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.
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.
