Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Again, WHAT liberal media!?
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 18, 2011 at 6:05 pm #598659
dawsonctParticipantIf you saw Palin’s speech in Wisconsin, this is probably what you saw and heard, presented by the main-stream CORPORATIST media:
Oh how nice! what support! The people LOVE Sarah!
This is what you heard if you were actually standing in the audience:
And this is the response from Breitbart, who makes more in speaker and appearance fees than those gosh-darn greedy public employees do all year long.
He thinks Americans with a different point of view should either shut TF up, or “go to hell.” What an ass.
You Republicans can follow these buffoons, but they ascend to power to the detriment of us and our Nation.
BTW, all the dog-whistle terms they use to keep you dupes in line, keeping teh gays from getting married, big-government regulation of the wombs of adult women, keeping the damned libruhls from takin’ yer guns, will never happen. They KNOW if they deliver on the social issues that keep you voting for them, you will START to examine their economic policies and understand how destructive it is to your community and your accustomed way-of-life.
April 18, 2011 at 6:07 pm #722737
dawsonctParticipantWhoops! THIS is the response from Breitbart:
WATCH: Andrew Breitbart to Wisconsin Labor Activists: “Go to Hell”
What the hell has he ever done for his Nation? He is just a leach.
April 18, 2011 at 10:55 pm #722738
JoBParticipantApril 18, 2011 at 11:57 pm #722739
dawsonctParticipantFeel free to spread them around, LIBERALLY, JoB!
April 19, 2011 at 3:21 am #722740
JoBParticipantApril 19, 2011 at 4:50 pm #722741
dawsonctParticipantHmm, I thought I’d get at least ONE person defending Sarah or Breitbart or the T-partiers. Wonder if they are finally getting a sense of shame.
More likely they haven’t received the official talking points, so they have nothing to say.
Even MORE likely, they never saw any of this on the corporatist main-stream media, so aren’t even aware of it happening.
April 19, 2011 at 4:52 pm #722742
JoBParticipanteven more likely…
they spent their spleen on another topic…
if we keep this one alive for a few days they will find it…
or.. cross post the link to the last topic where they were active ;->
April 19, 2011 at 11:28 pm #722743
DPMemberLet’s see . . . Breitbart, Breitbart . . . where have I heard that name before?
Oh yeah! This is the blogger who took some remarks by a black federal employee (Shirley Sherrod) and repackaged them to make her sound like a racist, when she was actually speaking out AGAINST racism.
Sherrod lost her job over Mr. Breitbart’s dirty little trick, but even after it became clear that her remarks had been taken grossly out of context, Breitbart refused to admit his bad.
Story: http://www.slate.com/id/2261552/
Kind of hard to defend someone like that . . .
April 20, 2011 at 12:09 am #722744
dawsonctParticipantYou would think it would DP, too bad it isn’t the case.
He is really impressed with himself.
Next he is going after those greedy middle-class teachers, who ruined our economy with their low pay and deffered compensation.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201104180045
I KNOW Media Matters is one of those wacky left wing “give ’em enough rope and they’ll hang themselves” type of websites, so our friends on the farreich will probably discount it. Done with CGI no doubt, maybe just a good editing job.
April 21, 2011 at 8:14 am #722745
HMC RichParticipantHerr DCT. Vell, you have made your point but I ask you zis. Vun of Stormbanfuhrers’ Breitbart propoganda outlets released a very interesting story regarding full disclosure. Seems zey want ze full recordings and not just soundbites. Schultz!!! Throw zem in ze cooler. Hmmmm. http://biggovernment.com/amarcus/2011/04/20/confirmed-cbs-editors-refuse-to-release-full-audio-of-obama-hot-mic-recording/
Since Herr Breitbart has been found guilty of promoting propaganda vich he has not vatched himself, it seems quite odd that vun of his henchman vould ask for full disclosure of CBS NEWS regarding ze OPEN MIC incident. Very Interesting. But Stupid. Ve know CBS has never been biased in any vay since Herr Cronkite left. Ve have vays of getting ze truth. Sargeant Schultz, cut their coal rations to half. But Colonel, ze weather is going to be very bad. Schultz, just carry out ze order. Ja Vohl Her Capitan.
Hi DawsonCT. This is quite interesting. CBS has the rights to this audio. They can do whatever they feel.
And Breitbart should be discredited for the errors he has made which you correctly point out. But the irony is that one of his sites doesn’t want just the OKeefe version but the full recorded account of the President.
Yes Breitbart certainly has made some very big mistakes. You also forgot to mention how the Obama Administration panicked and had her (Sherrod) resign. She was the victim.
You have to admit the irony of the situation. The guy who didn’t use the entire video now wanting the whole story.
We have heard the President trash people in private before when they thought microphones were not around. I guess transparency is a good talking point but gets in the way of the campaign to get re-elected.
Oh yeah, didn’t Schumer just mess up a bit like this too! Better watch what you say on your conference calls Chucky.
Your Democrats in leadership certainly don’t want the American public to know what you really think.
Auf Veidersehn.
Since ve are the farreich should ve not sound like it too?
I loved Hogan’s Heroes.
April 21, 2011 at 12:46 pm #722746
redblackParticipantrich: from this day forward, i demand that you write all of your posts in that accent.
Your Democrats in leadership certainly don’t want the American public to know what you really think.
i diagrammed this sentence and it still makes no sense.
April 21, 2011 at 4:56 pm #722747
dawsonctParticipantHmm, so how does your response address the MAIN issue, Rich, that the CORPORATIST main-stream media, not LIBERAL, not CONSERVATIVE, but CORPORATIST media controls the narrative in this country. The majority sees and hears ONLY the news that the oligarchs who own the corporations that run the media outlets want you to receive.
And frankly, they want the UNCRITICAL thinker, usually rather conservative, to BELIEVE that “the media” is a product of a vast liberal conspiracy.
In this specific case, the ONLY version of the video you saw on the mainstream media was the first video, which gives you the impression that Palin was giving quite the barn-burner of a speech, when the reality was that she couldn’t get her message out through the loud protestation of the crowd.
If all of America saw how she was being received, in context, they would have a much different opinion of her popularity.
But It seems you don’t have a problem with the manipulation, as long as the entities for which you cheer-lead are the perpetrators.
April 23, 2011 at 11:28 am #722748
HMC RichParticipantYou must be right DawsonCT. I am a drone. We are Sheep. We are not men. We are Devo. I must devolve. Power to De-evolution. Reboot, Power Cycle, Boot Up.
The power of the nightly news shows and even the cable networks is vanishing in some cases and changing drastically in others. It is like Ice Cream. We choose the flavors we like.
Some of us like good looking attractive people telling us “the news”. Others actually want the news. I used to love watching the BBC and their presenters. Then they started grooming their people for looks. Oh, there was still a left bias but it was a British bias.
Almost All of the networks want to do is make money, win the ratings, and maybe get some awards. They don’t care if the Executive Producer is liberal or conservative or a Martian. They want the bottom line to make the shareholder happy and get more dividends. They also want maximum bang for their buck. News divisions are under tremendous financial pressures and it is a cut throat world in many of these places. Technology has replaced a lot of good people. It has also made the mediums and media better in a lot of ways. A new class of media organizations are out there. Competition and opportunity are out there.
Blessedly, we have more and more channels, sources, domestic and international. All with different points of view. It is wonderful. I Like It.
But for America, I want all of the media outlets to distrust the government. It is their job. And I have stated this over and over. Nothing should ever be “off the record”.
The Maddows, O’Reilly’s, Stewarts, etc are entertainment in a news setting. But I can watch KBTC 28.2 and see the BBC, DuetschesWelle, NHK, RT, and a whole slew of news shows. I can turn to the internet to blogs, blogs, blogs. I get tweeted and facebooked by social media. I can turn to cable and dish for the main corporate propogandized stories of the day. Or some of the newer alternative news and current affairs stations. I use my smartphone for my favorite News Apps. WOW, this is cool!!!
But you know the place that I like best? This little blog right here. The West Seattle Blog. You know why? Because they are true journalists who report the facts of what is going on in our community. They are run by a very good and seasoned professional. I know some of their former colleagues, and we are fortunate. Plus, we get the opportunity for (mostly) civil discussions here in the forum. Talk about a very interactive experience.
As far as the Wisconsin speech, through the use of a variety of media accessed through the web, I had already deduced what you were trying to get across. Not everyone, especially some older or less well off have that luxury.
So yes, there is bias. I know people who work and have worked at the big news stations.
So what are you complaining about? Do you want state run news organizations? Do you want the fairness doctrine reinstated? If you are complaining about biased content, you have a point. But I don’t agree with all of it.
I have proven before that about 88% of the beltway reporters vote for Democrats. I have seen a bias from them. If a Republican gets in trouble, the stories almost always say REPUBLICAN senator…
but quite often the sin of omission in labels for Democrats comes through.
Conservatives RULE THE RADIO airwaves. 1090 has an audience but the older conservative likes their free commercially supported AM talk radio choice. Television stations in my not so humble opinion are just a little more liberal in bigger cities and just a little more conservative in smaller markets. MSNBC is opposite of FOX News. Others fit somewhere in between. Newspapers seem to be the same way. But the internet. How I love the variety.
But, I must ask. I do not care for the “greedy” corporatist but I love the “Capitalist”. What is your beef with them? You have made it crystal clear that you are not a fan. As far as I am concerned you are advocating your thoughts. Good for you.
April 23, 2011 at 4:59 pm #722749
dawsonctParticipantI don’t have ANY problem with capitalism, it’s UNRESTRAINED capitalism that is the problem.
The libertarian mind-set that is dictating Republican Party philosophy is bankrupt (and will bankrupt our Nation).
Just as a football game where the home team get to set the rules, can change them at will, and supplies their own referees, won’t be much of a contest, when the massive multi-national corporations who the Republican Party ONLY represent do the same, it is to OUR Nation’s detriment.
I fully expect to go into business myself someday soon. I am NOT anti-business (again, you are exhibiting the USUAL B & W thinking of a Republican, Rich), I am just against unrestrained capitalism, which WILL destroy our Nation.
April 23, 2011 at 10:42 pm #722750
c@lbobMemberAnderew Breitbart is untrustworthy to me because he used excerpts of Sherrod’s comments to make it appear that she was saying the opposite of the point of her story. Now, Breitbart is attempting to say that everybody does it, in an attempt to clear himself. Does Obama think American workers are slugs, I don’t think so. Is it unreasonable to believe that people who get nearly $150K a year from their government’s oil profits wouldn’t be particularly worried about democracy in that government? Not to me, although that attitude may be short sighted on their part. Breitbart wants to do the selective editing, but he has proven not to be up to the job, IMHO.
Even those slightly liberal outlets that you put forward, Maddow and the rest, all have the same problem – although Maddow has it the least. That problem is they all talk about the same pointless stories. The debate over the budget has been about cutting the deficit at a time when that is the least important thing we do, worse it could be counter-productive. Even a “liberal” Senator like Richard Durbin is now proposing cuts is SS and eventually privatizing it. Capitulation in light of hollow opposition, that’s what the corporate media likes.
April 23, 2011 at 11:35 pm #722751
JoBParticipantHMCRich…
MSNBC is the opposite of FOX?
in your dreams…
You want to see left leaning reporting?
Try LINK TV…
they even broadcast Al Jazeer
April 24, 2011 at 10:55 am #722752
HMC RichParticipantThink what you might JoB. I have watched LINK TV when I had a dish. They are not MSNBC. That is true. But whatever.
And Al Jazeera can be watched over the air. To each their own. Like I said. Many flavors to chose from.
April 24, 2011 at 10:57 am #722753
HMC RichParticipantRedblack, you are right. The Democrats in leadership do want the rank and file to know what the spin is. They just release it a bit before they want to sometimes.
April 24, 2011 at 11:13 am #722754
HMC RichParticipantOh DawsonCT, sometimes you surprise me.
One. You and I both do not want un-regulated corporatists, we just might disagree on the degree.
Two. Pardon me but your shoe is untied. In 2008 Corporations gave more to Democrats than Republicans. But you will see a graph that shows Historically businesses have given more to the Republicans. So you are partially right but the times are a changin’. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121996098615981191.html?mod=special_page_campaign2008_leftbox
or how about more recently to the Governors Associations: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/11/democrats-and-republicans-sharing-b.html
Seems like the lobbyists are busy with both parties.
So are the Democrats just as greedy as the Republicans? Looks that way.
Three. Irresponsible spending and not enough tax revenues are going to kill the country. Both parties are at fault. Admit it. You are being too partisan.
I do wish people in general were more ethical. I think diminishing integrity is hurting our country and the rest of the world. There are bright spots but a lot of dark spots too.
April 24, 2011 at 4:46 pm #722755
redblackParticipantBut for America, I want all of the media outlets to distrust the government. It is their job. And I have stated this over and over. Nothing should ever be “off the record”.
so you want the fourth estate to have a built-in bias. that’s weird.
i want the fourth estate to report the truth and nothing but.
The Maddows, O’Reilly’s, Stewarts, etc are entertainment in a news setting.
what news setting? none such exists in the united states.
Irresponsible spending and not enough tax revenues are going to kill the country. Both parties are at fault. Admit it. You are being too partisan.
oh, i know we’re spending way too much… on war, health insurance, and corporate hegemony. we’re not spending anywhere near enough on domestic programs and infrastructure.
lastly: hi, c@lbob!
April 24, 2011 at 5:16 pm #722756
DPMemberYeah, good to see you back, c@lbob. I thought maybe you’d changed your name and moved to Hollywood.
April 24, 2011 at 5:29 pm #722757
JoBParticipantHMCRich…
the only way you could watch LINK TV
or Al Jazeera for that matter
and not see the difference between them and MSNBC
is if you have bought the lie
that anything left of far right is far left.
It’s all that stuff they don’t show you on MSNBC that is the real clincher.
Yes, the corporatists are now funding democrats..
you seem to think that means something?
what you don’t seem to get is that we (on the left)
can see past the immediacy of winning the election
and don’t think corporate sponsorship is such a good thing long term.
April 25, 2011 at 1:25 pm #722758
redblackParticipantjo: corporatists funding democrats probably has a lot to do with the fact that they know new regulations are on voters’ minds, and they’re spending as much as they can to mitigate same.
you know, kind of how they threw a bunch of money at republican causes to get regulations loosened or removed in the first place.
April 25, 2011 at 4:40 pm #722759
JoBParticipantredblack…
Yes..
buying votes on regulation is exactly what they have in mind…
wish they weren’t so danged efficient :(
April 26, 2011 at 8:15 am #722760
HMC RichParticipantEven when your guys do it, you still spin it. You guys crack me up.
Regarding the fourth estate, fine, we use your words.
There is news everywhere. Whether it be right wing, left wing, middle of the road or parody. I rarely agree with any Rolling Stone political piece which will most always slant to left but at least they say what is on their mind. And if it shows an abuse of power with a politician, then that is good.
Also, if it be across the whole spectrum and brings out problems with government, I am all for it.
But there is bias whether some of you want to admit it or not.
You might be right that there is not any un-biased news, but there is enough information out there to make informed choices. It sometimes takes a while to sift through it.
Excluding them does not help us. Choosing not to watch or read is everyones choice. Are we not better off with a whole spectrum of choices?
Regarding an earlier post. We are not spending enough on the right kind of domestic programs and infrastructure.
JoB, here is the definition of far right.
Adj. 1. far-right – extremely conservative
and far left –
adjective radical or extremely liberal
So I guess the word “extreme” can be used for the right. And the word “radical” can be used for the left.
I don’t buy it or your propaganda.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.