Media's Presidential Bias and Decline

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: bozack
I have to say that this is a great great post, however sadly the majority of people eat up what they are shoveled bite after bite..

Which is why I am hoping that should Obama get into office his presidency is a total failure, and then that prompts people to ask where the media was in all of this and why he and his crew got the free pass.

So you'd rather Obama fail and make the situation in this country worse than him succeed and admit you were wrong.

You are a true American patriot. Hannity should interview you.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
No matter how the right tries to put pig shit on the lips of Obama, everybody can see with their own eyes what lying fucks they are. Only the most dim witted of people see with their ears by listening to sliming scum.

You actually posted something coherent, though it was totally devoid of concrete examples. Still, props to improvement!

The example is the OP of this thread which, I would have thought, would be obvious I was replying to, as well as he added data supplied here by others.

The OP said there is bias in favor of Obama, which honestly isn't surprising given that most journalists are overwhelmingly liberal, yet your saying this isn't true. Which post has actually provided evidence that the OP is factually wrong?
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
No matter how the right tries to put pig shit on the lips of Obama, everybody can see with their own eyes what lying fucks they are. Only the most dim witted of people see with their ears by listening to sliming scum.
Obviously then, you have a following.

 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Answer... the media has still barely covered the Ayers thing.

We have investigative reports on the Alaska pipe line, but know NOTHING about the working relationship between Obama and Ayers. They shared an office together. Obama steered over a million dollars towards Ayers etc etc. Where are the investigative reports on that stuff? Why do I have to read right wing web site to learn these facts?

Didn't you intend to say, "so-called facts?"

Why is it that you assume that what you read on right-wing web sites is factual? Have you considered the possibility that the reason you do NOT read about these so-called facts in the MSM is that these incidents are fabrications and there's nothing to report?

In other words, you would like everyone to believe there is nothing to report.

Go watch the 1 hour episode Fox News aired on these so-called-facts.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Duwelon
The OP said there is bias in favor of Obama, which honestly isn't surprising given that most journalists are overwhelmingly liberal, yet your saying this isn't true. Which post has actually provided evidence that the OP is factually wrong?

The fact that the OP was posted by ProfJohn.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Duwelon
The OP said there is bias in favor of Obama, which honestly isn't surprising given that most journalists are overwhelmingly liberal, yet your saying this isn't true. Which post has actually provided evidence that the OP is factually wrong?

The fact that the OP was posted by ProfJohn.

I forgot, you're not intellectually honest enough to not resort to this kind of crap post. The only people that you appeal to with the above are those who are already blinded by their hatred to not even consider truth in what their "enemies" say. The fact that you posted that crap speaks more about your character than it does ProfJohns.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Answer... the media has still barely covered the Ayers thing.

We have investigative reports on the Alaska pipe line, but know NOTHING about the working relationship between Obama and Ayers. They shared an office together. Obama steered over a million dollars towards Ayers etc etc. Where are the investigative reports on that stuff? Why do I have to read right wing web site to learn these facts?

Didn't you intend to say, "so-called facts?"

Why is it that you assume that what you read on right-wing web sites is factual? Have you considered the possibility that the reason you do NOT read about these so-called facts in the MSM is that these incidents are fabrications and there's nothing to report?

In other words, you would like everyone to believe there is nothing to report.

Go watch the 1 hour episode Fox News aired on these so-called-facts.

Is there a report that analyzes the % of favorable coverage for Mccain vs Obama on Foxnews?
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
No matter how the right tries to put pig shit on the lips of Obama, everybody can see with their own eyes what lying fucks they are. Only the most dim witted of people see with their ears by listening to sliming scum.

You actually posted something coherent, though it was totally devoid of concrete examples. Still, props to improvement!

The example is the OP of this thread which, I would have thought, would be obvious I was replying to, as well as he added data supplied here by others.

Johnnie proclaims Michael Malone a 'career reporter'.

Whose 'career' centered around writing for soap operas One Life to Live and Another World.

:laugh:


Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Robor

The fact that the OP was posted by ProfJohn.

I forgot, you're not intellectually honest enough to not resort to this kind of crap post. The only people that you appeal to with the above are those who are already blinded by their hatred to not even consider truth in what their "enemies" say. The fact that you posted that crap speaks more about your character than it does ProfJohns.


See Above for Johnnie's "intellectual honesty".
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,496
20,608
146
Originally posted by: OrByte
goodness another media bias thread?

Answer this question: If the media is sooo biased, and soooo influential in political matters, how on earth did the media allow GWB to get elected not once but TWICE!?

The problem here is simple. The republican brand is in the sh!tter and the resident GOP diehards don't want to deal with that reality. Im sorry to say this, but the GOP is going to get lamblasted this election and it isn't the media's fault. It isn't the liberals fault either. It is your own damn fault.

figure out why.
:thumbsup:

 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Originally posted by: OrByte
goodness another media bias thread?

Answer this question: If the media is sooo biased, and soooo influential in political matters, how on earth did the media allow GWB to get elected not once but TWICE!?

The problem here is simple. The republican brand is in the sh!tter and the resident GOP diehards don't want to deal with that reality. Im sorry to say this, but the GOP is going to get lamblasted this election and it isn't the media's fault. It isn't the liberals fault either. It is your own damn fault.

figure out why.
:thumbsup:

This is the simple truth. Pointing fingers won't fix it and blaming the media just makes it worse. It just delays the inevitable.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Maybe, just maybe it's because media reflects what most people want?
You really believe that??

Explain 2004 then.
Media:
50% Democrat
22% Republican

Actual result 51% Republican 48% Democrat.

The only reason I can imagine you think this matters is that you think people are so unprofessional that they are unable to do their jobs because of political affiliation. This may reflect upon how YOU view the world, but that's pretty much it.

As far as media bias in this campaign, are you people insane? Maybe there are more negative stories out there about McCain because he has run a horrendous campaign, picked one of the worst running mates in US presidential history, has been wildly lurching around pulling cheap political stunt after cheap political stunt, and has run a negative campaign so ridiculous and full of lies that even Karl Rove called him out on it in an electoral atmosphere where anything Republican is pretty much DOA against an incredibly charismatic figure who also happens to be the first black presidential candidate in history.

If the media were reporting this race as if both parties were equal, they would be guilty of journalistic malpractice. That would be the true crime, for the media to bow to the never ending cries of the rabid right, the party of personal responsibility that has found yet another scapegoat to excuse their complete and utter failure. "It's not our fault everyone hates us, it's the librul media!"

You people are pathetic. Grow up and take responsibility. You're losing because the party you stand behind has royally fucked up this country. Take your electoral lumps like a man and stop desperately searching for why it isn't your fault McCain is losing so badly.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: jimmyj68
Reverend Wright was/is an outspoken somewhat irresponsible preacher. But my money is on the fact you'll find his counterpart(s) in a lot of "White" churches. Why do you think Sunday still remains the most segregated day of the week? Oh; and lest we forget, America's white churches used the Bible to justify slavery, segragation, Jim Crow and the lingering doubt that still causes many White people to pause when it comes to a Black man in the "White" House.
If John McCain spent 20 years in one of those 'white' churches do you think the media would give him a pass?

Maybe they would report on it nonstop for the better part of a month. How many thousands of times were those Rev. Wright clips played by the 'librul media'? How many hours of programming nationwide were spent discussing it? What would they have had to do in order to not be 'giving him a pass'? Actually string Obama up themselves?

Do you have the memory of a goldfish or something?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: shira
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Answer... the media has still barely covered the Ayers thing.

We have investigative reports on the Alaska pipe line, but know NOTHING about the working relationship between Obama and Ayers. They shared an office together. Obama steered over a million dollars towards Ayers etc etc. Where are the investigative reports on that stuff? Why do I have to read right wing web site to learn these facts?

Didn't you intend to say, "so-called facts?"

Why is it that you assume that what you read on right-wing web sites is factual? Have you considered the possibility that the reason you do NOT read about these so-called facts in the MSM is that these incidents are fabrications and there's nothing to report?

One final thing. Pro-Jo, you are also insane about "barely covering" the Ayers thing. Type "ayers" into google, you will turn up almost 14,000,000 hits. I scrolled through quite a few of the pages, and nearly every link is a mainstream media story on the topic. For you to say they "barely covered" it would require a total suspension of reality.

As a comparison, the US landing on the moon has approximately 1 million hits, and the US constitution 8.5 million. I guess according to Pro-Jo they must not exist at all.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Topic Title: Media's Presidential Bias and Decline
Topic Summary: Columnist Michael Malone Looks at Slanted Election Coverage and the Reasons Why

The New York Times is already on its death bed it seems.

A few more quarters of losses could change the face of the paper and with it the entire industry.

Newspaper print has been on it's "deathbed" since Al Gore and I invented the Internets, it has nothing to do with Obama.

The only thing slanted is you and your Republican buds heads.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Topic Title: Media's Presidential Bias and Decline
Topic Summary: Columnist Michael Malone Looks at Slanted Election Coverage and the Reasons Why

The New York Times is already on its death bed it seems.

A few more quarters of losses could change the face of the paper and with it the entire industry.

Newspaper print has been on it's "deathbed" since Al Gore and I invented the Internets, it has nothing to do with Obama.

The only thing slanted is you and your Republican buds heads.

I like how the conservatives scream 'bias!' as to why print media is declining instead of looking at the incredibly obvious reasons, that being the internet for news and craigslist/ebay/etc for classifieds.

Pro-Jo's problem with this is that he already has decided the media is biased and no matter how many mountains of evidence are presented to him that it isn't, he has his opinion reinforced by the right wing media he consumes. There's no way to dent that.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
That is the new GOP talking point, its the media that is killing McCain, and as a talking point, everyone and their damn brother law in the GOP obediently parrots that line. And its especially the far right that parrots that line mostly loudly , because its they and GWB who are most responsible for the sad and sorry present state of the GOP.

Because its GWB and his stinking public policies that have brought this nation to its knees. And its cause and effect, bad public policy lead to bad results, even with adding 4 trillion to public debt,
GWB can barely sustain the economy, and has damn near collapsed, the world wide banking system, and America is more divided now than before.

The election of 11/2006 was that clear message that the American people had enough of GWB, and what did the GOP do in 2007&08, they rallied closer to GWB than ever. Then the GOP electorate selected McCain, GWB's harshest critic, and still the far right did not wake up.

In a sense, it did not matter who the GOP nominated for 08, the GWB R label would taint them, but if you GOP republirats can't at least all support McCain, its divided you will fail.

But earth to the GOP earth to the GOP, you need to return to your old values as exemplified by people like Warner, DiMedici, and Hagel, and Lugar. If the GOP tries to run to the right like Limbaugh wants you to,
you are finished as a national party.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Topic Title: ProfJohn's Bias and Credibility Decline
Topic Summary: Apologist ProfJohn Whines About Allegedly Slanted Election Coverage

Fixed it for ya. No need to thank me. :cool:

Hey, PJ -- Your party's candidates for President and Vice Presiden are tukeys who continue to get caught up in their own lies, double speak, gaffs and stupidity. Simply reporting the events accurately as they occur makes them look bad for one reason -- They ARE that wrong, they ARE that dumb, and they ARE that bad. :p

Even Rupert's own "fair and balanced" media sycophants can no longer duck that reality. :laugh:
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: Infohawk
It's just another post n' run. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't the same broken record complaint about the "MSM."

I hope not. PJ - you've got a forum to speak - so speak - and back it up.

*edit - PJ ran away....

hey, PJ, I'd still love to see the links to the sites you find back up your idea of truth...

AWW!! You Make John Go Poof! Him No Comin' Back No More! Him Got No Sites To Back UP Him Drivel!
Can we equate a war protester who did want to bomb empty Government buildings to people who now kill innocent civilians to further their interests?
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,056
27,785
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Jack, the Rev. Wright story was a gold mine. But it took the media months to get around to telling the story. It appeared on the 'right wing' media MONTHS before the MSM started to talk about it.

Bill Ayers is another possible media gold mine. Obama made statements down playing his relationship with Ayers. There seems to be a LOT of evidence to suggest that Obama and Ayers working relationship was far greater than Obama wants us to believe, but no one in the MSM wants to touch the story.

And what about Obama's record in the state senate? There has been virtually NO coverage of those 8 years.

If the media ever turned against Obama it could get real ugly. But I doubt we will ever see that happen.
The media after 9/11 failed too many times to question the Bush administration especially in their run up to the Iraq war. I think occasionally thay are beholden to what is going on currently and stick to those narratives.

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: HomerJS
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Jack, the Rev. Wright story was a gold mine. But it took the media months to get around to telling the story. It appeared on the 'right wing' media MONTHS before the MSM started to talk about it.

Bill Ayers is another possible media gold mine. Obama made statements down playing his relationship with Ayers. There seems to be a LOT of evidence to suggest that Obama and Ayers working relationship was far greater than Obama wants us to believe, but no one in the MSM wants to touch the story.

And what about Obama's record in the state senate? There has been virtually NO coverage of those 8 years.

If the media ever turned against Obama it could get real ugly. But I doubt we will ever see that happen.
The media after 9/11 failed too many times to question the Bush administration especially in their run up to the Iraq war. I think occasionally thay are beholden to what is going on currently and stick to those narratives.

Wait a minute, I thought Obama didn't pass any significant bills in the state senate!? You guys need to all get on the same script. Does he have no record of any note in the state senate, or does he have a bad record? He really can't have both. You have to choose your attacks Pro-Jo.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
umm I have a life outside of P&N, sorry guys.

Some links:
They shared an office in the same building as shown 100% by this evidence.
link
They have tax records for the Annenberg Challenge and a web site for Bill Ayers' Small Schools Workshop, both have the same address.

Obama, as director of the Annenberg Challenge, directed over $1 million to the Small Schools Network a group which Ayers was co-director.

None of this would matter, except Obama LIED to the American people about his relationship, or at least tried to seriously downplay it.

In a debate Obama said
"George this is of what I'm talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from... The notion that somehow that by me knowing someone who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old somehow reflects on my values doesn't make much sense George."
A guy who lived in his neighborhood, shared an office in the same building, directed a million dollars towards, served on two academic panels with an held a fundraiser at his house.

So tell me why the MSM has not reported any of these facts? Why do I know more about conversations Sarah Palin had about banning books than about the working relationship between Obama and Ayers?

And how many New York Times articles have been written about Obama and Ayers?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,055
48,050
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
umm I have a life outside of P&N, sorry guys.

Some links:
They shared an office in the same building as shown 100% by this evidence.
link
They have tax records for the Annenberg Challenge and a web site for Bill Ayers' Small Schools Workshop, both have the same address.

Obama, as director of the Annenberg Challenge, directed over $1 million to the Small Schools Network a group which Ayers was co-director.

None of this would matter, except Obama LIED to the American people about his relationship, or at least tried to seriously downplay it.

In a debate Obama said
"George this is of what I'm talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from... The notion that somehow that by me knowing someone who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old somehow reflects on my values doesn't make much sense George."
A guy who lived in his neighborhood, shared an office in the same building, directed a million dollars towards, served on two academic panels with an held a fundraiser at his house.

So tell me why the MSM has not reported any of these facts? Why do I know more about conversations Sarah Palin had about banning books than about the working relationship between Obama and Ayers?

And how many New York Times articles have been written about Obama and Ayers?

The mainstream media has reported on every single one of those facts.

That is except for them being on the same floor of an office building, because that would be stupid and pointless innuendo beneath any responsible journalist.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Pointless and stupid??? Obama is down playing their relationship, wouldn't showing that they worked in the same building raise questions about how honest Obama is being?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
You are truly diseased, PJ. The Annenberg Challenge and the Small Schools Workshop shared a mailing address, not surprising since the Annenberg Challenge largely funded the Small Schools Workshop... Both Obama and Ayers sat on the Annenberg Board at the time. That doesn't mean Ayers and Obama "shared an office", no matter how much you'd like to say it does...

If it weren't so funny, it'd be pathetic. Ayers! Ayers! Ayers! Ayers! Attack! Attack! Attack!

The MSM has reported the facts- they just haven't spread the usual FUD, which is apparently your mission.

The alleged relationship between Ayers and Obama is one of the most investigated aspects of today's politics- the reason we don't hear much about it is that there's nothing there, other than in the fevered bunker mentality imaginations of the Right...