Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

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  
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 125
Balanced media coverage...Page 6 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

Why would you say that. You just proved that you take things out of context and lie? Why?

Where exactly is the lie??? Just exactly how far to the right do you want to go?? Executing Isreal more nukes...Nuke'ing Iran???Posioning our rivers, stream, lakes, land, and oceans with no enviromental regulations...making the minimum wage $.35/hour??? how far to the right do you want to go...making christianity the religion of the land and incorporating it into our government???banning Islam????tax the poor and eliminate taxes on the wealthy??? completely deregulate health insurance????
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 126
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 11:52:02 AM
I could at least respect a halfhearted acknowledgment of the paradox but you can't even manage that.

In your copious research on the healthcare law, please compare what it does for smokers and non smokers above and below the poverty line, and then get back to us. You know-- actually supply context on the subject you wish to discuss intelligently.

Until then, your attempts to make your point are just causing your nose to lengthen.

adding in a few of your own "idea's" from the land of Rod Sterling.

Rod Serling was insightful, thought-provoking, perhaps even brilliant. Irish, please don't make shoddy comparisons.

Unfortunately you may create an environment that is conducive for a shift too far to the right.

Too far to the right? You mean a decentralized, limited federal government where most legislative power lies with the individual states? California isn't indebted to the federal government as many states are, so you should be OK in that scenario.
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 127
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:16:07 PM
"Give it about 2 years living in the hell created by leftism"

Yes, I concur, 2 years should just about do it...for the right!! Today we had our republicant version of the movie 'ground hog day'...Boner announced he wants the same things he did during the debt ceiling crisis...which he doesn't even know what that is...becuase the tea party guys are leading him around by the nose...

So we have had our kumbya moment, now the reps are loading the clown car for 2016, with some of the same ol batshit crazy people...and boner is back in the house, saying one thing one day, or first throwing an olive branch..then throwing a brick...

"It's going to be a bumpy ride"

No shit, and with where the american people are with their view of congress and the feet dragging, I hope they are smart enough to say it with votes, and flush the losers who now want to read the tea leaves as if they had won 2 weeks ago.

"The time of labor unions should be coming to the time of being knocked down to size"

Boy, you have some hard on for the unions...times like these make me wish I had a time machine, and could stick you on the production line pre-union...a nice 6 day work week, 12 hour work day, and no safety rules, so you could lose a thumb, an arm or an you shit and no vacation...

Unions have been giving in more than they ever had to. I admit some things don't make sense, like the bakery contract that put them under. At the same time, the wonderful folks at Walmart are bringing you shopping on thanksgiving that should warm your heart.

"condusive for a shift too far to the right"

That would presuppose, that the right could get it's act together and run someone not as extreme as they are. Or rig the election like they are trying to do in Ohio and Wisconsin. You'd also have to run on that cutting social security thing and medicare thing...which will turn off some republicans at the bottom end of the spectrum.

I can't really believe they are pitching a fit over 4.6% in taxes over $250,000.

Well at any rate, this should play out in the media, as an interesting experience. You guys will moan about the presentation of the facts. They will merely report on how the republicans are feet drgging on the work of the people. Nobody will be happy, but in the end, the american people are not that stupid. They will see it for what it is, and sooner or later punish them...
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 128
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:25:33 PM
In your copious research on the healthcare law, please compare what it does for smokers and non smokers above and below the poverty line, and then get back to us. You know-- actually supply context on the subject you wish to discuss intelligently.

Are they lying? Please enlighten? 1.5 x higher for smokers. You may not believe the governments own report on who smokes but that is your issue not mine. Find a better source to support your position rather then just dismissing.

The health-care law also allows insurers to charge tobacco users 1.5 times as much as non-smokers, a higher rate generally meant to cover the higher costs incurred from smoking-related diseases.

Too far to the right? You mean a decentralized, limited federal government where most legislative power lies with the individual states? California isn't indebted to the federal government as many states are, so you should be OK in that scenario.

Did you actually have a point here? It was lost in your ignorance of California.

The left-leaning organization, whose California affiliate is the California Budget Project, found that in the late part of the last decade, California had the third greatest disparity between those in the top income brackets and those at the bottom of any state. Only New Mexico and Arizona had greater gaps

California has been run by liberals for the past decade. This is what they do. They create the disparity.

Add up the amount of people on Government assistance, the number of government workers and then what is left is what is supporting the state. That population that is supporting the state is disappearing quickly.
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 129
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:59:46 PM

Are they lying? Please enlighten? 1.5 x higher for smokers.

Oh, I see. All you have is the Washington Post article and a flimsy smoker = poor equation. Well, in line with the thread subject, a critical reader should be asking questions while reading that information. I have already posed a few such questions, but you would rather play Glenn Beck and connect the spuriously related dots instead-- whatever leads to "progressive agenda = totalitarianism and exploit the poor."

My point about "too far right"? My point is wondering where in the name of Pat Buchanan you believe that subjective line to be.

My point regarding California? It is that California pays more to the Fed gov't than it receives in aid:
Joined: 4/26/2012
Msg: 130
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 1:03:24 PM
The problem with most of the media is that they see themselves as the anointed definers of good and evil and not just reporters of the news. They have made a religion of themselves. They have a god complex. They want to be held in reverence. They think they are smarter than anyone else. And they will naturally lean in the direction of those who are godless enough to buy into their antichrist religion of political correctness. Hence, more than 90% of them vote democrat.
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 131
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 3:10:21 PM

You pretend to be defending the economically "poor" people who smoke because they will be charged a higher premium for health insurance. However, you seem to be very ignorant of the fact that truly poor people will not be paying very much, if at all. One and a half of nothing is still nothing. And their policy will provide them with educational programs intended to help them to quit smoking in order to have better health and enjoy their lives as a result of their good choices.

I am not pretending to defend anything. I don't want obamacare as it is. I want it thrown out.

I am just saying that according to last Tuesday smokers get 1.5x higher deductibles and well that just happens to impact mostly poor and lower educated. Something you don't' want to here and stomp around pouting about how its wrong wrong wrong wrong.

So, you are saying the article is lying?

And again support liberal bias. A joke of a scenario where nothing is ever questioned if it supports liberalism and leftism. Your very own religion and bible.
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 132
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 5:25:01 PM

I did not mention the matt taibbi article in Rolling Stone, because I know all will say it is a left wing publication. I believe many of his articles are factual but can and would be viewed as left in the extreme.

True... very negative piece towards Romney, but, as far as I can tell, factual (I mean, how the hell would I know?).

From the Rolling Stone article:

Once all that debt is added, one of two things can happen. The company can fire workers and slash benefits to pay off all its new obligations to Goldman Sachs and Bain, leaving it ripe to be resold by Bain at a huge profit. Or it can go bankrupt – this happens after about seven percent of all private equity buyouts

Read more:

^^^^Kind of neat.... just by copying and pasting a portion from the article it automatically included the link.... what will they think of next?

Seven percent? Geez... after all the nasty crap they said about Bain, I thought the percentage was going to be a lot higher.

Same article:

At the time of the KB Toys deal, Romney was a Bain investor and owner, making him a mere beneficiary of the raping and pillaging, rather than its direct organizer. Moreover, KB's demise was hastened by a host of genuine market forces, including competition from video games and cellphones. But there's absolutely no way to look at what Bain did at KB and see anything but a cash grab – one that followed the business model laid out by Romney.

So... the author is pulling the same stunt as in the article presented here about Clear Channel.... Romney wasn't really involved but we're going to spend several paragraphs trashing him anyhow. So much for Romney and KB Toys....

The article also mentions the Ampad company you had mentioned:

Take a typical Bain transaction involving an Indiana-based company called American Pad and Paper. Bain bought Ampad in 1992 for just $5 million, financing the rest of the deal with borrowed cash. Within three years, Ampad was paying $60 million in annual debt payments, plus an additional $7 million in management fees. A year later, Bain led Ampad to go public, cashed out about $50 million in stock for itself and its investors, charged the firm $2 million for arranging the IPO and pocketed another $5 million in "management" fees. Ampad wound up going bankrupt, and hundreds of workers lost their jobs

Pretty scathing, but really the author is only giving us a small part of the story.... he's cherry-picking what details he wants us to hear.

He doesn't mention what I found at wikipedia:

The company continued to enjoy 53 percent compound annual growth in net sales, which increased from $8.8 million in 1992 to $200.5 million in 1996, when the company became publicly traded. The company made a number of acquisitions, including writing products company SCM in July 1994, brand names from the American Trading and Production Corporation in August 1995, WR Acquisition and the Williamhouse-Regency Division of Delaware, Inc. in October, 1995, Niagara Envelope Company, Inc. in 1996, and Shade/Allied, Inc. in February 1997.

Ampad increased sales by a tremendous amount in five years, also it appears that most of the debt accrued was legitamately being used to expand the company... the author of the Rolling Stone article doesn't feel the need to tell the reader of this however.....

.....and I'm done. In ten minutes of digging (and substantially more time spent putting this post together), I've managed to poke several holes in this article, even though, techinically, the article is factually correct (I think?). I have no doubt if I spent more time I would find more holes.

I'm not really a big fan of the business model where companies load themselves up with debt.... but this certainly isn't a practice limited to takeover specialists like Bain. Small businesses are starting up every week in my town... often by people I know. Taking on large debt in order to grow is very common... also often neccesary to meet customer demands.... "Go Big or Go Home".

People should be able to disagree with a politicians' policies without characterizing him as a monster.

To myself, the people who liken Romney to Gekko are just the leftist equivalent of those rightwing nutjobs who believe Obama is a Muslim who was born in Kenya.
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 133
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 7:32:01 PM
(yawn), I guess selective ideas are not limited to journalists! You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about trying to prove me wrong or somehow complicit, in the romney hanging...hahahaha!

Did you bother to READ what you QUOTED? "Seven percent? Geez"

Now please read what you cited so as to stress the point I will quote and capitalize the key part of the phrase.

"this happens after about seven percent of ALL private equity buyouts"

That "ALL" is a telling part of the phrase, it neither reflects what Bain did, but what the group of buy out specialists did. So in your head, without benefit of knowing the total amount of deals done in any given year. You are willing to accept that 'average' for an entire industry, as that which Bain about gilding the lily!!!

"So much for romney and KB toys"

So now you "think" you have proof the mittster wasn't involved? Hahaha! So where is your proof? You don't see tiabbi saying he had the goods, do you have a copy of the notes from Bain, of who was present when the KB deal was discussed? You aren't doing any better than the congressman in our country accusing Obama of sleeping while benghazi happened! That's all purely innuedo.

Further, since it is YOU who now wants to cherry pick, lets revew the article...did he not say romney who OWNED the firm, took it in this direction? Away from seeding small companies, and starting to buy and pick apart companies to profit from? That he left the firm after establishing a pirates idea of strip a profit and run.

"Ampad sales by a tremdous amount in five years"

No they didn't, (yawn, I can hardly keep my eyes open in discussions with dullards), they BOUGHT sales in that five buying product lines from other companies, they increased sales, NOT neccessarily profits! If you paid 5 cents for a product and it costs you 10 cents to produce the product, and you sell the product for 12 you make money or just increase cash flow and sales?

"and I'm done" plus "I've managed to poke several holes in this article"

Be careful not to poke your eye out!!! Hahaha! It's called 'dressing the turkey'...pump up sales, by buying market share, then take the company public, before they realize it just increased sales, without increasing profits, because you bought those sales with debt, and the debt service is actually eating you alive. Obviously, you failed to cite the costs of those purchased lines of business.

"Go Big or Go Home"

A term I am all to familiar with, but we used to say on wall street, no guts no glory! Which basically meant bet the farm and hope for the best...some would say the "knew" it would be best...

Fully half of what I do, is learning what companies are doing, by pulling apart balance sheets and what makes sense and what does don't have to believe me, I could care less...but it is why I knew Google would be a winner and Groupon would not be. It is why the day before the IPO of Facebook on here, I posted that many would be slaughtered...I am really sorry to tell you, it's not rocket's boring shit pays well, but is boring as hell!

To me romney was and is a flawed human being, who would have made a shit president...that's merely my opinion, based on my conversations with people that knew him far better than I. You obviously hold him in high regard, fine, I can't lead you where you don't want to go.

Matt Taibbi is a great journalist, not a good debater, since I have seen him talk many times. He takes himself and his beliefs too seriously, and is flawed from the POV as being somewhat biased, as his articles show. Hence the reason I didn't cite him, or his article. While we show the same facts, he didn't have the requisite 20,000 words necessary to prove his point. That was and is part of the problem with rolling stone, they want the 'feel good' for their readers, not the total facts that would put them to sleep...
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 134
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 8:33:33 PM
One quick thing:

"So much for romney and KB toys"

So now you "think" you have proof the mittster wasn't involved?

Pretty hard to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that he wasn't involved. The author (who seems to hate Romney) of the article, the same article that mentions all the same companies you mentioned, seems ready to concede the point though.... so yeah I feel pretty confident that my perspective is more accurate than yours.... really at this point, on this particular subject, you're just a drowning man flailing around pitifully.

Again, from Rolling Stone:

At the time of the KB Toys deal, Romney was a Bain investor and owner, making him a mere beneficiary of the raping and pillaging, rather than its direct organizer. Moreover, KB's demise was hastened by a host of genuine market forces, including competition from video games and cellphones. But there's absolutely no way to look at what Bain did at KB and see anything but a cash grab – one that followed the business model laid out by Romney.

Same quote as I used last time, this time with a different part in bold.

Of course I cherrypicked the article.... I wanted to make my points without having five pages of "Rolling Stone" plopped in the middle of this thread... but I did include the part about "Romney's business model".

You obviously hold him in high regard, fine, I can't lead you where you don't want to go.

No, I thought he probably would have made a better President than Obama.... I just don't think Obama's very good.

In this thread, I'm mostly interested in how people are so inclined to take a politician and turn them into a fictionalized cartoon-like villian..... I actually think I nailed this point pretty well at the end of my last post.

the people who liken Romney to Gekko are just the leftist equivalent of those rightwing nutjobs who believe Obama is a Muslim who was born in Kenya.

....also if you have any more articles witten by "great journalists", I'd be interested in seeing how objective they are.... that'd be staying on topic to this thread, right?
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 135
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 9:25:31 PM
how would it be possible for any of us to know that media covereage wasn't biased? If you lean toward that bias it will feel unbiased. Although from my postion my bias doesn't have room for the other side so much. Part of the reason for that is people here are kind of jerks about there position and won't even disucuss the issues that are involved with their position.

Closed minds are douche bags. but what can you use to tell if your mind is as closed as theirs. Can't use a douche bag to gauge that.

I'm willing to be wrong. I'm not willing to be stupid about foundations.
Joined: 10/21/2007
Msg: 136
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/21/2012 9:54:04 PM

You pretend to be defending the economically "poor" people who smoke because they will be charged a higher premium for health insurance. However, you seem to be very ignorant of the fact that truly poor people will not be paying very much, if at all.

Would this kindness to low income people be the same kindness the state of Washington offered me when I was a self employed single mother barely getting by? There was (and I think still is) state insurance for low income people. For my son and I the monthly premiums were almost $300/mo. That was back in the early 90's when insurance was astronomical, but still cheaper than it is now.

You can call me a troll if you like because I won't be back to talk with walls.
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 137
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/22/2012 7:16:36 AM
Here's what Hostess looks like from within:

The scenario is familiar to me for nearly twenty years: long talks with a former coal miner. Pension raiding, okayed by the the courts, selling off the assets, the new mine opening non-union. He was glad his spine collapsed and he ended up on Disability -- it was going to be a better end for him than working a non-union mine.

NONE of this being reported by our "librul media" -- wonder why?
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 138
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/22/2012 7:18:28 AM
Oy,thanks! I don't think you can win with the Tea Party, though. My sis in law, would claim lefty source for anything she didn't like/want to hear: Even Cato, Heritage. Only Glenn was accepted, and if it disagreed, I must have taken the quote out of context. . . .

During the fuss about polls, I asked her why a big name polling company, whose livelihood/continued existence depended on being accurate, would lie? For once, just the one time, she said, "I don't know."
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 139
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/22/2012 7:53:45 AM
My personal memory was that the BIG push to claim media bias began in 2001, with this book: Bernard Goldberg wrote Bias in 2001. The meme has never let up on the right since that time. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 140
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/22/2012 9:22:48 PM
Ahhh cammster...seems like you are gum stuck to my shoe..but sorry, a bad man is a bad man.

"you're just a drowning man flailing around pitifully"

(sigh) only because I decided on using the best known names. A fool is a fool all the same. He grasps at straws and the low hanging fruit, trying to prove a point, that while moot, is none the less fact.

This will be my last post to you, because no matter what I show or say, you seem to be of the mind of all republicans that mitt was an honorable man. He wasn't, he will never be. 10 of 67 deals done by Bain made 70% of the firms profits...4 of those 10 wound up in bankruptcy. Far exceeding that 7% number you seem to cling to.

Why not look at Accuride, Bain invested $2.6 million emerged with a $61 million profit, the company went bankrupt. Or the 1994 investment in Dade International where the debt went from $300 million to $900 million. Using part of that increase in debt, they financed the repurchase of half of Bain's shares in the company by paying them $242 million for that half portion. The company filed bankruptcy in 2002. BTW, Bain paid $27 million for 100% of their stake.

Or the case of the Holson Company...which purchased the Burnes Company...a fascinating story of a RI company that moved jobs to S. Carolina, then back up north...all the while shedding jobs and lowering costs...ultimately winding up in bankruptcy.

Or the DDI corp, purchased by Bain in 1996, merged with another entity and wound up in bankruptcy in 2003, after Bain had sold their stake.

All of these were clearly in the Romney era of Bain. But that won't make a difference, youse luv ya some mittster! Because he is being persecuted by the "liberal media", of course many of the sources for articles about these debacles come from those great bastions of liberalism such as Bloomberg news(hardly a left leaning organization) or the WSJ(another outfit, owned by Murdoch currently, but previously owned by Dow Jones, a well known liberal news organization) hahahaha!

"also if you have any more articles by "great journalists", I'd be interested in seeing how objective they are"

frankly I wouldn't share my used bathroom tissue with you. You have no capacity to see the truth, no matter who writes it. And THAT'S on topic!
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 141
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/23/2012 5:39:07 PM

Why not look at Accuride..... Or the case of the Holson Company..... Or the DDI corp.....

All of these were clearly in the Romney era of Bain.

Well maybe you shoulda been talking about these to begin with instead of insisting on being willfully stupid and sticking to your guns with KB Toys.

Pretty sure I know why you didn't though... you didn't know about them. You've been scrambling in a desperate attempt to stay a step ahead of me this whole time and I know pretty near piddly about Bain.... 'course I'm not trying to make any outrageous claims about them neither.

And none of this matters a wee little bit... you've hated Romney before you knew anything about him.... the only thing you care to learn about him is something with which you can justify that hatred. Luckily for you, there are "journalists" who are great at digging up dirt and telling one-sided stories about pretty much whoever there is to hate.... as long as there's enough people that care to read the stuff that is.... a guy's gotta get paid. Ain't capitalism great.

This will be my last post to you


I was only going to respond to you one more time and that was it, no more, I was done.... you can ask any of my friends.


A month or so ago, you said you liked me... right out in the open, where everyone could see. I was the one who said I didn't like you...


I'm just going to tell people it was mutual.
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 142
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/23/2012 8:39:02 PM
Tonight I watched "balanced media coverage"....On a typical Fox show, Neil Cavaluto, or whatever the fuk his name is...first proceeded to make a fool of Ralph Nadar, who's idea is to increase the minimum wage, to make the economy better...of course this putz, says many jobs are going hungry avoiding the point Nadar was making.

Now to bolster his point...shithead cavaluto has an "economic expert" on the show, to rebut things...the owner of the shop on "Hard core pawn" in detroit! Having him cite the increase of this show's star, business, he alludes it's Obama's fault...that so many people go to this pawn shop! Of course never mentioning as a similar show in Vegas mentions, that the publicity associated with the show, greatly increased traffic.

Next he has David Stockman, aide to Reagan, who then asserts the aid to Chrysler was wrong. Citing his expertise a vindification as his 75% margin for election in his congessional district. Not a Lee Iaccoca, who probably would have agreed since he is older and somewhat senile..

This is what passes for "balanced" on FOX....
Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 143
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 11/24/2012 9:12:32 AM
^^^I think there's some understanding out there that what passes as 'conservative balanced' media is what is likely to keep Republicans from making any in-roads with groups it's currently having difficulty appealing to.

I have been watching and listening to a few centrist Republicans processing the election loss. These are the pundit types that to me are enlightened about 'choice', evolution, and who have a realistic perspective about immigration any of whom I think could host what I see is a hole in political programming--that being a truly, balanced conservative political show.

People like Mark McKinnon, Ana Navarro, David Frum, Steve Schmidt and Michael Steele have conservative perspectives that I have listened to because they aren't extreme. These people are reasonable conservatives, who have a viewpoint and a conservative message that without extremism and deranged machinations of the fringe, I believe could resonate.
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 144
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 12/8/2012 5:40:17 PM

The story of our time

by digby

A good piece by Dan Froomkin this morning:

Post-mortems of contemporary election coverage typically include regrets about horserace journalism, he-said-she-said stenography, and the lack of enlightening stories about the issues.

But according to longtime political observers Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, campaign coverage in 2012 was a particularly calamitous failure, almost entirely missing the single biggest story of the race: Namely, the radical right-wing, off-the-rails lurch of the Republican Party, both in terms of its agenda and its relationship to the truth.

Mann and Ornstein are two longtime centrist Washington fixtures who earlier this year dramatically rejected the strictures of false equivalency that bind so much of the capital's media elite and publicly concluded that GOP leaders have become "ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."

The 2012 campaign further proved their point, they both said in recent interviews. It also exposed how fabulists and liars can exploit the elite media's fear of being seen as taking sides.

That is the story of our time. And it has been, by the way, for quite a while. And after watching the Senate refuse to ratify a treaty last week solely on the basis of wingnut lunacy, I'm guessing it's not changing any time soon. Perhaps people forget that these wackjobs impeached a president over a private indiscretion with the enthusiastic support of the media. That was as crazy as you can get in a democracy --- except for their subsequent actions which included stealing and election and invading a country on false evidence. And now we're on a crazed economic crusade that's right up there with "we will disarm Saddam Hussein" for absurd up-is-down-ism.

The historical view of this era is going to be incredulous --- if we don't kill the planet in the meantime because of this nonsense.

Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 145
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 12/8/2012 6:07:54 PM
^^^ Balanded...

The Legacy of President Barack Obama does not begin or end with his first term in office, it begins now and ends four years hence. Quite what that legacy will be depends not on how Barack Obama will behave, but rather the extent to which he controls his own destiny. Perhaps he will surprise me...perhaps...

The mistake was made in 2011 and we see today that the FUKUS Axis (France, UK, US) sided with terrorists in Libya and destroyed the one model of true democracy the modern world has seen, the Jamahiriya.

True, Obama could have been the victim of the AIPAC lobby controlled by, or rather whose orders are followed by, his side-kick in the State Department (Hillary War Zone Clinton) but now, just before his inauguration for his second term in office, we see tell-tale signs that Libya was no "mistake" but rather, another piece in the puzzle. We see signs that Obama is a sinister fraud, whose claims for change were a lie to his family, his people and the world. We see that Obama is a weak, manipulated puppet, ready to ask "How high?" when his political paymasters and puppet-masters pull his strings.
I am old enough to know what I am saying and young enough to be a formidable foe for those who attack Russia. There is, however, time for a change of direction, for someone to slam their fist down on the table and throw an existential question towards NATO, or at least to get the lobbies which control this supra-national monster to perpetuate themselves without wars.

Many schools of martial arts state that the humiliation is not to withdraw when it is right to do so, but rather to advance knowing it is wrong.

Let us see how Barack Obama writes his political epitaph on the world stage.

I seriously doubt anyone has any idea what the balance really was. It wasn't for helping the poor. We were not poor. That may change in the future.
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 146
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 8/25/2014 6:50:12 PM
From the original post ...
I wonder why most of the media, and that includes television and newspapers, tends to be biased towards liberal and progressive viewpoints.
It's all really a matter of what you read or which channel you watch on TV or which radio station you listen to.

It's the same in the country noted on the OP's profile. I know, I lived there and personally experienced it. They have TV channels that only broadcast Left viewpoints ... or Right viewpoints.

All you had to do is turn on the evening news on two different TV's in the same room in order to hear the difference. We didn't really listen very much to radios since my husband wanted only to listen to the music of the Bayerischer Rundfunk ... a public-service radio and television broadcaster, based in Munich of Bavaria in Germany. BR is a member organization of the ARD consortium of public broadcasters in Germany. ARD (full name: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland – Consortium of public broadcasters in Germany, details below at name)...

... is a joint organization of Germany's regional public-service broadcasters. It was founded in 1950 in West Germany to represent the common interests of the new, decentralized, post-war broadcasting services – in particular the introduction of a joint television network.

The ARD is the world's second largest public broadcaster after the British Broadcasting Corporation.

I think he kept it on in his car (he traveled a lot in our business over there) because they have a special service that will break in and tell you about accidents or problems in your particular area. I have to admit, they had some really good broadcasts even though, back then I was not as involved in "American" politics as much as now. I do recall that my husband (he's German) used to have some pretty heated debates with his friend about politics. I just listened and tried to follow what they were talking about.

Anyways ... back while living in Florida (2006 - 2009), I did a lot of traveling as a home health nurse and so had the opportunity to listen to talk radio in my car. I did my best to find some sort of "neutral" station but could not. I did my best to find a station that represented anything close to my views ... none available ... go figure.

So I ended up having to listen to "right-wing" talk radio. In some ways, it was very enlightening since I heard all the stuff they were pumping into people's heads ... heard all their views on things. While I was somewhat surprised, I basically figured it was going on. It was entertaining to say the least since it was during that time that I heard that Paul Begala had said that GWB is a "high-functioning moron".

I couldn't believe I was hearing right and pulled over to listen again because they kept repeating it over and over again. I honestly thought it was a prank. I thought someone made up a joke. I had this right-wing talk show on (I think it was Michael Medved) and they were simply going crazy ... pretty much foaming at the mouth over this.

At one point, when I realized they were absolutely serious about it, I started laughing ... and ended up having to pull off the road again in order to gain my composure so I could drive. From that point on, I was sold on that radio station ... for no other reason but to hear what the conservatives were ranting about. It can be quite entertaining. And I would guess that if there is a similar thing going on with left viewpoints, then the right-wingers are probably also listening ... for pure entertainment.

I still have no idea how to find a "left-wing" radio station so I'm wondering how people can say that the mainstream media favors the liberals? Someone please help me find a radio station that actually represents that .... P-L-E-A-S-E ... I want to know!

I really don't think it's weighed either way. It just depends on which radio and TV channels one listens to. I think it's the same with newspapers. The newspaper in our town is run by wealthy right-wing people. At first it was apparent to me when reading the editorial page, but then when they openly started backing only conservative candidates it was pretty clear. Then they bought a local radio station and TV station and their newscasters are pretty much limited to saying positive things only about conservatives.

A friend or mine did an experiment and called them to try to place political ads and found out they were charging more than 3 times as much for running Democrats' ads as opposed to Republicans' ads. I don't even bother to tune in their stations anymore. It's worth it to get cable so I can avoid that kind of stuff.
Joined: 2/21/2014
Msg: 147
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 8/25/2014 7:16:03 PM

I wonder why most of the media, and that includes television and newspapers, tends to be biased towards liberal and progressive viewpoints.

I am reminded of this little adage "Reality has a liberal bias".

It's something that I find to be very much true, society and culture pretty much always progress, over all, towards a more liberal state. Rarely do they "roll back" to a less liberal state and even when they do, it never really lasts very long before the progress and liberal momentum restarts.

I would say that the appearance of "liberal bias" in the media is just that, appearance, owing to people failing to progress with the times. Most complaints of "liberal bias" can be easily explained away by that unwillingness to accept that society and culture have evolved beyond the complainer's "comfort".
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 148
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 8/26/2014 7:27:53 AM
Why does the American media seem to have a liberal bias? Uh, b/c we live in a liberal country. We believe individuals have rights (people forget exactly what that means), that we should be able to vote our politicians in and out, that we can start a company if we want to without having to bribe officials for a license to do so, et cetera.

Why do individual mediums seem to have a bias? easy--advertising. Its the real reason why they exist, to make a profit. Its why your fav mag gives such subscriber deals and in December offers you a chance to give a friend a gift sub--so the magazine can go to its advertisers and charge more b/c they bring more eyeballs to the printed page. in the day of the Internet and FB tracing you around it to created a targeted list of exactly what you like (which is why sometimes the ads you see reflect a site you were looking at recently), printed media wants to offer advertisers a targeted demographic, and cable TV offers channels focused on specific consumers.
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 149
view profile
Balanced media coverage...
Posted: 8/30/2014 12:06:55 PM
If this wasn't so pathetic, it would be pretty funny.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Balanced media coverage...