MorningGlory Posted October 22, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2009 Do non-propaganda outlets promote protests that are one sided in nature? That shows how much you DON'T know, B.E. The tea parties were attended by people of all political persuasions. Please, learn some facts before you post hyperbole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted October 22, 2009 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2009 Do non-propaganda outlets promote protests that are one sided in nature? That shows how much you DON'T know, B.E. The tea parties were attended by people of all political persuasions. Please, learn some facts before you post hyperbole. I'm thinking most Democrats didn't appreciate those signs at the 9/12 protests that said "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" or all the ones comparing Obama/Pelosi to Nazis. I saw a video of one person at the 9/12 protests going through the crowd with a tall sign saying 'Public Option NOW". He was almost entirely booed by the crowd, and all sorts of nasty things were shouted at him. He need half a dozen policeman to walk through the crowd without getting assaulted, and a few people still took swipes at his sign. In polls, they tell a different story. The majority of people support a public option. Among Democrats in one district (I think this was Harry Reid), it was 71% in favour. Among Republicans in that district, 21%. Seeing as most of the crowd booed him, and all those signs, and much of the rest of the video footage available, I doubt it was a straight Liberal/Conservative 50/50 split. It was probably at the very least heavily weighted in favour of Rather Conservative people. If the government decided to stop news conferences/press briefings and not give public statements or interviews of that nature period, that I fully expect to get backlash. The Conservative Party in Canada did that when they got into power, and reduced Government transparency, which a lot of people didn't like. In fact, the previous press secretary (I need to double check the title) for the Bush ADministration recently said "Near the end, we didn't do much with MSNBC. So yeah, the same type of thing did happen. That I don't have an issue with. The Government has it's freedom to say what it will under freedom of speech, and that may include opinons about News Organizations that may or may not be News Organizations. The issue is when a self described News Organization does the following; 1. Deliberately slants coverage. 2. Edits video in a misleading manner. 3. Covers topics highly of interest to one side of the politic spectrum, and gives them a boost by promoting and advertising them. Like the FNC Tax Day Tea Parties, or the 9/12 protests, but does not follow number 4. 4. Does not cover actual grassroots protests that did not have a major 24 news channel promoting it, that were still newsworthy, like the 75,000 people at the gay rights march a short time ago. Fox News gave that a total of 4:12 (that is, minutes and seconds) of coverage, with a shot from the top of a building. What else was deemed newsworthy, that needed a live Satellite truck, moreso than 75K people marching in Washington? An empty field were a couple dozen people protested. Earlier in the day. Nobody else was there at the time. The coverage adds up being almost entirely anti-Obama in slant, promoting near conspiracy theories, and notcovering newsworthy events that don't favour one politicla view. Is it their freedom to do as an organization? Yes. I'm not disputing that. Is it "Fair and Balanced" News Journalism? No. It may advertise as such, but someone could probably sue them for false advertising. Pointing that out, even if that person is in The Government, is a "No shorts, Sherlock!" kind of moment. It's patently obvious, and just because that person is a Government Employee doesn't diminish the truth of that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted October 22, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted October 22, 2009 I'm thinking most Democrats didn't appreciate those signs at the 9/12 protests that said "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" or all the ones comparing Obama/Pelosi to Nazis. I saw a video of one person at the 9/12 protests going through the crowd with a tall sign saying 'Public Option NOW". He was almost entirely booed by the crowd, and all sorts of nasty things were shouted at him. He need half a dozen policeman to walk through the crowd without getting assaulted, and a few people still took swipes at his sign. Again....why do you care? This all happened, or didn't happen, in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted October 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I'm thinking most Democrats didn't appreciate those signs at the 9/12 protests that said "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" or all the ones comparing Obama/Pelosi to Nazis. At least the protesters didn't inflate a giant balloon of Obama and throw shoes at it - like the Democrats/Liberals did of Bush during the Inauguration last January. But anyway, CNN got caught red-handed slanting biased coverage of the Tea Parties in a negative light. And I saw pictures of the crowds where I saw a lot of signs, and it was only a handful of posters that were offensive. Most weren't. But of course, the non-offensive majority is not sensational news. I saw a video of one person at the 9/12 protests going through the crowd with a tall sign saying 'Public Option NOW". He was almost entirely booed by the crowd, and all sorts of nasty things were shouted at him. He need half a dozen policeman to walk through the crowd without getting assaulted, and a few people still took swipes at his sign. And NOW parades are full of the sweetest, most gracious women you ever met, too. Not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaiah 6:8 Posted October 23, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 426 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 3,633 Content Per Day: 0.58 Reputation: 222 Days Won: 13 Joined: 03/23/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/26/1978 Author Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) OK burning, the gloves come off now. I have tried to be nice but you keep being obnoxious so here we go... you have your own agenda, you are not a U.S. Citizen you do not know what is going on here outside of what you see on TV. Of course you know, everything you see on TV is 100% truth right? You have your own biased ideas, you do not want to see the other point of view. From looking at what you have said what you have posted, and the links you have posted you have proven not to be a rational person. You are not only posting thoughts and idea's that are not just liberal but radical liberal. You seem to believe conspiracy theories that back up your own previously formed ideas but yet deride other people who believe in conspiracy theories that disagree with your predetermined idea's.You do not want an honest debate, which I ave with my liberal friends all the time, you just want to attack. You refuse to answer my main point, you refuse to admit that all news organizations have bias, as I have acknowledged you just keep attacking Fox. The point is not Fox news. The point is how the White house is dealing with a situation. They have admitted that they have controlled the media, and they want to control the media, this is against what the United States is founded on and is completely illegal. If you are so concerned about what is going on here, move here become a citizen and vote. I personally do not agree with anything Obama does I did not vote for him, I did vote but for the other guy. I have a right to object to the government and what it does as I live here and I have stated my opinion by voting. As for your accusations. The issue is when a self described News Organization does the following; (self described? Who defines what a news organization is? What are the rules? I think CNN started as a Edited October 23, 2009 by Isaiah 6:8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 The issue is when a self described News Organization does the following; 1. Deliberately slants coverage. 2. Edits video in a misleading manner. 3. Covers topics highly of interest to one side of the politic spectrum, and gives them a boost by promoting and advertising them. 4. Does not cover actual grassroots protests yeah....NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, AOL, MSNBC, BBC are terrible, eh? Thank God we have at least a few honest people left in journalistic pursuit at FOX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts