- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 27, 2008 at 5:06 pm #586833
JoBParticipanti just visited media matters following a link someone left on one of the political threads… and followed it to their page on political propaganda…
i was surprised not to see Barak Obama listed in their links list.. Hillary and Bill were both listed. When i followed the link for progressives.. i did find links to a few scattered articles on instances of press bias towards Senator Obama and his wife…
I have always respected Media matters.. and still do.. but the lack of postings on media bias for the Obama’s made me ask if there is bias there.
I was unable to answer that question for myself.. and would like an answer if someone knows more than hubby and i…
but i would also like to ask you to weigh in on the larger issue.. which is how do we uncover bias in our internet sources?
ok.. some places you won’t have to look far… but for others it might be more difficult…
Since i believe it is always important to know the bias of my sources… this matter intrigues me.
April 27, 2008 at 5:31 pm #623167
charlabobParticipantI assume you mean there are allegations of proClinton and proMcCain bias, but no articles alleging proObama bias in their links? The propaganda page I found has links to biased and untrue articles or statements concerning Democratic candidates.
http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/propaganda_noise_machine?f=h_hot
Please post the URL pointing to the page that has links to pro-candidate bias. Currently, the articles on the main propaganda page are primarily debugging attacks on Clinton by Dick Morris, Chris Matthews and other right-wing tools. And one alleging Pelosi can’t be a good Christian because she called the Dali Lama “His Holiness”.
The internet is not different from other media and interactions. In fact, much of the internet information comes from other media and vice versa. WRT blog postings, it’s fairly easy to see where people are coming from. For example, the Huffington Post has biographies of their regular posters and most are open about their biographies. WRT to general blog postings, I believe very little until I research it.
April 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm #623168
AnonymousInactiveDick Morris has a self-explanatory name. He’s bitter and has had it out for both Clintons. No one takes him seriously. Fox uses him as the political equivalent of a stripper. Entertaining fluff. I don’t think he can remotely qualify as media bias. That would be validating this idiot.
April 27, 2008 at 7:12 pm #623169
JoBParticipantJT
i didn’t bother reading most of that crap. i linked the Hillary list somewhere on one of the political threads.. but it really wasn’t worth my time going further… it was a pretty impressive and recent list though.
too much like preaching to the choir:)
i asked about media matters because neither hubby nor i could think of anything we had read that would indicate they had any bias other than anti-corporate media… and i think they sponsor or co-sponsor a pretty big conference that is very well regarded.
but the lack of references to anti-Obama postings was a bit of a yellow flag… it prompted me to ask more questions.
i had to go through a fair number of links to get to that list.. issues/media/propagnada/list of names including progressives.. and then the list itself.
it’s sort of like a scavenger hunt:)
April 28, 2008 at 12:18 am #623170
TheHouseMemberYou couldn’t have come up with a better title for a thread about a bunch of Dems. This might be the longest thread in history!
April 28, 2008 at 2:14 am #623171
JoBParticipanthouse.. i knew you couldn’t resist posting to that title by me …
too bad you don’t actually know anything ;-)
April 29, 2008 at 5:53 pm #623172
JoBParticipantsince noone else weighed in.. i looked for evidence of bias towards Hillary on Media Matters…
I could find plenty of references in the conservative media… who most often used Hillary Clinton and democrats in general interchangeably…
but surprisingly.. only one source (that i didn’t dig deep enough to discover their political bias.. a New York Paper…) actually had substantive comments about Hillary and Media Matters…
Written in September of 2006…
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usclin074880328sep07,0,5183234.story
and the piece that referenced it written in May 2007…
http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2007/05/the_new_question_police.html
However, Wikipedia says that Media Matters receives donations from Move-on.org… i was unable to discover whether they still do after Move-on.org endorsed Senator Obama:)
while it is true that Media Matters has had the support of the Clintons… it is equally true that they have had the support of many other Obama supporting democrats…
i don’t think there is enough evidence to score this one for me…
we will have to see what they do after the media really takes off after Senator Obama…
the more i learn, the more interesting all of this gets.
May 8, 2008 at 4:41 am #623173
JoBParticipantIt’s amazing the things I don’t know…
Today I spent enough time on the Huffington Post to get curious after finding this article…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/me-and-mccain-hero-worshi_b_100378.html
so I checked wikipedia….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik/iArianna_Huffington
and suddenly the anti-Hillary hysteria inspired by that blog makes sense…
heaven help us all if she is the new voice of progressives…
while you’re at it.. check out her business partner..
Her business partner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Lerer
most interesting.
I’m with Ed… Hillary needs to stay in the race… and this blog is one of the reasons why.
May 8, 2008 at 5:05 am #623174
JoBParticipantWhy didn’t i know about Znet?
i can see why noone links to them.. they aren’t so fond of politicians…
but interesting commentary!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.