Clinton and Media Bias

“"many people, who call themselves “liberals”, like the guy in my office, often DON’T WANT TO read a point of view that conflicts with their dogmatically righteous morality."

-----

I think that is true of most humans. Whether they are "liberal" or "conservative", black, white, christian, muslim, etc., etc., etc., has no direct correlation to this, IMHO.”

“Very true Chili.”

“I've read some of Goldberg's book.

Cons love it!”

“Well I know it's hard to believe, but occasionally author's put a particular spin on their writing to sell books and make money.”

“Its nothing earth-shaking.

Goldberg's book is like that rare bit of "evidence" that "debunks" predictions of global warming.

Conservatives tend to run that sort of thing up the flagpole and jabber on about it on talk radio.”

“I work in the media, my wife works in the media, many of our friends work in the media - and yet unless I read this book I'm closed minded?"
ynamiynami


but there's no liberal bias in you, right?



righhhhhhhhhht, we believe you....”

“I'm what you would proably consider to be a liberal. There is bias in almost every story. What I try and do as a professional is limit the bias. For example, if I'm writing something then I try and talk to people from all sides of the situation.
A key guide to the job you are doing is the number of complaints you get. Thankfully in the past I've had roughly equal complaints from both sides of the political spectrum - including many times when all sides complain about bias in the same story. It's also been a long time since I've covered political stories.”

“Thanks violin, I’ll try to keep my eye out for those works. Does either Noam Chomsky or Ann Coulter have extensive insider media knowledge? I am not familiar with Ann Coulter. The interesting thing about Goldberg’s perspective is his 28 years as a reporter for CBS. Logic fails you violin. You haven’t had you Wheaties today, son.

“If you can’t answer a man’s argument, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names.”

Elbert Hubbard


Yani, let me try this one more time. Do you consider people who lean to the left of political thought, “liberals?” I do not. This is a coined term that is inaccurate. Part of the definition of liberal is open-minded. Why would you consider people on the left side of the political spectrum any more open-minded than those on the right? Yessir, in my experience, most people who call themselves “liberal”… aw hell, I’ve been over this before. Are you questioning my personal experience?

Can you answer the Affirmative Action question? What about when people who call themselves “liberal” say that the religious right should not push its morality on others. However, many of these same people who call themselves “liberal” insist on pushing their morality on others through higher taxes for government programs that they think help the most people, politically correct speech, and a biased media that pretends to be objective.

Many people who call themselves “liberal” say they believe that diversity is good. According to Goldberg, something like 89% of the media is registered Democrat and that dissenting opinions in the newsroom are not often well tolerated. Goldberg blew the whistle on bias in the media. He was run out of the business by the same people who believe that it is a moral duty to blow the whistle on big business.

When dealing with the issue of homosexual rights, the philosophy of many people who call themselves “liberal” is, “Governments exist to protect the rights of minorities” (Wendell Phillips). When explaining the presidential election loss of 2002, many people who call themselves “liberals” said, “We really won the election because we won the popular vote”. Totally ignoring the reason for which the Electoral College was created.

You try to justify not reading the book, yani. I’d guess that you work hard at justifying lots of things in your life. I say you’re either too lazy to read the book or you’re closed-minded. But I could be wrong. There could be plenty of other reasons. You should have no problem convincing yourself that they’re good ones. Goldberg’s book suggests that there is no “left-wing conspiracy” in the media, he contends that most of those folks are clueless as to their own bias. Dan Rather believes that the NYT editorial page is “middle-of-the-road.” Are you that clueless, ynamiynami?


Chili, didn’t I say, “Most folks have a very hard time examining their own beliefs. This is the sad state of human affairs. “ in my original post? Why are we repeating the obvious here? There is a difference between willful ignorance and hypocrisy. Many people suffer from willful ignorance. But a person, who calls himself a “liberal” and then closes his mind, is a hypocrite.

I’ve used labels to describe myself, but not often. Some people just love identifying with labels. It makes them part of a special group. In this way they are similar to religious fanatics. I think it helps simplify the world for them. But if you call yourself a Christian, and you believe that killing people is a good idea, you are a hypocrite.”

“what arclite said.....”

“Well arclite, I also tend to agree that the arbitray application of labels is very wrong. But in applying the label of "conservative" to those who are very anti abortion would not result in a gross misnomer. Yet, the vast majority of this group turns around with a very passionate support of capital punishment. Then among those who are both anti abortion and pro capital punishment, there is a sizable group who profess to follow the more "conservative" (again an arbitrary label) Christian denomination.

Thus, even among the "conservatives", hyprocrisy runs rampant.”

“So we should call them "righties" now?”

“What percentage of Goldberg’s royalties do you get arc?”

“Dan Rather believes that the NYT editorial page is “middle-of-the-road.” Are you that clueless, ynamiynami?

I think you need to look at your own bias here Arclite. I'm having an e-mail conversation with a friend and former colleague of mine who's covering events in Korea. He tells me of a common opinion there that the New York Time slavishly follows the Bush line, citing the example of its failure to give sufficient coverage to the bugging of UN members in New York. I replied that the recent story about military basis was not what the Bush administration wanted to see. I think the Times treads the line fairly well.
I would say that this administration is moving to the right all the time. Therefore as it moves away from the center you will see more news stories in many publications questioning what it is doing.

People see things with different eyes, and I would suggest that while I realize that I have a degree of bias, and try to take account of it in my professional life, you fail to realize that it exists in you - highlighted by the views you put forward, in a fairly blinkered form.

I would suggest that coming from a fair distance the right, you are unable to see where the middle of the road lies.
Your opinion is as "clueless" as that of Dan Rather, or anyone else's for that matter.

It's not a question a laziness. But I have better, more entertaining books to read than the one you suggest. If I were to want to write something about media bias, then I would read it but to have a discussion with you - frankly it's not worth it.

You also take one definition of liberal. You can get into the semantics of what you say but the tone you put across is clear. I suggest you re-read what you've written rather than just repeating yourself
Instead of labelling these people "lefties", if you seek make no connection to those with a "liberal" (as defined by conservatives) leaning, then why not call them "righties" instead - should this choice be so random.
Why - because you seek to make poor assessments of people with views that are not as extreme as yours. When you are challenged to hide behind your definition of the term "liberal".

I understand what you are saying - lefties are not really liberals.
As righties are not necessarily conservatives.

You have trouble with the term liberal. Lets put your views expressed earlier another way. Many of those with views from the left of the political spectrum are closed minded and so should not be called liberal.

I would also think you understand that it is the people with what are generally considered right-wing points of view who use the term liberal the most, usually in a negative way.”

“Right-wingers really do make use of the term "liberal".

Have you ever counted the number of times Mona "The Moaner" Charen uses "liberal" in her columns?”

“And left wingers really use the term neocon.
Big effin deal.”

“i can't understand why liberals always try to squirm out of being called a liberal. many won['t admit that is what they are, instead they try to change the subject or muddy the waters with psychobabble gobbledygook. why not just admit you are a liberal, since it's obviously what you think is right?

i've had arguments with violin, tilt, phaed, tom and others because they wouldn't admit to being a liberal, when pretty much every stance they take is a liberal one.

it raises questions in my mind as to their true methods to their madness.....


in other words they are either ashamed to be liberal, or they are lieing about their beliefs for some crazed reason....


well boys? what is it? and don't hand me that 'moderate/vote for the man' crap. if you side with jessie jackson and tom dashel all the time, your a liberal. if you are coinstantly defending gephart and bashing bush, you're a liberal. on and on, don't be coy...

a spade after all is merely a spade...and a hoe a hoe”

“well, stratdewd, I think the crux of the problem is how do you define a "liberal" and how do you define a "conservative".

What meaning can we derive from the labels?”

“We've been over this like a thousand times. Strat won't define liberal.”

“i just did define it. you sup[port liberal causes and liberal politicians, and you no not support conservative views or people. pretty simple really...

it's like defining blue, or defining cold, or defining love....you just know it when you see it.


and i see it alot around here. lots of my friends are liberals, some by choice, some by ignorance, some by apathy or peer pressure and most are just because their daddy was and they never even thought there could be another side to things.


i used to be a liberal, untill i really started looking at the whole picture and stopped being so selfish....


true liberalism, pure liberalism wouldn't be so bad, but it's been corrupted by mans lust for power”

“Strat, have you ever heard that you can't define a word by using the word to define it?

From your definition, I could call you a liberal, because I just know it when I see it.

Do I have liberal points of view? Damn straight. Am I A LIBERAL? My more liberal friends wouldn't say so.”

“ok, you are 'somehwhat' liberal....

i have friends that are more conservative than i am. but i bet to you i'm a jack-booted thug...”

“"if you side with jessie jackson and tom dashel all the time, your a liberal. if you are coinstantly defending gephart and bashing bush, you're a liberal. on and on, don't be coy..."

Strat that's the dumbest thing I ever read. I'm glad everything is that simple on your planet.

Bush is a ratba$tard deserter.

I side with arguments, not people/politicians. If something is wrong it's wrong and it doesn't matter what side it came from.

I support the right to do what you want to do whether it be owning a gun, getting an abortion, smoking pot, watching porn, religious freedom, telling someone the evils of abortion/guns/porn/religion. I believe that as citizens we have the RESPONSIBILITY to vote, perform jury service, and follow the law (and be ready to pay the price if you chose to break the law).

I would love to see a responsible government that operated on a minimum of taxes. And I'm aware that Republicans and Democrats, "Liberals and Conservatives" are NEVER gonna do it! Why? Job security!

And they rely on brainwashed clones to argue amongst themselves to keep you oblivious to the fact that MOST POLITICIANS DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU, ME, OR THE COUNTRY!

The DOJ just dropped an investigation into a college professor that had a policy of not writing a letter of recommendation to med school for students that did not believe in evolution

on the day that the saddam statue fell in Baghdad and the Administration broke it's arm patting itself on the back for giving Iraq democracy (with which they will use to chose theocracy) 40+ FEDERAL agents went in to a production company which makes really HARDCORE porn to create another obscenity case (that we will pay millions for as taxpayers) isn't that ironic??

sorry about the run on sentences.”

“if you want to know, here's where I stand:

”

“Dang.Take the test. I fall just to the right of, and little more libertarian than Gandhi. You?”

“Economic Left/Right: -4.50
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -5.79”

“I side with arguments, not people/politicians. If something is wrong it's wrong and it doesn't matter what side it came from


ok don, follow me here.....the ideas you follow are shared by others, just like mine are. well, the people i share "ideas' with tend to be conservative.....see how it works?

i agree that many on both sides are piles of crap. but you have to believe that the ideals, the philosophies will prevail. you gotta pick something...”

“here's where i landed....

Economic Left/Right: 1.88
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -1.33


some of the questions were a lil 'iffy'....hard to answer just as a general rul...”

“No you don't have to pick anything.

Because both of the sides are inherently flawed.

And I think most people don't even know what the true aims of each party are.

How long have you been paying attention to politics Strat? Both "sides" have sold themselves out over and over again. And I think that's crap, I chose not to play that game it's stupid.

What are the Conservative ideals?
What are the Liberal ideals?

I vote pragmatically, I think anyone who does otherwise really has to ask themselves why.”

“as do i....

if you choose not to decide, you'll still have made a choice...
Ghetty Lee”

“dang phead, you're over there with stalin.....”

“I guess to spell it out

Economically I'm conservative
Socially I'm liberal

but again it depends on the individual issue at hand.”

“I vote against anti-constitution folk. Especially the anti-gun crowd. The Republicans are definitley not perfect by any means but I see them as the lesser of two evils.

Economic Left/Right: 2.38

Authoritarian/Libertarian: -0.87

Did you all see where Tony Blair landed? I knew deep down he was not a lefty.”

“All except for the whole authoritarian thing, dip#&%!$.”

“see don, you do know what liberal means...

i noticed that, peckerwood. it did say that they "guessed" at some of those famous people, based on their polocies...”

“see don, you do know what liberal means...

i noticed that, peckerwood. it did say that they "guessed" at some of those famous people, based on their polocies...”

“And strat, it seems like we didn't choose all that differently on a whole number of things...”

“did i read it wrong? what quadrant are you in?”

“i've said all along phaeddy that we prolly have more in common than not.....you liberal, pinko commie tree hugger, peacenic, freak, you”

“If someone chooses not to label themselves as "liberal", "conservative", "moderate", etc., it might be that they either:
1. want the freedom to decide their stance on each issue as it arises.
2. realize that someone else will label them anyway, so why bother?
3. observe that many issues blur the lines, (go so far right that you're left)
4. want to be seen as radical and independent
5. are apathetic about the way the country is heading.
And, probably some other reasons.
It seems to me that some people want to define others who don't agree with them, in order to use this definition to prove how correct they are and how incorrect those who don't agree with them are.
Certain talk-show hosts are quite accomplished at this tactic. They paint an ugly picture and then stand back and shout, "Look, the picture of this kind of person is really ugly!!!". Then there is much proclaiming of how ugly people want this thing or that thing. A person might notice a dearth of genuine discussion with the "ugly" group, because it is much easier to shout down to the masses than engage in a debate that might prove that the "uglies" might have some substantial arguments.
It's not my job to label myself. Someone else can do that, if they feel so inclined. I do wish they would not cease from listening to my points of view, though.”

“i agree with much of that dan.

you liberal! HAHA!”

“That's one of the biggest reasons I hate labels, Dunadan.


Chili, equally valid arguments could be made showing that people who are for capital punishment but against abortion, and those who are for abortion but against capital punishment, are hypocritical. But it all depends on which principles guide their opinions. You could also make an argument that those who believe in “freedom of choice” are hypocritical when they don’t want people to chose how to invest their social security contribution. It all depends on what principles you follow. I struggle with my opinions all the time. I try to make my opinions consistent with my principles. I’m not always very good at it. If you ever see me being hypocritical, please point it out. I swear I’ll thank you for it. Dante had an especially low place in his hell for hypocrites.



You can call them whatever you like, Phaedrus. You are still free to chose in this country. At least until the PC police can send you to jail for “hate speech.” Maybe the PC patrol will decide to boycott you. Then you and your family will end up in the streets, living off welfare and screaming about more government subsidies for victims of “liberal” political correctness.



Yani, I agree that this administration has moved in a “right-wing” direction. I also believe that it was always “right-wing” but I just did not anticipate the consequences of its positions. You use this to say that you think the NYT is fair and unbiased in its reporting? You cannot be serious? I asked you about the editorial page, which is “left” by anyone’s standards. But you think the NYT is middle-of-the-road in its reporting too? LOLOLOLOLOLOL I am coming to see the wisdom in Goldberg’s position. I have scientific evidence to back up the position that I am not clueless. You, on the other hand, appear to be totally clueless.

You have no idea where my political views stand, yani. I have not said that I stand for any political position in any of my posts here. I have merely put forth ideas to generate discussion. I have one dictionary that includes unbigoted in its definition of “liberal.” You appear to be a hypocrite on many levels.

Yeah right, you have, “…better, more entertaining books to read…”. On which you can form an accurate opinion, unless you haven’t read the book. Yes of course. And I don’t want to read the NFPA fire codes because it speaks to mistakes in my profession that need to be addressed. And chili wouldn’t think of reading any Supreme Court decisions because hell never go in front of the Supreme Court and it will have no bearing on making him a better lawyer. And violin will never read any books on economic theory that don’t agree with his views. You didn’t make the debate team in H.S. did you, yani? Who are you trying to fool here?

I was teasing about the “lefties” things. But calling hypocritical “conservatives” righties, could be your choice. It is the hypocrisy of calling oneself “liberal” while being a closed-mind bigot to which I object. There is nothing in the definition of the word that precludes a “conservative” from being a closed-mind bigot.

“Many of those with views from the left of the political spectrum are closed minded and so should not be called liberal.” YES! I’ll go there. Sorry it took so long to get there. I certainly can express my views better. But I have a certain “smart-ass” characteristic to my nature that sometimes rubs people the wrong way. It gets them so fired up that the discussion becomes emotional rather than logical. I can’t admit to the highest motives when I enjoy seeing people try to discuss something emotionally rather than logically. I need to work on that aspect of my character.

“I would also think you understand that it is the people with what are generally considered right-wing points of view who use the term liberal the most, usually in a negative way." I don’t agree with this statement. People who call themselves “conservative” definitely use it in a negative way. But I hear a lot of “left-leaning” people use it as a badge of honor. I have used it as a badge of honor for myself on occasion. So if you ever see me being closed-minded (not to be confused with disagreement about clearly defined positions), hypocritical (including inconsistent), or bigoted, please point it out and we can discuss it.



Anybody see other inconsistent principles in the examples which I put forth?”

“People who complain about the government when they never vote is the first example that comes to mind, arc.”

“You can call them whatever you like, Phaedrus. You are still free to chose in this country. At least until the PC police can send you to jail for “hate speech.” Maybe the PC patrol will decide to boycott you. Then you and your family will end up in the streets, living off welfare and screaming about more government subsidies for victims of “liberal” political correctness.


LOL! I thought the lefties were supposed to be the big conspiracy theorists! :)

Actually, I don't generally call myself liberal. I have certain liberal points of view that get me labeled by people fond of labeling (you know who you are). If I were going to choose a term that better fits how I view the world, I would choose progressive or humanist. Not that you should have to all me that. I'd hate to make you change your speech patterns - too close to PC.”

“Generally I would say that by American terms the NYT leans slightly to the left - but then again it is trying to eastablish itself for an international audience. In global terms it is more to the right.

You label me a hypocrite. Why do you do that, because I don't agree with you? Or because I won't read a book you suggest. There is a huge difference between you reading a book on fire codes, which could help you in your job, as would be me reading a book on media law, and reading Goldberg's book. The book you suggest doesn't really offer me any better way of doing my job. I may read it one day, but not today.
You also know as much of my views and I do of yours. Was I wrong is guessing yours? Are you of a "left lean"? Do you support affirmative action? Are you a "liberal" and think the NYT editorial page reflects your views and is baised against the right? Was that what you were trying to say?
What's your views on Communism? Does everyone in American need to read Das Kapital to have a view?
Even this doesn't compare to your demand that I need to read this book to have a view as Das Kapital is a cornerstone of communisim. A book by a singe former journalist out to make a profit is not.
No I didn't make the debate team, we didn't have one. Nor did I go to an American high school.

What is this scientific evidence you suggest? I would say that any study of the media couldn't be science anyway.”

“Economic Left/Right: 3.12
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -3.69

Right winger with libertarian leanings it looks like. I'm closer to the middle than far out.

Some of the wording in the question makes it impossible to answer accurately. There were too many absolutes mixed in.”

“Intersting. You're further right than Stratdewd.”

“And I must re-read these things before I post them, I'm becoming worse than Ice Tea ;o)”

“-0.50
-0.62”

“Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -5.54

The problem I had with the test is the inclusion of more than one concept in a single question. For example, the one about a society should be very open about sex, but it's gone too far. Double-barreled!

I don't think it's a very valid measure, and probably not reliable, either.”

“Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -4.00

Pretty Gandhi-like, but less extreme than Phaedrus.”