Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by SG-17, Oct 23, 2008.
Because reality has a well known liberal bias.
As till said:
I disagree with there being a bias toward reality. I think the bias is firstly toward whatever makes them the most money, secondly toward false neutrality, i.e., "McCain said the sky is green with polka-dots, while Obama said the sky is blue", and thirdly toward. whatever's the easiest thing for the journalist himself to do. But Till's main point, that both campaigns aren't equivalent and therefore will not be covered in equal light, is completely correct. That's especially true this year; McCain's attacks on the media about Palin seemed to have hurt the media's ego, and they seem to be constantly trying to out-do each other as real journalists for once (thus, the polka-dot analogy isn't as valid this election as it usually is).
The"bias" of the media in the US is toward lazy, cheap, and sensationalist.
Hmm, if this keeps up, I might just have to revise my signature.
What. He. Said.
Maybe Palin or Bristol or Piper can go into hiding. The media loves its missing white girl stories.
you know that when FOX tells you the media is biased, you should TOTALLY believe THEM because they are the ONLY UNbiased media, RIGHT?
Why is it a bias for a media outlet to blast McCain for the kind of campaign he's been running? If a President lies us into a war, should the media coverage be 50/50 negative and positive? Yeah, much of the media likes Obama more than McCain, but McCain aint exactly inspiring well wishers with his behavior. I had much more respect for the guy before his campaign... Calling that a bias misses the point - NO ONE should view McCain's campaign as anything more than slander. Of the two, Obama behaves more like an adult should behave. That aint bias, its reality...
Reality has a known liberal bias!
Edit: God dammit EHK.
CNN is the most neutral news network while Fox if the most Conservative
Separate names with a comma.