Liberal Media Bias

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Very interesting  article/observations by former CEO of liberal National Public Radio (NPR)

http://nypost.com/2017/10/21/the-other-half-of-america-that-the-liberal-media-doesnt-cover/

[AuburnNTexas 7,134]

Good post and good reading. He recognizes the split in the country and realizes that the people in the media centers because they live in their own isolated world can't relate to middle America. To often the media yells the equivalent of wolf by calling anybody who disagrees with them a racist.

Middle America is not one group of people we don't fit stereotypes. I am an old white conservative male. The Liberal media would hear that I am an old while conservative male and immediately classify me as a white supremacist. I am against illegal immigration and yet I help illegal immigrants fill out paper work to become legal. I have a friend a good bit younger than me who came here as a child illegally but married a US citizen, has a job, children and was deported back to Mexico.  I helped him with paperwork trying to become legal before he was deported and when his family did not have enough money to sponsor him for his return. I sponsored him and he is now a green Card living legally.  I work with a church group called PHP (People Helping People) the part I work with has a web site where people who have gently used furniture will donate it and then we will pick it up and deliver to people who need it.  My point is I don't fit the stereotype most people don't.

I am married to a Latina, my kids are obviously mixed and they are conservatives also. I have tried to live my life and teach my kids my christian values, I would say I try to teach my wife those same values but to be honest she probably teaches me more when it comes to being a Christian.

My point is conservatives are not the evil people the media tries to make it appear we are. Do I know conservatives who are racists and who believe men are superior to women? Yes, but I disagree with them and I tell them I disagree with them but I also know liberals who once you get to know them and get past the facade are racists and believe men are superior to women. I also know liberals who are the salt of the earth and are the epitome of Christian values love one another as you love God, love your enemy, etc.

The problem with the Press and many people is everything is black and white, if you disagree with me on one issue you are my enemy.

During Hurricane Harvey while I was appalled by the damage and destruction I was also amazed by the basic goodness of people. I saw pictures of human chains of people rescuing others from cars or homes. I would see all of humanity in the chain Men, Women, Hispanics, Blacks, Whites, Asians, etc. That is the real story of Harvey. The media basically glossed over that. We need more feel good stories out of the media.  They need to publish the news but who says the news is only about anger, loss, tragedy, violence.

 

[Auburn85 432]

I'll say it every chance I get. 

It was ok for Clinton to be buddy buddy with Trump. Go to his wedding. But it wasn't ok to vote for Trump. That made you a deplorable.

 

It was ok for Clinton to hang around Harvey Weinstein, but if you were a woman who voted against Clinton, you voted against your own voice. 

It was ok for Clinton  to hang around Meryl Streep who is a pedophile sympathizer and who called Harvey Weinstein a God. But it wasn't ok for women to vote for Bernie Sanders. They were told that there was a special place in hell for them. Told that they only liked Bernie because some of the younger boys was with Bernie and apparently these shallow women only supported Bernie because they were looking for dates.

 

All of this sh*t they treaded lightly for Clinton  but they will go full throat assault on middle america with some aspects of their life they don't like.

All of these educated people have such disdain for people that they can't see straight. Or they give them the low expectation mentality that their sympathy towards middle america is also condescending because of their lack of education. Thus, the media is so much smarter than them that it hurts.

 

I do think CNN is liberal bias.

I do think MSNBC is liberal bias.

I do not think FOX is liberal bias. They are conservative bias.  If someone wants to play ping pong. Spare me. Start a thread about conservative bias. I will gladly join you.. We can discuss terrorists fist bumps. But mainly I would like a distintion to be made. I don't want someone like Hannity to be equated with someone like Brian Stelter. Because one is a talking the head. The other is presented to the audience as neutral.

For example, Brian Stelter of CNN is presented to us as a neutral anchor covering the news media. I think he's far from neutral.

That's why I single him out He's is so far off the reservation with his Russia Today coverage. He doesn't even attempt to be neutral or fair. Is he being purposely deceitful or is he being sincere and he is just mistaken?

I am conservative. I am bias at times.  So now what?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Auburn85 432]

I would say another liberal bias blind spot is an article like this:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/05/marco-rubio-and-his-wife-cited-17-times-for-traffic-infractions-2/

The New York Times actually took the time to research how many traffic tickets Marco Rubio and his wife received.

Keep in mind, this was not an editorial, but rather a neutral news article.

 

New York Times asked their readers to help them go through Sarah Palin's emails.

 

https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/help-us-investigate-the-sarah-palin-e-mail-records/

 

I'm still looking so please correct me if the New York Times made a similar post in wanting their readers to help look through Clinton's emails.

 

 

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AuburnNTexas and Auburn 85........fantastic posts. Thank you

[Auburn85 432]

Get a little peak here:

 

[Auburn85 432]

same guy who  knows zero Trump supporters says this at the same event:

 

[Auburn85 432]

10 minute segment on a GIF post made on Twitter:

Maybe Stelter is trolling the audience? After all he is aware that the WWE is fake. Maybe this is his version of a wrestling promo?

 

[Auburn85 432]

This is the sh*t I'm talking about.

 

 

Stelter's wants us to be all serious about words and gif posts Trump has said and posted about the media. And that the words and posts are dangerous and unprecedented.

Then, one of Stelter's  guest makes a great point about actions. So in response, Stelter ends the segment with a nursery rhyme. 

For this issue, it's not just Stelter. Some journalist are themselves or want the audience to be more fearful of words, posts, and hypotheticals than actual real, documented, actions.

[Auburn85 432]

Another blind spot here.

CNN "fact checks" an SNL skit.

 

[Auburn85 432]

Neutral anchor Anderson Cooper

 

[Auburn85 432]

CNN vs Obama rodeo clown: They can't simply make it about the rodeo clown. It's a heavy focus on right wing commentators defending the rodeo clown with the Obama rodeo clown being a secondary issue. Even have to get  a reporter to contact the Secret Service and make a live report back to CNN.

And now CNN vs Kathy Griffin:

 

[AUFAN78 3,892]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/23/10-times-cnn-told-us-an-apple-was-a-banana/

[Auburn85 432]

A neutral staff writer for the Washington Post commenting about why she wasn't covering Gosnell:

 

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Auburn85.......some great posts!!!

[Auburn85 432]

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/358983-media-shows-why-its-so-mistrusted-after-falsified-trump-fish-feeding

 

Media shows why it’s so mistrusted after falsified Trump fish-feeding ‘story’

It happened again — major media outlets and reporters getting caught red-handed misleading the public. 

And in this case, it was all over arguably the stupidest thing possible. 

 

You may have read by now that President Trump decided to dump a whole box of fish food into a koi pond while on his 13-day Asia trip. The implication, of course, is that a graceless brute like Trump has no idea about foreign customs and/or cares about the environment. 

 

Here's a few examples:  

Bloomberg's White House reporter:

New York Magazine: Trump Under Fire for Improper Fish-Feeding Technique

Jezebel:

CNBC’s Christina Wilkie (in a now-deleted tweet): “Trump and Japanese PM Shinzo Abe were scheduled to feed koi spoonfuls of food. Until Trump poured his entire box of fish food into the pond.” 

New York Daily News: Photo of Donald Trump dumping fish food into koi pond during Japan visit draws Obama comparisons 

The Guardian: “White House reporters, keen perhaps to pick up on a Trump gaffe, captured the moment when he upended his box on their smartphones and tweeted evidence of his questionable grasp of fish keeping. Some speculated that a poor palace employee would be dispatched to the scene to clean up the mess as soon as the two leaders disappeared inside.”

CNN: Trump feeds fish, winds up pouring entire box of food into koi pond

The CNN example includes edited video that zooms in on Trump to only show his face and prevents the viewer from seeing what Japanese Prime Minister Abe was doing at a key point of the short event.  

Why was Abe edited out? Perhaps because he took his entire box of fish food and dumped it into the pond. Trump followed Abe's lead and did the same seconds later.   

In other words — nothing to see here. 

But with the zoom edit cutting Abe out, the viewer or reader — with an assist from the caption — is led to believe only Trump dumped his box. 

So with this latest gaffe from numerous outlets in today's effort to make the president look like a dolt, it's another black eye for an industry that resembles Apollo Creed's face during his fatal fight against Ivan Drago in Rocky IV. 

So the obvious question is this: Why pick a fight with Trump — who is mostly polling in the 30s and has no major legislative victories despite having majorities in the House and Senate — over something so ridiculous as fish-feeding? By doing so, it only perfectly makes the argument for Trump that the media is not only overwhelmingly negative in covering him, as study after study shows, but it's at times also hostile, adversarial and — most importantly in this case — fake. 

How bad is the damage on the fake front? Check out this poll provided exclusively to The Hill from Harvard University and Harris, which shows 65 percent of Americans think there is a lot of fake news in the mainstream media.

The sentiment is carried by a majority across party lines, with 80 percent of Republicans, 60 percent of independents and 53 percent of Democrats stating such. Even more telling, 84 percent of voters said it is hard to know what news to believe online.

Bob Woodward probably gave the best advice during his speech at this year's White House Correspondents Dinner. 

"Whatever the climate, whether the media’s revered or reviled, we should and must persist, and, I believe, we will," the Watergate legend said. 

"We also need to face the reality that polling numbers show that most Americans disapprove of and distrust the media. This is no time for self-satisfaction or smugness," 

Our media can't afford any more of this kind of reporting marinated in the kind of smugness Woodward has keenly noticed. 

It needs to be almost perfect. And when mistakes are made, it needs to own up to them. 

Another day, another example of media bias. 

Oftentimes that bias is subtle. 

But in this feeding frenzy, it was not only blatantly overt, but intentional in its deception. 

 

Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) is a media reporter for The Hill.

[Auburn85 432]

Keep in mind each person speaking in this clip is presented as a reporter or correspondent , not a bias contributor.

 

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Auburn85....notice the silence from the left.

[homersapien 11,357]