The MSM is Liberal?? You Don't Say...
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 09-30-2008 - 11:29pm |
I guess you can call it a double-edged sword. People say stay informed and know the issues. They tell you to watch the news. They tell you read the newspaper, but when you seek out these sources in your quest to stay enlightened you end up getting frustrated, especially if you are conservative or subscribe to traditional American values. Why? Because you are being force fed pure, unadulterated liberal BS chock full of their biased views. So the next time you just happen to sit down in front of the TV, pick up the newspaper or click on that webpage don't question that feeling in the pit of your stomach. Because if you're anything like me you probably want to throw up because it is no secret as to what the liberal media is trying to do. These organizations have the audacity to try to pass the garbage they peddle on the public as objective news reporting. And it just gets progressively worse every year. The news coverage of the presidential primaries and general election season has been and is an absolute farce. Most major media outlets and their talking heads are nothing more than a marketing arm of the Barack Obama campaign. To these people this man can do no wrong. He possesses no real experience or major accomplishments, can outright lie through his teeth and

Pages
<
you want to make this thread about who they can get
The mainstream media has become less reliable.
>>Interestingly, the bloggers are the new sources for accurate reporting.
The biggest problem with bloggers is that their stories are often not vetted or edited. When a newsroom is working well, the journalists and editors are working hand in hand to check one another's facts and figures. When I turn in a story, I provide all of my source information -- sometimes including the taped interviews. The details are fact-checked by a third party. Because of time constraints, this is not the case for most daily newspapers, but the editors still play a crucial role in pointing out inaccuracies, bias, etc. Stories are read by many, many people before they are published.
Andrew Sullivan has gotten himself in a lot of trouble lately for posting inaccurate information. Earlier this week he accused McCain of saying "horsesh**" under his breath during the debate. Closer inspection showed that he was saying "of course." Sullivan is an opinion writer. No one should be getting their news from him or anyone else writing opinion pieces.
Your last graf is right on. The current administration has certainly hampered the press's ability to do its job.
Laura
About
I referenced the NYT's problems in another thread. First it was Judith Miller and WMDs. Then they sat on the illegal-wiretapping story.
Laura
Online news (not blogs) has become a big source of information for me, but I have to take it with a big tablespoon of salt.
>>I wish that one of our local news broadcasts would partner with our paper to produce the news.
The problem is that without journalistic competition, the whole story doesn't necessarily get told. There should be a tension between media outlets. There is simply too much news for one place to cover. When we have a variety of sources, we can get a more complete picture.
I wish our newspaper would cover these stories in more detail. I think newspapers have been the biggest casualty of the information age. They haven't found their niche, which I think it is the long-form, in-depth reporting that we so need.
Laura
Pages