By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at [email protected] and we'll help you recover your account.

Liberal Media in the US

Discussion in 'News' started by imported_b0b, Nov 21, 2004.

  1. imported_b0b

    imported_b0b Guest

    Is the media in the US really liberal? Right-wingers always seem to be moneing about the "liberal media" but to me (and here I admit I have limited knowledge of it - I'm Enlgish & live in England) American media seems to be some of the most right wing and obedient media in the world. I am incorrect? Is American media as liberal as people moan about? Is one man's liberal another man's right wing?
  2. villain

    villain Veteran Member

    Joined: Jul 12, 2002 Messages: 5,190 Likes Received: 2
    No it's not liberal at all. What it is is that media is mostly owned by right wingers... though most journalists are left wingers. So you get some subtle and nuanced information... and most of the real important stories are in the back pages.... I've even seen them sometimes in the middle of the comics section.

    KING BLING Guest

    The right views any truth not in line with there beliefs to be liberal and anti-Christian. The reason for this is the same attitude you can see in the republican government of ours and the people behind them - if you're not with us you're against us.

    To explain:
    Billy Bob Ifuckmysister governor bans abortion and has 4000 crosses hung up in every office in the state. He does so knowing that it violates the findings of the surpreme court and by that violates the constitution. He knows someone will step up to say "wait, doesn't this violate my right to not have your religion shoved down my throat like your dick in your sisters mouf?" And they go to court and the court sides with the logical fair intent of our government, hopefully. And the media reports it as it happened, with no extreme bias either way especially because they are hyper sensitive due to always being accused of having a left bias. BUT, since the republicans think everything including brushing there teeth is a war of good and evil and the media did not try to cast down bolts of lightning on the court systems, the evil constitution and the pagan godless devils who ould request fairness - the media is too liberal.

    R.I.P NOW with Bill Maher
  4. BROWNer

    BROWNer Guest

  5. metallix

    metallix Elite Member

    Joined: Oct 7, 2001 Messages: 2,955 Likes Received: 1
  6. cpickle

    cpickle Member

    Joined: Sep 3, 2002 Messages: 886 Likes Received: 6
    Yes the vast majority of media here in the 'States is far left-wing. In this last election, they were so convinced by their early exit polls that Kerry was going to win -- they were giddy over the prospect... now they're in deep denial over Bush's victory.

    I long ago stopped watching television news as it's impossible to get a straight story out of it.
  7. BROWNer

    BROWNer Guest

    ^killer argument.
  8. KaBar2

    KaBar2 Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 27, 2003 Messages: 2,130 Likes Received: 66
    I think one's opinion about whether the American media is left- or right-wing depends upon one's own subjective view of politics. One's statement about it says a lot more about oneself than it does about the political tendencies of the average journalist, newspaper, radio station or television network.

    I think most journalists tend to be young and college-educated. It would not surprise me at all to find that young, college-age people are liberals or leftists. I was an anarchist when I was young, and before that, a very liberal, left-wing Democrat.

    Owners and editors and news directors tend to be older, and male, and here in the U.S. are often Caucasian. These facts telegraph that the owners-editors-news directors are likely to be more conservative.

    However, if one is a right-wing Christian and Republican, a more-or-less liberal Republican editor who gives his ultra-liberal young Democrat journalists some room to run is going to seem very liberal.

    If one is a middle-aged, "1960's" Democrat with a liberal arts degree, the media is going to seem quite stilted and conservative.

    If one is an early-twenties college student attending a school like Berkeley, the news media is going to seem to obviously be part and parcel of the American imperialist propaganda machine, and the very idea that journalist can or should be "impartial" to be just more evidence of the racist, sexist, fascistic nature of the mass media.

    Having been at each of these places at one time or another, I think that the media has changed more than just a little in the last thirty-five years, but I have changed a whole hell of a lot. Therefore, the media that seemed callous and fascistic in 1968 now seems to me like a hopelessly liberal shill for the nanny state.
  9. DripOfAWish

    DripOfAWish Member

    Joined: Apr 16, 2003 Messages: 277 Likes Received: 0
    i watched that hour-long video that browner provided a link for. it did a good job articulating with great examples what i've always thought about the media. basically it's conservative in that it protects the interests of large corporations since the media is in fact owned by these large corporations.

    there are some loose ends left by some of the statements in the video, that i thought should have been further addressed, basically statements that rely on the presupposition that you already agree with them, which i thought was faulty on their part.

    kabar, try to spend the hour watching it, even if it starts stating things you greatly disagree with, just stick it out for the entire hour.
  10. Xeroshoes

    Xeroshoes Senior Member

    Joined: Apr 16, 2001 Messages: 1,413 Likes Received: 0
    You cannot generalize like that. That is an extreme view which most 'liberals' do not hold; I would know since I am attending a notoriously liberal school. Most intelligent people don't view things in black and white like that. I have read a bunch of your posts on here, and it is clear to me that you have a problem appreciating the shades of gray. People turn to the news for information. Most people trust the news, unless it's flagrantly biased like FOX news. In my experience, appreciably intelligent people do not blindly adhere to some radical dogma; that is, they don't approach things with some preconceived notion that everything they see on the news is "part and parcel of the American imperialist propaganda machine." I would not say that the US media is particularly right-wing, and my friends here probably wouldn't either. I would, however, say the argument that the media has a left-wing bias is bullshit. That said, it might be better to listen to the people here who live in other countries, because they have an objective view of things.
  11. KaBar2

    KaBar2 Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 27, 2003 Messages: 2,130 Likes Received: 66
    NOBODY has an "objective view of things." People from other countries have a viewpoint that is colored by their own life experiences and culture. Their opinions are valid (to them,) but not necessarily valid to ME. All viewpoints are subjective, at least to one degree or another, and because of that, all viewpoints are open to question and to some degree, suspect.

    Only things that can be absolutely measured can be considered to be completely objective. The barometric pressure, for instance, or the hardness of steel--yes, that is objective. But virtually everything else is subject to opinion, and since my opinion is just as valid as yours, and your opinion is just as valid as a third person's, it's pretty much all subjective.

    "One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter."

    Who is to say who is right? There is no "right," except as how one perceives it to be. My justice my be your injustice, and vice versa. Our opinion about what is "right" is colored by our own interests, our own experience and so forth. There are plenty of shades of gray in my life, but at some point one must strike a line of discernment and state "This is dark enough to be considered black; and this is only dark gray; and this is light gray; and this over here is white." What is dark gray to me may be black to you, and so forth. It's mainly a matter of opinion, and that makes it subjective.
  12. Xeroshoes

    Xeroshoes Senior Member

    Joined: Apr 16, 2001 Messages: 1,413 Likes Received: 0
    That's great, but I still think that people in other countries have a comparatively objective view in this case. Sorry for not making that clear...

    Grandiloquence alone won't justify your argument. I'm not even going to argue with you. I can tell that it will go nowhere, and your lack of a logical argument says more than I can. In the spirit of what I just read in the anarchism thread, I'm gonna stop wasting time at this shit...
  13. KaBar2

    KaBar2 Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 27, 2003 Messages: 2,130 Likes Received: 66
    Lack of a logical argument? One must base a philosophy of right and wrong upon something.

    For instance, if I am ostensibly a Christian, and therefore believe in the principles of Christianity, and base my moral code upon the teachings of Jesus Christ, or at least upon the New Testament and what the New Testament authors had to say about the teachings of Jesus, then my behavior, my personal sense of morality and the way in which I regard the world should be that of a Christian. One cannot violate all the principles of Christianity and reasonably continue to regard oneself as a Christian.

    If I were an anarchist, and an adherant of anarchist philosophy, then I suppose I would base my moral code, my behavior and the way in which I regard the world upon the principles of anarchism. I would then accept most of socialist theory, a belief in economic communism (with a small "c"), the primacy of the individual, the tyranny of Law, the State, Family and the Church. I could not very well go into business, employ people for wages, and work to produce a profit. Not if I were an anarchist.

    Rather than base my philosophy upon the New Testament, I would base it upon Godwin, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Malatesta, Goldman, Christie and Meltzer and so forth. If I were an anarchist, I would despise religion, and the influence of religion upon society, but I would embrace the morality inherent in anarchism.

    The two viewpoints are diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive. They cannot be reconciled. Yet, Christians believe sincerely that they are right. And anarchists believe they are right. And if they both adhere to the principles of their respective philosophies, they will both lead unoffensive and morally consistent lives. Unfortunately, neither Christians nor anarchists (nor anyone else, really) seem capable of so doing, and therein lies our problem. We all fall painfully short of our lofty aspirations.
  14. imported_b0b

    imported_b0b Guest

    Other than the Kerry exit polls, what makes you say that? Examples?
  15. Nekro

    Nekro Elite Member

    Joined: Feb 19, 2003 Messages: 2,568 Likes Received: 1
    The thing is, the facts are left wing.

    Which side is usually more corrupt? The guy getting a blowjob in the bathroom or the guys selling weapons to Iran and starting wars based on information they know to be bullshit? Who's got more blood on his hands, Ted Kennedy or Henry Kissinger?

    The right wingers always scream about the so-called liberal media when they get busted doing nefarious shit.