Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Balanced media coverage...      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 51
Balanced media coverage...Page 3 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
you probably can't read or understand it.


It must really rile you that I'm a successful white male and not some smelly minority or muslim you can detest with vigor....the thread you so detestingly wrote your hate posts was one about the birther movement...it must have really stuck in your craw to have to go to ban camp for posting your true hatred of blacks and muslims...


VVVedit for below:

Now that's F'in funny.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 52
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 1:29:13 PM
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/13/abc-station-botches-petraeus-book-cover-all-up-in-my-snatch/

Oops... It's okay it was just an honest mistake. Has nothing to do with anything :)
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 53
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 2:25:00 PM

You wouldn't mind pointing out exactly which posts of mine you claim (without basis in fact, I might add) to have seen, would you? I'm sure you would, but humor me. You can't, precisely because I haven't posted anything remotely similar to what you assert


My thoughts are that you won't reply til tomorrow...because looking at your posting history it appears you have a 5 per day limit here...of course, in those uber conservative blogs you probably have carte blanche....did you get the post limit due to racist comments???
 Sciencetreker
Joined: 2/13/2012
Msg: 54
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 2:38:41 PM
Kings Night

Neo-Conservatives are generally former Democrats, usually of Jewish descent, and are semi-pundits in their own mind.


As a Jew I'm baffled by your ignorance. It's like saying that most liberals are of Jewish descent descent because Marx, Engels and Lenin were Jews.

Wake up...it's 2012..'In general' most neo-cons are not former democrats and not of Jewish descent.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 55
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 3:12:05 PM

Well now...you already know these posts were deleted preceeding your visit to ban camp...

Did you know that you can search archived copies of POF forum entries that include deleted threads and comments through forum archive sites (like boardreader as one example)...? I'll bet that posters who claim "you can't prove that" don't know about that little trick...

Of course, such effort is not really necessary... just read a profile and look for that tell-tale "I only date my race" type commentary, it's much faster...

It must really rile you that I'm a successful white male and not some smelly minority or muslim you can detest with vigor

I'm absolutely sure that being a minority or muslim is not necessary for the hate to flow... Simply saying things a Repub teabagger doesn't like to hear should be sufficient...

Anyway, enough about that...

I believe one of our resident Repub minions recently asserted that the Repubs would see their errors and correct... If one were to go by the repub teabagger comments here (including those of the poster making the prediction) and the recent comments from the mittster about "why he lost" that prediction has already been proven false... The repubs are heading for "rump party" status (at least in terms of their electoral success) and then they won't have to worry about "leftist/liberal media bias" because nobody will do any stories about them other than the "what ever happened to.../Does anyone remember when...?" type stories... oh, and maybe the odd "rare repub teabagger sighted..." story...

As a Jew I'm baffled by your ignorance.

Don't be... now that they were unable to win the election they will stop pretending to be "Jewish friendly"... At least until another election cycle rolls around (and it won't help them any more then than now)...
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 56
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 3:30:04 PM
I'm going to ignore the bashing and the more wildly prejudice-based commentary, and try to get back to the more useful core issue of the thread.

Specifically, Aries mentioned some worthy areas to observe and consider...

There are lots of NON political reports in the news every day. Do these reports indicate bias?

I see complaints all the time, about silly news, and about "off the wall" stuff that gets talked about, as indicating that the news organization being critiqued is "hiding the important news behind nonsense." Amusingly, BOTH the extreme left AND the extreme right, make the same accusation, sometimes even at the same time. If you are paranoid, or just plain angry, then any time that you think that something important is going on, and it isn't front and center on the main news, you are going to feel righteously certain that the fact that it isn't is proof that the main news is corrupt, and/or part of the problem.

The thing is, if you have ever taken a course, or done any research into the BUSINESS of making a profit by reporting "news," you would have learned something very revealing. That is, that just as there are comics in almost every newspaper that also reports death and disaster, that almost EVERY news organization which wants to keep viewers interested enough that they can sell advertising time, will include a certain amount of junk stories in their reports.

Further, you will find that often the business of making profits from reporting the news, also influences HOW the news is reported, and it is NOT NOT NOT simply a matter of political bias at all. Rather, the people who actually guide how news is reported, lay out formats for reporters and news readers to follow, in order to make the stories most palatable for viewers, and again this is not designed to maximize the accuracy, fairness, or factuality of the stories, it is designed to maximize the number of people who will likely report that they WATCHED, again to sell advertising time.

This business manipulation of the news has far more to do with why so many people think that they can perceive bias, than 99% of the complainers from ALL extremes are aware.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 57
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 3:51:51 PM
This business manipulation of the news has far more to do with why so many people think that they can perceive bias, than 99% of the complainers from ALL extremes are aware.

As true as this is, this same fact has been pointed out since the first time I was on POF... some 6 years ago... It made no difference, the Repubs (and now teabaggers, though they really are the same people) continued to insist that bias existed everywhere but FOX and certain radio shows...

The reality is that most of what the repub teabaggers call "political bias in the news" is really "bias in editorial commentary/analysis" more than anything else... They just don't seem to be able to see the difference between "news" and "editorial commentary/analysis" about the news... They just can't stand to hear someone else give a different analysis that contradicts their "commentary/analysis"... If one looks at the types of examples they give for "bias in the news", the example often follows the vein of "they didn't mention the race of the criminal. That's important to know" and such when it is an actual news story... They can usually only give clear examples of political bias when they reference "editorial/analysis" commentary...
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 58
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 7:38:42 PM

They just don't seem to be able to see the difference between "news" and "editorial commentary/analysis" about the news...

I can recognise news... I can also recognise editorials. If a "news" program has editorials that consistantly are slanted in one direction it's reasonable to think that program has a bias.

This thread is titled "Balanced media coverage...", media is a lot bigger than just news. My feeling is that movies, entertainment telivision, talk shows, comedians, musicians... etcetera, probably play a greater role in influencing the average persons' vote than news does. Next time I see someone on here compare Mitt Romney to Gordon Gekko I'm gonna... well I'll probably just sit here quietly shaking my head.

Even without ever having taken a college course OR doing any research I can easily spot the merit in Igor's point... some stories are more palatable to the consumers than others.... that's why we see the same type of stories over and over again. Reality really does have a liberal bias. We are fed a lot more stories along the lines of "Erin Brockovich" than ones where big corporations act decently and are overall benificial to society. I'd like to see Julia Roberts in a pushup bra playing the woman who sued McDonalds because they maliciously serve their coffee too hot and she spilt it on herself at the drive-thru.

...also...

I think that there's the possibility you overuse dot-dot-dot even moreso than myself.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 59
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/15/2012 11:22:53 PM

This thread is titled "Balanced media coverage...", media is a lot bigger than just news. My feeling is that movies, entertainment telivision, talk shows, comedians, musicians... etcetera, probably play a greater role in influencing the average persons' vote than news does.
....
Even without ever having taken a college course OR doing any research I can easily spot the merit in Igor's point... some stories are more palatable to the consumers than others

Yes but, in most any media other than news "bias", if it can even truly be said to exist, should be inconsequential to the point of "Balanced media coverage" (in the sense of national political candidacies/candidates as expressed in the OP) and entirely expected. Entertainment programmes, even where they purport to analyse and inform on 'current events' and political events are the brainchildren of their creators, of course they carry the biases of the creators and permanent participants, no-one should expect otherwise. No-one ever expected Buckley to adopt a Liberal view point on a 'current event'/political issue on Firing Line no matter how well he balanced any given show and rightly so but, that isn't really the kind of "coverage" the OP referred to. He specifically refered to news outlets and journalists.

I'm not necessarily denying or disputing that "entertainment television" can be a bigger influence on many voters, as sad a statement as that is, or disputing that news programming is often 'dressed up' to draw in a larger viewership but, as Igor pointed out, this is not to serve a primarily political purpose. That was part of the point I was making with the distinction between "news" and "editorial/analysis", that the 'entertainment', being the "editorial/analysis" commentary, was what the majority of the repubs are unable to see beyond. As far as 'entertainment media' aside from news is concerned, I don't think there is any doubt among any rational people that this is what constitutes "news" for the majority of Repubs over the last 20 years and one of the primary reasons they see so much deliberate political bias in the "news coverage" (except, of course from FOX).

I think that there's the possibility you overuse dot-dot-dot even moreso than myself.

much easier to organize than above... needs less attention to grammar and punctuation
 unYOUsual
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 60
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 5:19:33 AM
Of course their is bias, bias of some sort will always exist..you even see it in the Liberals who post on these forums, they are allegedly the most unbiased accepting tolerant people who ever existed..they embrace all colors creeds and sexual orientations..but see how accepting and tolerant they are of Conservatives, Christians or white American males..everyone extolls the virtues of diversity in regards to superficial exterior things and sexuality issues but too many are intolerant of others beliefs and ideologies...

The media chooses what stories to cover based on the ideology of whoever determines what is news worthy..you can't report everything that happens so you have to choose..I have 3 channels at home one Network channel Cool TV and Weather Radar...If I only watched the one Network channel I would not be aware of most things that happen..
 woobytoodsday
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 61
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 8:20:05 AM

that people with a more right wing stance are...stupid, or at least, not as educated, cultured, and sophisticated ?


http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 62
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 8:38:29 AM
Well I see that everyone is out and up early, so let me try and give my opinion on what has been said:

People keep discussing "Balanced", well balance to me implies equal, so that the argument or issue is framed with BOTH sides being framed, now then a broadcaster can and usually does put his spin(opinion) on it.

As I said earlier, I consider neither FOX nor MSNBC balanced. Each approaches a story from either a conservative or liberal POV, and then presents not only their spin on it, but adds guests to FURTHER spin the story in their direction. Since I am a liberal(no doubt there) I will spin a little. The best recent example to me was on election night when Karl Rove had his on-air meltdown, and insisted Ohio was called to early. Forcing the newswoman to check with her staff calling the states. Though look at the list of guests on either of these networks, and the stance of those employed for on-air discussions. I will give some small kudos to MSNBC, because they have Joe Scarborough a conservative and S E Culp a conservative..where as Fox has no liberals to speak of, except the one guy who gets beat up by 4 conservatives on one show.

Why would she do that? To make a guest happy? She worked for FOX, they had experts and called it.

As for one posters assertion of comparing Mitt to Gordon Gekko...well lets see, Gekko said he was plunging Blue Star airlines into bankruptcy because "it was wreckable"! Now didn't Bain under and owned by romney do the exact same thing with any number of companies, Stage Stores, KB Toys, GST Steel to name a few? Same business, the buying and selling of companies, same model, the loading on of debt and fees. Same concept to make a profit at any cost, even if it meant the bankrupting of the company. I say this because to my knowledge, I am the only poster who referred to Gekko in regards to romney....besides all that...if I want to use "...".......I will!

@71 "they are alledgedly the most unbiased accepting tolerant people"

Funny, my friends and argued this very point a number of years ago. My point at the time was "why do we always lay down and play fair when the other side attacks and treats us with contempt"...an ongoing issue with liberals for 25 years. I think the problem is the right doesn't like liberals who hit back!!!

As for the statement itself...I never said, nor will I that I will be accepting or tolerant. I will try and treat all people as fairly as I can and with respect...until they disrespect me or my beliefs. You can debate with me all you want and I will remain even handed until I read some diatribe or a litany of 'brown shirts', 'elite', 'smug', 'self righteous' and far worse espoused on these forums.

On a seperate note from corporate america today, we have support Papa John's day...where all good conservatives go and stuff themselves with his pizza. Because the ACA will force him to provide healthcare. The cost to Papa John's...14 CENTS a pizza. First being a good NYer, I don't consider that dreck pizza, so I rarely bought it before, I certainly wouldn't now. Now I'm sorry, but I believe if everyone an't afford a quarter more for a pizza so 25,000 people can have health insurance...we are really in a state! This poor poor man living in a mansion of 30,000 sq ft on acres of land including a golf course, while his employees idea of healthcare, and the one he endorses is the ER, is pitiful.

Is he free to do it? Absolutely! Does it make sense? Well it makes 14 cents for sure. Is this a place you'd aspire to work in?
 Stray__Cat
Joined: 7/12/2006
Msg: 63
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 4:19:09 PM
I often wonder why folks complain about this.
Are you people robots?

Do you watch whatever is put in front of you without questioning?
Fox News viewers maybe.
(But where else are they gonna get their daily dose of crazy?)

I balance my media by reading and viewing several sources.
They are all skewed.
Most can't say whats up as someone would get fired if they did.

If information is that important to you
don't be lazy about it.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 64
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 4:46:49 PM

I balance my media by reading and viewing several sources.
They are all skewed.
Most can't say whats up as someone would get fired if they did.


You are making a claim of censorship. Can you prove it? So, you think all media censors opposing ideas?
 Stray__Cat
Joined: 7/12/2006
Msg: 65
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 5:13:17 PM
Well here's a well known example from 2004.

Remember when Dan Rather got fired?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Rather

Main article: Killian documents controversy

On September 8, 2004, Rather reported on 60 Minutes Wednesday that a series of memos critical of President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard service record had been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush's former commanding officer, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian.[25] Once copies of the documents were made available on the internet, their authenticity was quickly called into question. Much of this was based on the fact that the documents were proportionally printed and displayed other modern typographic conventions unavailable on military typewriters of the 1970s. This led to claims that the memos were forgeries.[26] The accusations then spread over the following days into mainstream media outlets including The Washington Post,[27] The New York Times,[28] and the Chicago Sun-Times.[29]

Rather and CBS initially defended the story, insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts.[30] CBS was contradicted by some of the experts it originally cited,[31] and later reported that its source for the documents – former Texas Army National Guard officer Lt. Col. Bill Burkett – had misled the network about how he had obtained them.[32]

On September 20, CBS retracted the story. Rather stated, "If I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."[33] The controversy has been referred to by some as "Memogate" and "Rathergate."[34]

Following an investigation commissioned by CBS,[35][36][37] CBS fired story producer Mary Mapes and asked three other producers connected with the story to resign. Many believe Rather's retirement was hastened by this incident.[38] On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rather was interviewed on Larry King Live commenting "Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. ... The truth of this story stands up to this day."

*******************************************************************************************************

The documents may be or may not be legit.
(Last I heard they were...but why quibble)
However....The story they are connected to...Dubya's Guard years...is true.

Dan Rather went out on a limb about something true.
and got fired for saying so.
No other broadcaster has been as brave since.
 SweetLilGTP
Joined: 10/22/2010
Msg: 66
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 6:09:15 PM

Liberals have the position of feeling like they are the ones that are center. They just stay left of center and call themselves liberal. They can turn socialist and still call themselves centrists. They can fight against every form of right wing position and ideology and do so in numbers and protests and still be just liberal. It's basically a catch all for not calling oneself a leftist.


Agreed.

However a Liberal that is here: {......./L.....................................................................)

is alot different than one that is here: {............................................................./L.....}

I guess, with all the "left" "right" rhetoric; the question becomes: To the right, or to the left.......of what?


We have lost the press. They are no longer about truth. It is just entertainment.


Unfortunately; I see it that way too.

Our Globe and Mail swings back n forth between viewpoints; with sensationalism and severe bias for each side in a debate, at any given time. Thank God they still have dry "fact based" news also.
 SweetLilGTP
Joined: 10/22/2010
Msg: 67
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 6:26:16 PM

http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5


That's due to the rise in numbers, and popularity, of pundits.

I cant believe the things I hear Anne Coulter and a few others pass off as "the way it is". Who knew that the proverbial "left" and proverbial "right" were in a war? (propaganda heavy one too)
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 68
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 7:46:20 PM

A poll was taken at the Columbia School of Journalism, regarded as the pre-eminent school of journalism, where a number of students were asked the origin of the following saying:

"From each person according to their capability, to each person according to their need"........... Over half of the students asked said that was in the US Constitution.


Yeah, that's a classic alright. Every now and then someone comes up with something like that. Realize though, that this has nothing to do with "liberalism" or "conservatism," and doesn't mean that either side has smarter or less well informed membership.

Tons of people think that the Declaration of Independence is a legally enforceable document of the United States Government, too (it was written and published before the United States existed). Lots more, when asked to sign a modern typed up copy of it, as though it is a new statement of principles we ought to adhere to, have refused and declared that the people trying to get them to sign were socialist revolutionaries or worse.

A more recent example, is that after the recent election, Donald Trump complained bitterly that the election was a fraud, tweet shouting " We are not a Democracy!" thus, Trump in a single tweet, proved that he knows almost NOTHING about American History, doesn't know what a democracy is, and/or has never in his life listened to himself as he said the Pledge of Allegiance.

Concerted ignorance is far from the exclusive plague of either left or right.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 69
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 8:03:12 PM
Okay, just wanted to throw this out there since it is media related.

http://www.history.com/shows/men-who-built-america

This show is really cool. I wish I knew enough to know what was myth and what is as much fact as can be known... One of the reasons I'm bringing this up is that they do a good job of integrating both sides into the story. The men the show is based on were pretty damn impressive ***holes that did amazing things and often with a huge negative impact.

The amount of money they collectively donated to the US far exceeds anything imaginable today. And these are the same guys that were responsible for the rise in progressivism. It was richly deserved.

Our memory sucks. It's been long enough. Liberals still live in the world that perceives the corporations as they were in 1890 while Republicans view it from McCarthyism.

The other thing I find amazing is that the portrayal of 'big government' providing services for people it is no different then these original guys. It is just as bad. It is doing nothing but creating the largest monopoly that has ever existed.

It is unavoidable. If anyone else has watched this and come to a different conclusion... would like to hear that 'bias'.
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 70
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/16/2012 10:52:53 PM
Lily_Beyaz:

You suggest the film Erin Brockovitch being influential in championing 'liberal' ideology.

No, I never really looked at it like that. I believe the movie championed the idea of "standing up for what's right".... pretty much a universal plotline that appeals to both conservatives and liberals. The movie does, however, demonize a corporate giant (in this instance justifiably so, although I wouldn't be at all surprised if the film used a bit of artistic license and exaggerated some of the company's wrongdoings)... this is what I felt the movie did... it made it okay for us all to hate corporate giants a little bit.

The "David vs. Goliath" story is one that appeals to everyone and is told repeatedly not just by entertainment media but news media also want to be able report it. Goliath is the villian and David is the hero... we all understand this... no one wants to hear about how David shows up late for work and is a constant complainer and spends a significant portion of his workday texting back and forth with his girlfriend. David getting justly fired from his job is a story no one wants to tell and no one wants to hear... including myself.


OyVay:

As for one posters assertion of comparing Mitt to Gordon Gekko...well lets see, Gekko said he was plunging Blue Star airlines into bankruptcy because "it was wreckable"! Now didn't Bain under and owned by romney do the exact same thing with any number of companies, Stage Stores, KB Toys, GST Steel to name a few?

Gotta be honest with you here... I've never watched "Wall Street" in its entirety. So I never really understood the whole concept about "buying a company just to be able to sell off all the parts to make a quick profit". It occurs to me the real world doesn't work this way... nobody spends money on a business hoping it will fail so they can sell off all the parts... any big industrial machinery is pretty much only valuable sitting where it's at... as long as it remains in place it's only valuable if people are there to run the machinery. Once that equipment is dismantled it's pretty much worthless. Companies get bought and sold all the time up here... yet people keep their jobs.... 'cause they're the ones who know how to operate the equipment. I suppose there must be exceptions to the rule, but they'd be just that... exceptions.

Also, I looked up the three companies you listed here. GST Steel went bankrupt two years after Romney had left Bain to run the Olympics, Bain purchased KB toys after Romney had already left, and Stage Stores is still in business. So maybe you could find better examples to make your point? And I'm hoping you're knowledgeable about this stuff 'cause I'll probably have questions concerning how Romney made more money by bankrupting these companies than he would of by turning them into successes.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 71
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/17/2012 6:23:22 AM
^^ Actually, you really do need to read up on some real history. The 80's and nineties were PACKED with people "buying up companies in order not to make them succeed, but to sell off the parts for a profit." It was quite the rage, and that was what that movie Wall Street was fairly accurately focused on.

To be clear, it's very difficult to find any general set of actions, and declare them to always be good or always be bad. In this case, it is a normal and functionally necessary thing, that companies grow and die, and have their bits and pieces recycled. There is nothing inherently wrong with a group of people buying a company that no longer has a viable product or business model to work with, breaking it into pieces, and marketing the useful parts to be used in growing and healthy businesses.

The down side of this occurs when the buying, breaking up and selling becomes the GOAL of the investing companies. It becomes akin to turning acceptance of vultures and other carcass-consuming creatures, into a reason to go around murdering people. Essentially, the "bad" versions of the corporate raiders, were the ones who took note that a given company chanced to have a momentary balance sheet where the structural parts of the company, the physical plant and so forth, were higher in dollar value than the purchasing price of the company. They would buy it with no interest whatsoever in what the business was about, and didn't care that it was vibrant and growing. They would then destroy it and sell the parts for a quick profit, simultaneously making themselves rich, and the business world itself, a less productive and healthy environment.

This sort of thing got worse, as the Real Estate bubble took off. A company which had offices or factories on now wildly over-valued land, would be targets for the raiders, even though they were well in the black.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 72
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:05:42 AM
Look I did a quick search online, for the names of companies, mea culpa for getting one wrong. As for the Bain issue and romney leaving to run the Olympics, a few things worth noting. First he had founded the company, was the owner if not 100%, damn close to it. Next he set the tone, laid out the premise for how HIS company would operate. He was there from 1984 until he left, and still owned the vast majority of it, long after.

If you owned all of something, would you not say something about how it was being run, if the direction was other than what you wanted? Next for his vaunted management style of the Olympics, does anyone realize how much more was spent per athlete on this Olympics than any before it? While I haven't checked the record, I'm sure it was more than was spent in London per athlete.

Now I suppose that could be good. But is it really? Much of that money came from the US government, in the form of grants. So looking back or forward, I doubt you can compare the costs between a Salt Lake City, and a Tokyo, London or any other major city...and then view it as successful, or run well. This was more a matter of fund raising for a very limited return on investments.

Finally, what caused the real estate bubble was easy credit, and people getting mortgages who shouldn't have. Well these takeover artists are no different. Check the figures on some of these deals. Bain put down a few million toward helping achieve control. They would purchase a majority stake in a company for 2 or 300 million in some cases...BUT only put up 8 or 10 million of their own money, and borrow the rest. That means they got control of a company for 3 0r 4% of the total of the investment.

While one poster doesn't understand and has seen companies taken over and the jobs remained. I have a suggestion. There is a movie you should see, Other People's Money starring Danny Devito...not too boring and if you follow the plot, it will all make sense to you. However in the movie to not digust those seeing it, they have a happy ending...in most cases, there is no happy ending, just a bunch of shuttered factories and all the folks unemployed...
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 73
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:23:42 AM
^^^^ No really.... http://www.history.com/shows/men-who-built-america

Bain does what they do because there is a role for that. You don't have to like the role but it is necessary for failing companies. Where it is overstepping as pointed out by another post... it is when healthy companies are taken over for the purpose of consolidating the market.

Can you show Bain as consolidating healthy companies? This is a question not a claim.
 Sciencetreker
Joined: 2/13/2012
Msg: 74
view profile
History
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/17/2012 10:52:38 AM

, although I wouldn't be at all surprised if the film used a bit of artistic license and exaggerated some of the company's wrongdoings)... this is what I felt the movie did... it made it okay for us all to hate corporate giants a little bit.
The "David vs. Goliath" story is one that appeals to everyone and is told repeatedly not just by entertainment media but news media also want to be able report it. Goliath is the villian and David is the hero... we all understand this... no one wants to hear about how David shows up late for work and is a constant complainer and spends a significant portion of his workday texting back and forth with his girlfriend. David getting justly fired from his job is a story no one wants to tell and no one wants to hear... including myself.


It's similar in media coverage of the sciences. In movies scientists are somehow close-minded when they dismiss the 14 year old's plea that an alien landed in his backyard. How dare the AMA dismiss some 'miracle cure'..must be a conspiracy of the evil pahrmaceutical industry..things your doctor won't tell you. The list goes on. As a geologist I hear the same earfull about 'peak oil' for the last two decades..all of us geologists have blinders on and we're 'running out'. The media, which means a journalist, is an 'expert' on GMO foods today and an 'expert' on solar energy tomorrow....it's all those stodgy scientists who somehow , after a lifetime of study, who just don't get it.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 75
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/17/2012 11:00:02 AM
"Bain does what they do because there is a role for that"

Ah yes, vulture capital..circle the almost dead carcus of a company, pick it up for a song and then strip the remains of any value left.

But..but.. but I thought he was going to be the "great job creator"? Not much knowledge about creating jobs in chop shopping companies, near their demise! hahahaha!

Healthy companies cost too much, and usually will fight back. Industrial consolidation is an issue in this country, well at least it was when the DOJ had balls(not for 30 years) and called out monopolies.

No the mittser looked for companies which would cost a low price, and had assets worth disposing of. Or a company like KB Toys, who had good cash flow. Good cash flow, but marginal profits were ideal. It was easy to sell the banks on financing them. Mitt knew shit about the toy industry, neither did any of his staff. They refocused the management with bribes...er...bonuses, on that cash flow, so they could divert part of it for debt service. Something totally unnecessary had they not become involved and loaded the company with the debt to begin with.

Many believe that is why they missed the whole segment of the market, that put them out of business. They were too busy figuring out who would go on the next round of layoffs.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Balanced media coverage...