Depersonalization Support Forum banner

Liberal media? Psha!

274 Views 5 Replies 3 Participants Last post by  ZiggomatiX
I'm always flabbergasted when conservatives speak of the "liberal media", as if such an entity actually exists. This one mainly goes out to Gimpy (sorry if i got the name wrong), who has now mentioned it a couple of times.

I mean, certainly there is a balancing liberal constituency which evens out the often hard-handed right wing rhetoric. For every O'Reilly, there's a Franken. Here in Toronto, there is the Toronto Star...unapolegetically liberal, but not ridiculously so. It's counter is the sickening rag, The Toronto Sun, whose brilliantly conceived headline on the day of 9.11, poetically read: "THOSE BASTARDS!" One can imagine what their "articles" are like.

But to claim that mainstream american media (CNN and the other major networks) has a liberal slant is absurd. I heard an argument that because these networks have their home in NY and LA, traditional BLUE zones, that they must therefore have a liberal bias. I'm afraid that position is a little naive. To the best of my knowledge ALL of those networks are owned by a billion dollar parent company who are in the business of making money. The higher ups at these companies put pressure on their little news divisions to sell the news. And news sells a lot when a war is going on. Millionaires and their ilk, with some exception, vote RED.

I'm not saying there is a right-wing media conspiracy (although i certainly think there is a right-wing bias), but to say that there's a liberal bias to the news is something that i find quite laughable.

And Gimpy, that bit on CNN you posted about on another thread, which you found so hilarious...did it ever occur to you that many others may have also found it just as funny and would therefore have disregarded the opinions as overtly liberally biased when in fact, it was the Right, propogating their opinions by making the left look so ridiculous. It's the oldest propoganda trick in the book. I'm surprised you fell for it.

Also...during the Afghan campaign, the hunt for OBL, and working up to the invasion of Iraq, i had to really search to find any mainstream american news that would offer a "dove-ish" view of all these things. It wasn't until the whole situation in Iraq became a mess that some of these stations started straightening up and start taking the wars a little more seriously.

In the end, when it's all said and done...mainstream American media leans farther right than it does left. What are some other thoughts?

See less See more
1 - 3 of 6 Posts
First of all that hilarious report was not right-wing propaganda and I didn't fall for anything. I realize it was a report where they want to find some extreme people to make it more interesting. It was a report finding outraged democrats and they did it well. But, the only Bush supporter they find was this guy, I hate to jump to conclusions here, but he looked borderline homeless/crazy and he said he had talked to Jesus Christ who told him Bush was on this Earth to defeat Kerry. I found this guy funny, but nevertheless, they interviewed ONLY ONE Bush supporter, and they couldn't have found a "crazier" person. This guy was claiming that Jesus appeared to him, so basically he is calling himself a prophet. They couldn't have found anybody more outrageous. That's pretty slanted. I don't know if that was their intent. But, to throw you some props here, I will admit that I do like using the words "liberal media" a lot.

I do think that most television networks try to be as neutral as possible. It's the newspapers and magazines that throw everything out of whack. The New York Times, The Washington Post, the New Yorker, Rolling Stone, were so unabashedly liberal it was a joke. To counter that all you really have is The New York Post (which doesn't have the near the notoriety or circulation of the Times) and the Wall Street Journal. The Journal, in itself, is a purely business publication, so its probably going to be slanted by nature.

Although, it is known that O'Reilly is a republican, I don't think you can really compare him to Al Franken because they have different jobs. Al Franken and Ben Stein, yes. O'reilly and Chris Matthews, yes. O'Reilly gained SO MUCH attention because of this "fair and balanced" thing, which was kind of his baby. And when the feud between Al Franken and FoxNews came out about Franken's book using 'fair and balanced' in its title, it pitted the two against each other. I think O'Reilly and Matthews are great at what they do. They relentlessly attack and question everything and everybody. O'Reilly is right-winged but not as much as he is made out to be. People just really love to demonize O'Reilly because he is an outright asshole.

Yes, for every Begala, there is a Tucker Carlson...and on and on and on. I actually think what tipped the scale in the past few years and especially the past election, are all these liberal, dipsh*t celebrities who feel they have to meddle in politics and they gain so much media attention by nature and steal so much of the spotlight that television was just getting so much coverage of these assholes that it tipped the scale to the left. These are the people you seen on TV so it's coming off as more liberal. As I've alluded to in many of my posts, blame Hollywood.
See less See more
South Park dedicates a whole episode to satirizing the media in their latest episode. Regardless of where you stand politically, it is pretty funny. You can catch it 11 PM EST on Sunday since you missed it.
Here is a good article about the New York intelligentsia from one of my favorite authors and fellow alumnus Tom Wolfe. ... 25,00.html
1 - 3 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.