[quote]Biased reporting affects morale.
It gives comfort to the enemy.
I blame the msm in no uncertain terms.
JeffR [/quote]
What for? The loss of WWII?
The media is doing a bad job. But it’s not like it’s all partisian. There are positive developments in Iraq that haven’t been reported. There are also plenty of terrible shit that’s gone down that hasn’t been reported.
60 Minutes: Shelving a Story to Boost Bush?
CBS puts Niger expose on hold as boss endorses Republicans
September 28, 2004
In an outrageous politicization of journalism, CBS announced it would not air a report on forged documents that the Bush administration used to sell the Iraq war until after the November 2 election (New York Times, 9/25/04). A network spokesperson issued a statement declaring, “We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election.”
The 60 Minutes segment was ready to air on September 8, but was bumped in favor of the now infamous report that relied on supposed National Guard memos whose authenticity CBS now says it cannot confirm. The furor over the Guard memos has created a situation where CBS executives say “the network can now not credibly air a report questioning how the Bush administration could have gotten taken in by phony documents” (Newsweek online, 9/22/04).
http://www.fair.org/activism/cbs-niger.html
Distortion
The AP is bending over so far backwards to appear “objective,” and to avoid sounding harsh toward the president, that it ends up misleading readers about a major event that’s been at the center of a crucial national debate.
http://www.cjrdaily.org/archives/000783.asp
Bush has media walking a fine line
USA TODAY
3/9/2003
Veteran[reporters] say they hadn’t seen such a stifling atmosphere since the 1980s, when President Reagan called on reporters using a seating chart.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2003-03-09-media-mix_x.htm
Bush to WND: ‘No, no, no’
President cuts off correspondent’s query during scripted news conference
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33822
Fleischer admits to scripting news conference
Spokesman says he decided what reporters Bush would call on
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31406
CNN’s Hatchet Job on Scott Ritter
Media smear ex-Marine for seeking answers on Iraq
September 12, 2002
Toronto Star
"By Monday, professional hairdo Paula Zahn told viewers Ritter had “drunk Saddam Hussein’s Kool-Aid.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0912-02.htm
Defining Bias Downward
Holding Political Power to Account Is Not Some Liberal Plot
Columbia Journalism Review
In the wake of the election the bias symphony is reaching for a crescendo. The new refrain goes this way: aside from John Kerry, the election’s other loser was mainstream media. George W. Bush, the theory goes, won despite the strenuous efforts of the press to bring him down. Here’s an example of this view. from Tim Graham of National Review Online:
Every anti-Bush angle . . . was explored with great ferocity. Almost every week of 2004 was a bad media week for Bush. There was Paul O’Neill Book Week. There was 9/11 Ads in Bad Taste Week. There was Richard Clarke Book Week. There was Bob Woodward Book Week. There were two weeks of Alabama National Guard Whereabouts Hunt. There were four weeks of Abu Ghraib hype . . .
What’s disturbing is not the way that Graham is whining into his champagne but his little two-step away from reality. He and others are defining bias downward, as anything that challenges a GOP point of view.
When a Republican former treasury secretary publicly parts company with his president on economic policy, that’s a legitimate story fit for national discussion. Ditto for a book by a top anti-terrorism expert who seriously argues that the administration is blowing the war on terror. Ditto for the need for some attention to the work of Woodward, a quality reporter on the insider perspective (and whose book on the run-up to the war was carefully balanced). An effort to map the young George Bush’s record in the Guard, unknown to this day?
http://www.cjr.org/issues/2005/1/editorial.asp
The mainstream media in this country are dominated by liberals.
I was informed of this fact by Rush Limbaugh. And Thomas Sowell. And Ann Coulter. And Rich Lowry. And Bill O’Reilly. And William Safire. And Robert Novak. And William F. Buckley, Jr. And George Will.
And John Gibson. And Michelle Malkin. And David Brooks. And Tony Snow. And Tony Blankely. And Fred Barnes. And Britt Hume. And Larry Kudlow. And Sean Hannity. And David Horowitz. And William Kristol. And Hugh Hewitt.
And Oliver North. And Joe Scarborough. And Pat Buchanan. And John McLaughlin. And Cal Thomas. And Joe Klein. And James Kilpatrick. And Tucker Carlson. And Deroy Murdock. And Michael Savage. And Charles Krauthammer. And Stephen Moore. And Alan Keyes.
And Gary Bauer. And Mort Kondracke. And Andrew Sullivan. And Nicholas von Hoffman. And Neil Cavuto. And Matt Drudge. And Mike Rosen. And Dave Kopel. And John Caldara.
And JeffR. And rainjack. And Zeb. And Boston Barrister. And Zap Branigan. ; )
http://www.denverpost.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=2833971
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
60 Minutes: Shelving a Story to Boost Bush?
CBS puts Niger expose on hold as boss endorses Republicans
September 28, 2004
In an outrageous politicization of journalism, CBS announced it would not air a report on forged documents that the Bush administration used to sell the Iraq war until after the November 2 election (New York Times, 9/25/04). A network spokesperson issued a statement declaring, “We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election.”
The 60 Minutes segment was ready to air on September 8, but was bumped in favor of the now infamous report that relied on supposed National Guard memos whose authenticity CBS now says it cannot confirm. The furor over the Guard memos has created a situation where CBS executives say “the network can now not credibly air a report questioning how the Bush administration could have gotten taken in by phony documents” (Newsweek online, 9/22/04).
http://www.fair.org/activism/cbs-niger.html
Distortion
The AP is bending over so far backwards to appear “objective,” and to avoid sounding harsh toward the president, that it ends up misleading readers about a major event that’s been at the center of a crucial national debate.
http://www.cjrdaily.org/archives/000783.asp
Bush has media walking a fine line
USA TODAY
3/9/2003
Veteran[reporters] say they hadn’t seen such a stifling atmosphere since the 1980s, when President Reagan called on reporters using a seating chart.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2003-03-09-media-mix_x.htm
Bush to WND: ‘No, no, no’
President cuts off correspondent’s query during scripted news conference
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33822
Fleischer admits to scripting news conference
Spokesman says he decided what reporters Bush would call on
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31406
CNN’s Hatchet Job on Scott Ritter
Media smear ex-Marine for seeking answers on Iraq
September 12, 2002
Toronto Star
"By Monday, professional hairdo Paula Zahn told viewers Ritter had “drunk Saddam Hussein’s Kool-Aid.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0912-02.htm
Defining Bias Downward
Holding Political Power to Account Is Not Some Liberal Plot
Columbia Journalism Review
In the wake of the election the bias symphony is reaching for a crescendo. The new refrain goes this way: aside from John Kerry, the election’s other loser was mainstream media. George W. Bush, the theory goes, won despite the strenuous efforts of the press to bring him down. Here’s an example of this view. from Tim Graham of National Review Online:
Every anti-Bush angle . . . was explored with great ferocity. Almost every week of 2004 was a bad media week for Bush. There was Paul O’Neill Book Week. There was 9/11 Ads in Bad Taste Week. There was Richard Clarke Book Week. There was Bob Woodward Book Week. There were two weeks of Alabama National Guard Whereabouts Hunt. There were four weeks of Abu Ghraib hype . . .
What’s disturbing is not the way that Graham is whining into his champagne but his little two-step away from reality. He and others are defining bias downward, as anything that challenges a GOP point of view.
When a Republican former treasury secretary publicly parts company with his president on economic policy, that’s a legitimate story fit for national discussion. Ditto for a book by a top anti-terrorism expert who seriously argues that the administration is blowing the war on terror. Ditto for the need for some attention to the work of Woodward, a quality reporter on the insider perspective (and whose book on the run-up to the war was carefully balanced). An effort to map the young George Bush’s record in the Guard, unknown to this day?
http://www.cjr.org/issues/2005/1/editorial.asp
The mainstream media in this country are dominated by liberals.
I was informed of this fact by Rush Limbaugh. And Thomas Sowell. And Ann Coulter. And Rich Lowry. And Bill O’Reilly. And William Safire. And Robert Novak. And William F. Buckley, Jr. And George Will.
And John Gibson. And Michelle Malkin. And David Brooks. And Tony Snow. And Tony Blankely. And Fred Barnes. And Britt Hume. And Larry Kudlow. And Sean Hannity. And David Horowitz. And William Kristol. And Hugh Hewitt.
And Oliver North. And Joe Scarborough. And Pat Buchanan. And John McLaughlin. And Cal Thomas. And Joe Klein. And James Kilpatrick. And Tucker Carlson. And Deroy Murdock. And Michael Savage. And Charles Krauthammer. And Stephen Moore. And Alan Keyes.
And Gary Bauer. And Mort Kondracke. And Andrew Sullivan. And Nicholas von Hoffman. And Neil Cavuto. And Matt Drudge. And Mike Rosen. And Dave Kopel. And John Caldara.
And JeffR. And rainjack. And Zeb. And Boston Barrister. And Zap Branigan. ; )
http://www.denverpost.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=2833971[/quote]
Excellent!
MSM stopped being liberal long ago. It’s now just about dollars. As we all know, huge corporations own the MSM and huge corporations are benefited by Republicans being in office. At the very LEAST, the media is split 50/50 these days.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
“Nice one Jeff! You basically pointed out that the MSM has always been messed up.”
Thanks.
“You also brought out the difference between an enemy that actually attacked us and an enemy that we went to their country to attack.”
Wrong.
Remember hussein trying to kill GHWB? (1993)
Remember him firing on our planes in the no fly zone? Circa 1992-2003.
[/quote]
I remember quite well hussein trying to kill GHWB. I also remember that we launched several missles that blew the shit out of them in retaliation. Here is a link that discusses the incident and how it came out that Hussein ordered the attack.
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/fbilab1/05bush2.htm
I also remember him firing on our planes in the no fly zone. Which again, we blew the shit out of him again.
I am not arguing these events, all I am saying is that based on the article you posted, our COUNTRY was not attacked by Iraqi military like it was attacked by Japanese military. But we did march in and attack Iraq. I’m not taking sides, I’m just pointing out the differences.
Jeff, I appreciate you taking the time to flesh this out more. I may not always agree with your viewpoints, but I will take the time to read them and discuss them. The only time that I don’t is when I get nothing but insults and attacks. You didn’t do that and I appreciate it.
I agree with you that the MSM has its own agenda. It basically goes with the prevailing political winds unless it feels it can make more money by stirring up controversy. News is no longer news, its News-Entertainment. Its about ratings and money. Truth and honesty rarely has anything to do with it anymore.
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
…
I remember quite well hussein trying to kill GHWB. I also remember that we launched several missles that blew the shit out of them in retaliation. Here is a link that discusses the incident and how it came out that Hussein ordered the attack.
…[/quote]
According to everything I have read Clinton intentionally ordered the Iraqi security building to be hit during the night to minimize casualties because he didn’t want to overreact to a failed plot.
I suppose if they actually killed GHWB he would have ordered the building hit during the day so the actual agents were killed instead of the cleaning crew.
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
[i]"If you’re going to go in and try to topple Saddam Hussein, you have to go to Baghdad. Once you’ve got Baghdad, it’s not clear what you do with it. It’s not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that’s currently there now.
Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists?
How much credibility is that government going to have if it’s set up by the United States military when it’s there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave?"[/i]
- Dick Cheney, 1991
[/quote]
Just shows that our administration has been wrestling with these tough problems for a long time.
We didn’t go in blind as some would like to believe for political reasons.
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
60 Minutes: Shelving a Story to Boost Bush?
CBS puts Niger expose on hold as boss endorses Republicans
September 28, 2004
In an outrageous politicization of journalism, CBS announced it would not air a report on forged documents that the Bush administration used to sell the Iraq war until after the November 2 election (New York Times, 9/25/04). A network spokesperson issued a statement declaring, “We now believe it would be inappropriate to air the report so close to the presidential election.”
The 60 Minutes segment was ready to air on September 8, but was bumped in favor of the now infamous report that relied on supposed National Guard memos whose authenticity CBS now says it cannot confirm. The furor over the Guard memos has created a situation where CBS executives say “the network can now not credibly air a report questioning how the Bush administration could have gotten taken in by phony documents” … [/quote]
So CBS shelved one attack story about phony documents in order to air another attack story using phony documents in the same time slot?
This is proof that CBS News is not biased?
JTF, do you think about this stuff before you post it?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
So CBS shelved one attack story about phony documents in order to air another attack story using phony documents in the same time slot?
This is proof that CBS News is not biased?
JTF, do you think about this stuff before you post it?[/quote]
In case you didn’t notice Zap, a key GOP strategy relies heavily on painting the mainstream media as “liberal” so that any critical news can be discredited as slanted or bias and not entirely factual.
Here is a story about the “obvious” forged Niger/Uranium documents that the president used as evidence to take us to war in Iraq a month before the election. A story 60 Minutes worked on for 6 months and was scheduled to air Sept 8, suddenly gets bumped for a story about Bush’s guard service based on unconfirmed documents.
19 minutes or so into the story an “expert in typography” suddenly sees these documents as forged and sets the “Freepers” into a frenzy that dominates the airwaves for the next several weeks. In one fell swoop this story discredited the media (even more) and diverted attention from the biggest story of the year that most probably would have cost Bush re-election.
As it turns out the “liberal” media that is supposedly so “anti-Bush” never gets around to making a big issue that the blogger/expert who so quickly notices a forgery is none other than “Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes. He helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar then-President Bill Clinton following the Monica Lewinsky scandal.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04262/381287.stm
Not to mention, the “real story” of the Niger documents that got bumped is not even uttered in the “horrible liberal media” that will stop at nothing to bring down Bush. On top of all that, whether the guard documents where forged or not, they completely ignored the bigger issue that he never did or it was never proved that he completed his service obligation.
CBS - The Cowardly Broadcasting System
Sept 29, 2004
Salon
Bradley then interviews an expert from the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency, who tells him laughingly that it took only about two hours of Google searches for his staff to figure out the documents were fraudulent.
Then-CIA Director George Tenet warns the White House not to let Bush use the discredited Niger information in his speeches.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a senior Intelligence Committee member, tells Bradley that the claim was a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. “The people who wrote that address knew that the CIA doubted the very story that they were putting into the State of the Union,” Levin says. “So instead they put the words in the mouth of the British. That seems to me so fundamentally wrong.”
In his closing, Bradley explains how fiercely the White House fought his report. Administration officials and Republicans in Congress turned down “60 Minutes’” requests for interview. So did former Rep. Porter Goss, the Florida Republican whom Bush has appointed as the new director of the CIA.
http://www.independent-media.tv/itemprint.cfm?fmedia_id=9170&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported
Blog-Gate
Columbia Journalism Review
CRC’s executives bragged to PR Week that they helped legitimize the documents-are-fake story by supplying quotes from document experts as early as the day after the report, September 9. The goal, said president Greg Mueller, was to create a buzz online while at the same time showing journalists “it isn’t just Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge who are raising questions.”
http://www.cjr.org/issues/2005/1/pein-blog.asp
Show me a liberal or moderate conservative who’s happy with the way the media reported on this administration. All the stuff that’s going on right now was well known in internet circles and by the media well before the 04 election, yet most people are only hearing about it for the first time a year after the election.
Besides the hundred other reasons, that alone should invalidate the 04 election.
NON-PARTISAN GAO REPORT CONFIRMS CONCERNS ABOUT SECURITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES
Liberal media pretends not to notice.
And one for the road:
‘Dean Scream’ Clip Was Media Fraud
The Miami Herald
Feb 23, 2005
It’s never clear why some media wrongs are made into a big deal while others slip by. Take the CBS “60 Minutes” report on Bush’s military nonservice: The story itself was old, the dubious evidence was of dubious importance, and the broadcast had no discernible effect. It became a major scandal anyway.
On the other end of the scale is an instance of clear-cut media wrongdoing that involved unquestionably fraudulent evidence and had dramatic consequences. This one, however, has gone largely unremarked. It is the famous incident involving Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean that is known as The Dean Scream.
In fact the Dean Scream was a fraud, probably the clearest instance of media assassination in recent U.S. political history.
That clip was aired an estimated 700 times on various cable and broadcast channels…
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/38/9224
And that’s how the Dems ended up with Kerry…
God damn, I love liberal conspiracy theories.
Did you know Dan Rather was Bush’s step-brother? It’s true!! Barbs had a fling with Walter Cronkite’s dad, resulting in Rather. Later she married GHWB, and spit W. out of her vagina. That was the exact moment the MSM cabal was formed.
[quote]mmg_4 wrote:
Do you walk around with a big banner saying: “im a republican, and i DOMINATE!!!” [/quote]
Just to be clear, I have a tatoo on my forehead that reads, “I’m not a democrat, so I don’t have a micro-penis”.
[quote]doogie wrote:
God damn, I love liberal conspiracy theories.
[/quote]
One day a conspiracy theory, the next day front page news.
mmg_4 wrote:
“oooooohhh,republican DOMINANCE, nice jeffr. Let me ask u something,”
First of all, “u” is not a word. It never has been and never will be. Anyone who uses that letter as a replacement for “you” deserves scorn.
“how has being a republican helped you be DOMINANT in your own life?”
My dominance has led me to the Republicans. The whining, carping, and lack of realistic alternatives has made the modern democrats completely unattractive.
“Do you walk around with a big banner saying: “im a republican, and i DOMINATE!!!” And how was i being prejudice, i mean, you really dont like democrats, right?”
I do not like the modern democrat. I think they are hypocrites and the worst cabal of political opportunists in our history.
I don’t need a sign to proclaim my Republicanism.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
I do not like the modern democrat. I think they are hypocrites and the worst cabal of political opportunists in our history.
I don’t need a sign to proclaim my Republicanism.
JeffR
[/quote]
Ahhh… so U were the one being biased and has prejudice…And why do you assume that i am a democrat just because i disagree with you? most likely because your mind isnt open enough to see past conservative vs. Liberal…The first step to a solution is admitting that you have a problem, Jeffrey, you limp piece of shit.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
I don’t need a sign to proclaim my Republicanism.
JeffR
[/quote]
Your in good company Jeff.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/caseclosed/tedbundy1.shtml
Just be sure and stay off the list ; )
http://policecrime.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=hy78t4d56t6&action=print&thread=1128888898
JTF,
How you can figure pulling one attack story on Bush to air a different attack story on Bush proves CBS is in Bush’s pocket is impossible to figure out.
Regarding the “conspiracy” of Deans scream, where is the fraud you claim?
The article you linked certainly makes the claim, but does not make the case it was a fraud.
Dean screamed. It was shown a billion times because it was funny as hell to see a candidate make a complete ass out of himself.
Remember when GWH Bush puked and passed out at the dinner in Japan? I only saw that about a million times on TV because there was a vast right wing conspiracy to cover that up.
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
Your in good company Jeff.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/caseclosed/tedbundy1.shtml
Just be sure and stay off the list ; )
http://policecrime.proboards28.com/index.cgi?board=hy78t4d56t6&action=print&thread=1128888898[/quote]
[/quote]
You are one of a kind JTF.
So would you rather be a Ted Bundy, or a JW Gacy?
[quote]mmg_4 wrote:
Ahhh… so U were the one being biased and has prejudice…And why do you assume that i am a democrat just because i disagree with you? most likely because your mind isnt open enough to see past conservative vs. Liberal…The first step to a solution is admitting that you have a problem, Jeffrey, you limp piece of shit.[/quote]
Once again the midgeted one drops his “open your mind ands be free like me” bullshit.
It might actually come across with a tad more credibility if you didn’t type like a fucking highschool kid with a new blackberry.
BTW - I have yet to see you offer any opinion that proves this higher mental state that you fashion yourself as haveing. In fact - other than parroting the left, you have done nothing but try your less than enviable skills at insulting those from the right side of the aisle.
To borrow a line from Vegita’s assessment of your worthlessness - “Walks like a duck”.
Until you actually come up with an idea, or an argument that even approaches this free thinker you fashion yourself to be - I am affraid you will never be considered anything more than the angry, bitter, unoriginal hack that you are prving to be through your posting.
Now come back with something really witty, replete with your teen-aged writing skills, and prove yourself to be more than the idiot you are.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
JTF,
How you can figure pulling one attack story on Bush to air a different attack story on Bush proves CBS is in Bush’s pocket is impossible to figure out.
Regarding the “conspiracy” of Deans scream, where is the fraud you claim?
The article you linked certainly makes the claim, but does not make the case it was a fraud.
Dean screamed. It was shown a billion times because it was funny as hell to see a candidate make a complete ass out of himself.
Remember when GWH Bush puked and passed out at the dinner in Japan? I only saw that about a million times on TV because there was a vast right wing conspiracy to cover that up.[/quote]
There was no conspiracy. The media just completely overblew that, and their treatment of it was rididuclous. They often focus on the wrong things and sensationalize whether to the benefit of Democrats or Republicans.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
JTF,
How you can figure pulling one attack story on Bush to air a different attack story on Bush proves CBS is in Bush’s pocket is impossible to figure out.
Regarding the “conspiracy” of Deans scream, where is the fraud you claim?
The article you linked certainly makes the claim, but does not make the case it was a fraud.
Dean screamed. It was shown a billion times because it was funny as hell to see a candidate make a complete ass out of himself.
Remember when GWH Bush puked and passed out at the dinner in Japan? I only saw that about a million times on TV because there was a vast right wing conspiracy to cover that up.[/quote]
Zap…be honest, now: that was funny.
(And, I can’t speak for anyone else, but even liberal-ol’-me felt bad for the guy there. He was a 60-something year old man with jetlag being force-fed sake and sushi.)