Media Darling

[marcostar57]

OMG .... the You-tube propaganda channel for the OLD PARTY of just NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO... ;-(

[1sheron]

These friggin Media WHORES, just can't wait to hump on this fraud's leg, it's sickening to watch as these liberal media WHORES act like a pack of RABID scavengers. Liberals just doing what LIBERALS do best.

[marcostar57]

Yea right! So you do think it's great that FAUX is the GOP's official "news" channel.......

[iron1215]

Yeah we pretty much have state run media here in the States. All but Fox that is.

[JohnRhysMusician]

Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, and Willie Geist show some independence over at MSNBC, but MSNBC is by far the worst.

[Teutonik]

oh easily, even the newscasters let slip once and a while just how biased they are.

[Teikiatsu]

$13M vs Free

THAT's bias

[Bucknik]

"...Apologies to Fox News." - B. Hussein Obama

[fencingwolf]

The left will always have more media coverage then the right. The majority of journalists are democrat! That is going to affect how they cover things, what they chose to cover and what gets spotlighted. Even if you wanted to try and be "neutral" the majority of people can't do it. That's just human psychology.

[JrobHartley]

Did you ever think that they have a bias towards reality? This country is so far to the right that the left in this country would be the right in others.

Like I said, journalists have a bias towards reality because it's what they face each day to do accurate reporting.

[groberts1776]

JrobHartley,

Are you aware that Ziegler's post-election poll shows that Obama supporters were half as likely to be able to correctly answer 10 of 13 questions about the candidates as McCain supporters? Does that accord with your "reality bias"?

Another recent poll showed that Hannity listeners were among the best informed Americans, much better informed than CNN or MSNBC viewers. If FOX and conservative talk show hosts "dumb down" the news so much, why are their viewers so well informed?

[fencingwolf]

A bias is a bias. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Otherwise humans couldn't process all the information that's out there. We need heuristics. Reality will always be relative, that''s why some topics are always controversial. Personally I just like stations that will come out and say who they support or what causes instead of being "neutral" because it's nearly impossible to be neutral. Especially in the world of politics.

[Re5Publica]

Yes.

But, there's not only a bias, which goes without saying, it's the amount of media, & news networks which are biased in favour of left-wing politics.

You have news networks, Hollywood, as well as programs like the Colbert Report and The Daily Show which are devoted to counteracting one of the few conservative networks, Fox, in order to convince millions of people that having any opinion other than the left-wing one is immoral & ridiculous, & should be mocked & scorned but not debated.

[nickh2024]

if republicans think that what is currently going on in this video is completely obamas fault then you are just too stupid to breathe. and if anyone thinks its completely bush's fault.. your an idiot. this has been coming for a long time and people have been telling us. and if this video is trying to point out that just because president obama gets free press and is always on the tv hhe is ay less of a president than you are stupid too. our country wants a president that is in contact with us.

[nickh2024]

okay douche do you recall someone name bush...hmmm ring any bells. if i recall fox news had full unlimited access to the white house not only for one hour but for most of his term. okay on his ranch in the oval office everywhere. and did democrats get full free coverage....no i dont think so. do you see a pattern i certainly hope so.

[groberts1776]

The difference was that the FOX documentary was human interest, not issue-oriented. They showed Bush mountain biking for crying out loud!

How about leaving the adolescent language behind. One of the things I like best about Republicans is that they tend to elevate the debate. Consider that next time you want to call your ideological opponent a d**che.

[JrobHartley]

Your assertion that Republicans tend to elevate the debate is laughable.

I see a pretty even amount of ridiculous statements made by both ideological sides. What's the point in stereotyping that most progressives act in that way because it's simply not true.

In fact, the higher educated the voter the more likely that they are to be a liberal so how exactly does that reduce the quality of the debate?

[groberts1776]

Compare the profusion of swearing on dKos to RedState: I found 26000 instances of a common swear word on Kos, to 55 for RedSate (use site: to replicate this study).

"Kos" said "that's Democracy" regarding anti-semitic comments on his blog, RedState deletes not only the posts, but the accounts if individuals who make anti-semitic statements.

Functional illiteracy:

City Votes

Detroit: 47%  Democrat

Highland Park: 56% Democrat

Truly,

George Roberts, Ph.D.

[JrobHartley]

Functional illiteracy doesn't take in to account the people that are educated and how well they 'elevate' the debate. It says nothing that inner city people are more likely to be illiterate. Nice sample.

Jrobhartley ABD, since it's important

[groberts1776]

I was just pointing out that the Democrats message appeals not only to intellectuals, but to people who are uh, well, umm let's say not so "intellectual".

I find the above contrast interesting because I do my research in Detroit. Most of my colleagues are very educated and very liberal. So are the ppl outside asking for change. "Hey, just one dollar! MAN!"

Nice chatting with you, No hard feelings, I hope. Congrats on coming this far. My field is proteomics, what's your dissertation research?

[fishbait888]

go collect welfare.

[wildbloodydragon]

Well, here's your shot, republicans. Youtube is free, it's all free. Go ahead, bring your health care plan to the table, let's see what you got.

The reason they are charging that much is that they are assuming Obama's speech is a program that actually has viewers, while you are just another agency trying to fit an advertisement in between their programs. It might be unfair, but that's the way it goes. You should know better, that's how your beloved concept of Capitalism works.

[1archer1]

the absurdity of your rationalization of state television ala ussr and any number of dictatorships is laughable and revelatory of the arrogance of the left.

[wildbloodydragon]

State television? Rationalization? dictatorships? What the fuck are you talking about man? I spoke about none of these in my comment.

[1archer1]

i don't expect you to either admit it if you're a dedicated statist, or be aware of it if you are just the typical naïve obamadrone. judging from your childish language, my guess is the latter.

[wildbloodydragon]

While we're at it, can I guess too? I think you're too brainwashed to realize how you're getting fucked by every god damn corporation in this country. From central bank, to insurance companies, to cable companies.

Oh and yeah. Fuck Obama and his lies. I'm not oblivious to his mistakes. That motherfucker didn't deserve my vote.

[groberts1776]

FOX News ratings are through the roof while other news sources are experiencing double-digit declines. Capitalism.

Hannity and Rush both have over 10 million listeners each week and the ABC special couldn't muster half of that.

Yes, we Republicans love capitalism because it provides an individual with the opportunity to improve their own circumstances. With politicians running enterprise, it is a matter of *who* you know (and that goes regardless of what party is in charge). Viva capitalism!

[andybob63]

Capitalism can suck, when it's not check by society. But it's the best system we've come up with to date, and should be used.

[wildbloodydragon]

Yeah, FOX...Why don't republicans ask them? They always sided with them. Sure, they're trashy, biased and report poorly (search: liberal viewer youtube channel), but as you mentioned, they got good ratings.

Yup, it's all about who knows who in a Capitalist country. I believe in moderation. We can keep our capitalist system, but we must control the power of those who are getting too rich and powerful for their own good. While we help and mobilize those in need.

Viva democracy.

[JrobHartley]

Fox news ratings are through the roof because most of it is news that is reduced to the lowest common denominator.

Viewers are continually feed on their own ignorance and prejudice, then sit down patting themselves on the back for doing their quota of 'hating' against things they disagree with yet seem to have no conclusive reason why they do so.

[groberts1776]

"Viewers are continually feed on their own ignorance and prejudice, then sit down patting themselves on the back for doing their quota of 'hating' against things they disagree with yet seem to have no conclusive reason why they do so."

Seems like you just indulged in what you accuse FOX of doing. I can disagree with a liberal news outlet without considering it hateful or prejudiced. I wish CNN and MSNBC well - more news sources can only help to support a well-informed populace.

[JrobHartley]

I was waiting for a response to the effect that my comment was somehow hypocritical or should be self applied.

There's a distinction that should be made between critical thought and baseless criticism.

To this date there is no study that shows any news channel to have a liberal bias, only studies that prove Fox is biased. Fox even plays along at this point, all but stating their news is balanced because they need to outweigh the other side.

I'll grant that MSNBC is reduced to pandering.

[groberts1776]

Bernard Goldberg did a book-length study of media bias and found plenty of it.

A UCLA study (Groseclose and Milyo) found 18 of 20 news outlets left of the average voter.

As a scientist, I will point out to you that bias is subjective, so you won't find a single definitive answer, but consider this: 9 of 10 reporters inside the beltway voted Democrat in 2008. I don't allege sinister intent, only pointing out that if 9 in 10 beltway journalists voted Republican...

[JrobHartley]

Indeed. Bias is obvious subjective. If it were objective then there wouldn't be any bias because everyone could find agreed upon principles.

I was just being sarcastic in much the same way you weren't alleging sinister intent. Journalists are forced to interpret reality, to take a subjective position on objective material.

Their opinions are based on regular observation of specific events that the 'average voter' doesn't witness or bother to research at all.

[JrobHartley]

Being left of the average voter is kind of like saying that a runner finished in the top 5 of a race when he was the only person in the race.

That leaves out the information that is pertinent to making a determination as to whether or not that journalists opinion is based in and a good representation of fact.

[JrobHartley]

What I'm saying is that even if journalists lean left that might not be a bias on their part but a bias which exists in the average voter which skews the opinion as being false or not a good representation of reality when it's the voter who is not aware of the actual issues.

Sorry for the previous posts spelling error, Bias is 'obviously' subjective.

[groberts1776]

If journalist's opinions of such high quality, why bother to be informed at all, just read the editorial page to see who they endorsed ; - ).

A more likely alternative explanation for liberal bias in the news is that liberals tend to be drawn to journalism.

Parody of your analogy: members of clergy were rated among the most conservative individuals in our society in a recent study. The clergy are experts in morals so why not abandon your own moral judgment and just do as you are told?