Thursday, March 15, 2007

Blatant Media Bias

You know, the next time Media Matters and the left wants to cry about Fox News being biased, they ought to stop by CNN's webpage and see what mainstream America has had to put up with for the past 15 years in the way of blatant liberal bias.

This is a screenshot of CNN's top stories taken a few minutes ago. Absolutely ridiculous.

Let's break it down a bit...

A trumped-up hit piece on Rudy Giuliani, a republican, followed by a story about Hillary Clinton, a democrat, showing her to be fairly balanced when it comes to the war (aimed at making people feel she's not so bad, after all).

Then, an apologetic article about one of the worst terrorists in human history, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed. CNN/Time asks, is he "believable?" I'll tell you what's unbelievable - the fact that CNN is even asking that question.

Then the list goes on to describe Nancy Pelosi as one of the sexiest seniors around. Yeah, that's top story material. More like pandering to the leader of the left.

But CNN's icing on the cake, however, is a story about how Fox News' number one rated Bill O'Reilly is being sued by Zsa Zsa Gabor's weird husband. With reporting like this, it is no wonder CNN consistently gets trampled by Fox News in the ratings.

So, let me ask you, does it get any more biased than this? Can it be any more obvious? I mean, they're talking about how sexy Pelosi is for her age when real stories, like the fact US soldiers are making real headway in Iraq with the increased troop levels are being ignored. Or what about how the Democrat majority's plan to withdraw from Iraq failed in the Senate?

If the people in this country continue to rely on the slanted news of the left, this country and its cherished freedom of the press is doomed. If we cannot trust major world news outlets like CNN to be balanced, how can we expect any more from the citizens of our nation?

4 comments:

Joelogon said...

Tell me more about this planet you live on. It sounds fascinating.

What, couldn't you find the rampant in all the other bullets, too? You're obviously not trying hard enough.

Dan said...

It's not as if one has to reach to see this - and it's being going on for years.

But mainly, this is in response to the hypocrisy of liberal claims about media bias at Fox News or The Politico.

But then, given the liberal slant seen in the mainstream media for a generation, any news towards the center would appear biased to most lefties.

Dan said...

Oh, and I'm on the same planet as 64% of the rest of the population who think there is a blatant media bias.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070315-114454-8075r.htm

Joelogon said...

While there may or may not be media bias as you define it, the examples you posted are exceptionally week.

I think your ideological prisms are on too tight.

Looking at your points:

* I haven't read the Giuliani piece, though he and Chavez are still big in the current news cycle. Newsworthy, whether you feel it's trumped up or not.

* Hillary Clinton: A story about her supporting extended troop deployment in Iraq hurts her base; as I'm sure you note, she's an incredibly divisive figure, so I don't see how this makes her seem more balanced to people who don't support her.

* KSM: Did you even read the Time article? How could you possibly call it apologetic? It's about the quality of intelligence from a braggart and self-promoter who doesn't have anything to lose by exaggerating, since he'll be a captive forever, or until he's executed. We knew he was behind 9/11 -- that is not new.

* Pelosi: See the question mark? It's a sucker headline, and congratulations, guess what that makes you.

* O'Reilly: He's a major media figure, and it ties in Anna Nicole, and it's lurid. How is this media bias? Just because he works for Fox? (You'll note that around the time you took the screen shot, Foxnews was running a promo for one of their on-air Anna Nicole features.)

While they may be an example of the mass media's emphasis on fluff and soft news, what you list is a really bad argument for media bias. There are much better ones (not that I necessarily agree), so this only shows you're conditioned to see "liberal media bias" everywhere.

Lastly, I don't think you're against media bias. Like most folks, you're just against any media bias that doesn't track with your own.