When you use terms like "liberal agenda" it becomes very hard to distinguish you from all those useful idiots and willing accomplices.

On the contrary, he is useless.