The Media Bias/Incompetence Thread

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,474
Reaction score
2,588
So this is a thread for all the bad media craziness polluting the air waves.

I'll start with DNN....

CNN Touts Slam of '80s 'Mythology' Promoting 'Militarism,' 'Greed'


This rhetoric has resonated because for many, it no longer stirs memories of the actual 1950s of Jim Crow laws, gender inequality and religious bigotry. Instead, it evokes the sanitized idea of “The Fifties” that was originally created in the 1980s through movies like Back to the Future, Stand By Me and Hoosiers, television shows like Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley, and rockabilly greaser bands like the Stray Cats.

Same thing for the Tea Party’s use of red-baiting language that suggests the individual is more important than the common good. Though the Cold War ended years ago and though Ayn Rand is long dead, the bromides elicit Red Dawn fears and Michael Jordan dreams from a generation that grew up being taught to see ourselves as both Soviet-oppressed Wolverines and the next superstars singularly soaring to MVP awards – as long as we will ourselves to just do it.

You write, “It is impossible to consider the enduring legacy of the 1980s without first returning to and prostrating ourselves at the altar of Michael J. Fox.” What is Fox’s enduring impact today?

Michael J. Fox’s two most iconic characters in the 1980s were Marty McFly and Alex P. Keaton. Those two characters perfectly represent exactly how the 1980s was revising and reimagining contemporary American history on ideological lines.

Think about it: Marty McFly was a suburban teen fleeing the cartoonized dangers of modern life (ie. bazooka-weilding Libyan terrorists stalking the suburbs) into an idyllic Fifties of unity and safety. Alex P. Keaton, by contrast, spends his life lambasting his parents Sixties idealism.

This “Back to the Future”-versus-”Family Ties” war between the 1980s version of “The Fifties” (supposedly 100% unified, universally happy, optimistic, safe, etc.) and the 1980s version of “The Sixties” (supposedly 100% violent, chaotic, overly idealistic, etc.) defines our politics today.


Damn you Marty McFly......

You also make a case that the original “A-Team,” which reached new levels of prime time TV violence, may have something to do with how a generation views our government. How so?

First, it’s important to remember just how influential the A-Team was among ‘80s kids – who are, of course, today’s world-shaping adults. Though it's easy to retroactively trivialize that show, according to the New York Times in 1983, the program's first season had a particularly “large following of teen-agers and children aged 6 to 11” and by it’s second season People magazine estimated that a whopping 7 million preteens were watching each week. So this was a show that was really shaping kids minds at precisely the moment that they are forming their storylines about the world.

And what is the storyline of the A-Team? It’s one of the single-most anti-government parables of the modern age. From the beginning, we are told that the government wrongly accused and incarcerated these heroes; that the government is too inept to keep them incarcerated; that the A-Team is solving societal problems that the government refuses to solve; that the average person can find the A-Team but that the government can’t; and that the government is actually trying to stop the A-Team from its good samaritan work.

Sounds familiar, right? Of course it does – this is the way government is framed in the 21st century. We’re constantly told the government is either inept, evil, or both – and that the only way to solve problems is to either “go rogue” or hire a private contractor to fix the problem. That was the theme of not only the A-Team, but the entire “vigilante” genre of similar ‘80s productions like The Dukes of Hazzard, Ghostbusters, Die Hard and all the cheesy private detective shows. Their message was simple: You can’t rely on government, you must instead rely on the private corporation.

The A Team is too blame for the Tea Party!!!!
 
I don't know if anti-state was a prevailing theme in the 80's but it is certainly not how the state is "framed" in the 21st century. Almost every person I've met is some kind of statist. Social liberals are a dime a dozen. hell the state and its power has grown to record levels, the biggest sector of the economy in SA is the public sector, how can they seay people are anti-state these days?

What a terrible article...
 
Last edited:
"We’re constantly told the government is either inept, evil, or both..."

Really? And yet most people believe if the "right" people take control of the State and steal more money to throw around to the "right" places things will be better? Har har...
 
List of biased media:

- All.

Some of them are just better in hiding it than others.
 
Try mentioning the benefits of minimal government to South African friends and see the odd looks you get.

What most people in SA regard as liberty (right to vote, access to social services) is very different from what a person in the US regards as liberty (freedom from govt attempting to legislate behaviour, freedom from paying for other peoples welfare).

P.s. I don't mean voting is not a part of liberty, its just that voting rights for the US are a given.
 
Thanks for the awsome article, I always felt that the 50s was over-romanticised in the 80s, but never understood until now.
A very interesting point of view.
 
Three questions for you.

1. Do you think of Republicans and the Tea Party as dangerous, violent extremists?
2. Do you think the Wisconsin protests over GOP Governor Scott Walker's move to strip public sector employees of collective bargaining were peaceful?
3. Do you scoff at the right wing notion that mainstream media like the New York Times, the TV networks and NPR have a liberal media bias against the conservatives?

If you answered 'yes' to all three of those questions, then let me ask you one more...

Why isn't the mainstream media talking about the death threats against Republican politicians in Wisconsin?

Try to set aside whatever biases or preconceptions you might have for a moment and ask yourself why death threats against politicians aren't considered national news, especially in the wake of the all too fresh shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and other bystanders. And there hasn't just been one death threat, but a number of them.

Here's an example and it's real. According to Wisconsin State Department of Justice, authorities have found a suspect who admitted to sending the following email:

I want to make this perfectly clear. Because of your actions today and in the past couple of weeks I and the group of people that are working with me have decided that we've had enough. We feel that you and your republican dictators have to die. This is how it's going to happen: I as well as many others know where you and your family live, it's a matter of public records. We have all planned to assult you by arriving at your house and putting a nice little bullet in your head. However, this isn't enough. We also have decided that this may not be enough to send the message. So we have built several bombs that we have placed in various locations around the areas in which we know that you frequent. This includes, your house, your car, the state capitol, and well I won't tell you all of them because that's just no fun. Since we know that you are not smart enough to figure out why this is happening to you we have decided to make it perfectly clear to you. If you and your goonies feel that it's necessary to strip the rights of 300,000 people and ruin their lives, making them unable to feed, clothe, and provide the necessities to their families and themselves then We will "get rid of" (in which I mean kill) the 8 of you. Please understand that this does not include the heroic Senator that risked everything to go aganist what you and your goonies wanted him to do. The 8 includes the 7 senators and the dictator. We feel that it's worth our lives becasue we would be saving the lives of 300,000 people. Please make your peace with God as soon as possible and say goodbye to your loved ones we will not wait any longer. Goodbye *******!!!!

After the Giffords shooting, authorities have to take this sort of threat seriously. The media should too, even if the disturbed person who sent that email was motivated by exactly the kind of rhetoric that's been used by many liberals against GOP officials over and over again during the Madison protests. And there are more threats floating around the internet, in varying degrees of scary and credible.

If you read liberal blogs, you might have heard of some of these threats. Indirectly, anyway. Sarah Palin said the rhetoric should be toned down. The threats themselves were ignored and Palin was mocked.

On the other hand, if you read conservative blogs or listen to conservative media, you know all about these threats because people like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh and websites like Newsbusters and BigJournalism have not only been talking about the death threats for days now but they've been talking about the mainstream and liberal media ignoring the threats for days.

Ignoring the story of these threats is deeply, fundamentally wrong. It's bad, biased journalism that will lead to no possible good outcome and progressives should be leading the charge against it.

Just before writing this article, I did a Google search and it's stunning to find out that the right wing media really isn't exaggerating -- proven death threats against politicians are being ignored by the supposedly honest media. If you've never agreed with a single thing that Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly et al have said about anything, you can't in any good conscience say that they don't have a point here. Death threats are wrong and if a story like Wisconsin is national news for days, then so are death threats.

I'm in an odd position. In the last few months, I've had one foot in the left wing news stream and one foot in the right. My media duality began when conservative publisher Andrew Breitbart hired me to work with him on the Pigford 'black farmers' settlement story. I'm a pro-choice, pro-single payer, anti-war, pro-gay rights independent liberal with years of work in print and film backing those positions. Breitbart hired me to bring a different perspective to the non-partisan issue of corruption in Pigford.

Since then, I've written both here for the left-leaning Huffington Post and at Breitbart's right leaning BigGovernment.com. I've ended up reading a lot more conservative sites and dealing firsthand with a lot more conservatives than any time since I attended a high school dedicated to the principles of Ayn Rand about 30 years ago.

Unlike many on the left, I didn't view the Wisconsin battle as the end of days. I wasn't convinced that I had a dog in that hunt, in part because I think there's a strong case to be made those public employees shouldn't have the same collective bargaining rights as private sector workers -- a case made well by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who said...

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress."

Roosevelt's statement makes sense to me; it does seem that public employees are different than private. I'm not at all anti-union. (I've publicly supported unionizing the visual effects industry, for example.) I'm open to a good rational argument against the case FDR made but in discussions on Twitter and elsewhere, all I got in response from people on the left was anger and insults. I saw little light and felt much heat.

That tone of extreme hostility I experienced brings me back to the death threats in Wisconsin. Frankly, the bile and invective in that threat reminded me of the tone I saw directed at me from many so-called liberals because I committed the heresy of taking a different position from them on the issue of collective bargaining for public sector employees... based on something FDR said.

Is this really what liberalism has come to in 2011?

Since working with Breitbart, my position on political issues hasn't changed but I'd be lying if I didn't say I'm deeply disappointed by the virulent, lockstep attitude I see on the left. My experience in the last few months tells me what I would not have believed possible; on any number of issues (including Pigford, by the way) I've seen liberals act much nastier and with less factual honesty than the conservatives... and this includes on issues where I disagree with conservatives.

Burying the death threat story is a clear example of intellectual dishonesty and journalistic bias.

Don't take my word for it, though. Look into the story of death threats in Wisconsin yourself and see who has been covering the story and who hasn't. Try for a moment to see this story from the perspective of those who you may disagree with on policy and ask yourself how this looks to them. Can you blame them for feeling that way? Then take a few seconds and read those questions I asked you at the beginning of this article.

And then ask why progressives shouldn't expect more from our media -- and ourselves -- than we expect from our political adversaries.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-stranahan/shame-ignoring-death-thre_b_835805.html

Wow a slither of rational honesty out of huffingtonpost......
 
The media, be that news, entertainment, consists if people just like you and I(this may come as a shock to many).

Just like you and I, these people have values which are influenced by events in their lives. They form their opinions based on their perceptions. Some become politicians, some become writers, actors, etc.

They are obviously going to write articles, make movies based on their values.

It is for the "consumer" to judge whether it's art, crap, entertaining, all of the above or none of the above.

And if most people like it, or agree with it and you don't, well, deal with it :)
 
The author must have seen a different Back to the Future. Sure it was an idealised 1950s, but there was nastiness and hints at racism. And it's a stretch to call Happy Days or Laverne and Shirley 80s TV.

I think however that looking back there is generally a tendency to idealise earlier decades. It's human nature.

Try mentioning the benefits of minimal government to South African friends and see the odd looks you get.

What most people in SA regard as liberty (right to vote, access to social services) is very different from what a person in the US regards as liberty (freedom from govt attempting to legislate behaviour, freedom from paying for other peoples welfare).
Based on the actions of their elected representatives voters in the US do not have a problem with government legislating behaviour along with numerous attacks on freedom.
 
How's this for sick....

CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric hangs out with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, peddling under age prostitutes for his pals....

In March 2005, a woman contacted Palm Beach police, concerned that her 14-year-old step daughter had been taken to Epstein’s mansion by an older girl and paid $300 after stripping to her panties and massaging the man while he masturbated.[11] She had told him that she was 18 years old.[9] She undressed but had left on her underwear. [12] By 2011 at least 40 girls aged 13 to 17 had come forward with similar stories, some saying Epstein sexually assaulted them during the massage.[11]

at a cocktail party at his lavish home...

Britain's Prince Andrew regaled a bevy of media heavyweights at billionaire Jeffrey Epstein's Upper East Side townhouse the other night when he told of the royal family's joy over Prince William's upcoming wedding to Kate Middleton -- and the glamorous guests asked for invitations.

Andrew was quizzed by guests including Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos, Charlie Rose, Woody Allen and Chelsea Handler at the dinner thrown by Epstein, the disgraced former hedge fund manager who is old friends with Prince Andrew.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/pri...oyal_joy_2YVoEigpmUOFHmrwk2sHjJ#ixzz1GsnpesJy

Then 2 weeks later she posts this on her CBS blog....


If a fourteen-year-old sells her body, is she committing a crime -- or the victim of one?

Increasingly, our laws are starting to recognize that most young people engaged in prostitution are actually being exploited by someone else. And what they really need isn't punishment - it's help.

Every year, an estimated 100,000 minors are forced into prostitution in this country. Yet there are fewer than 100 beds available to them in specialized shelters nationwide.

The Senate recently passed a bill that would provide more shelter beds and counseling for victims, plus more money for law enforcement to go after pimps and traffickers. The bill is now pending in the House, but may not make it to a vote before recess.

I'm sure Congress is eager to get home for the holidays, but this is one bill that simply can't wait. These children don't get a holiday from the horrors they endure... but the New Year could bring new hope that somebody out there cares.

That's a page from my notebook.

I'm Katie Couric, CBS News.
 
Really? And yet most people believe if the "right" people take control of the State and steal more money to throw around to the "right" places things will be better? Har har...
Yet companies believe if the right people take control of the company and steal more money to throw around to the right places things will be better. Crazy bastards.
 
"We’re constantly told the government is either inept, evil, or both..."

Really? And yet most people believe if the "right" people take control of the State and steal more money to throw around to the "right" places things will be better? Har har...

It could be argued that many more people are skeptical like you than ever before. That’s an improvement.

Government does NOT necessarily = good. This gospel is penetrating through society where before (‘50’s in US say) government could do no wrong.
 
Yet companies believe if the right people take control of the company and steal more money to throw around to the right places things will be better. Crazy bastards.

How exactly do businesses steal money from consumers? Does the clerk at McDonald's stick a gun to your head and force you to supersize? What would happen if a business used coercion and the threat of violence the way the state does? Oh, that's right, nobody would patronize it and it would go bankrupt.

I believe you're trying to infer that large corporations act like the state in certain instances. This is false. They might use the state to enact various aims (regulatory capture, barriers to entry for competition, rent-seeking etc.), but these are not perversions of voluntary market exchange, but are the consequence of state powers to intervene in the market in the first place. Most of the worst things large corporations are able to get away with are actually "legal" because they garner the power of the state to make them legitimate.
 
Recent media geography fail time.

can you spot it.....

fnc-20110314-Shibuyaeggman.JPG



and an easier one

CNN-MAP.jpg


No cheating.
 
What a surprise!! :eek:

Alan trying to discredit CNN! :eek:

I guess we won't be seeing any links to your favourite network will we? :rolleyes:
 
Special for Alan:

Posted on Mar 20, 2011

By Andy Borowitz

NEW YORK—With unprecedented crises engulfing the world, millions of television viewers are finding the news too stressful to watch—and are turning to the Fox News Channel instead.

“Things are so bad in the world right now, many people are afraid to watch the news,” says psychologist Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota, who studies the relationship between news consumption and stress. “For them, Fox News represents a welcome break from reality.”

Tracy Klugian, 37, a systems analyst from Lansing, Mich., said that he was flipping the channels to find “anything but news” and found himself watching Fox for the first time. “They had this guy on—something Beck I think his name was—and he was just going on and on, making stuff up,” he said. “I was like, this is the kind of mindless junk I need right now.”

Klugian says he now records the program and watches it every day when he gets home from work: “For one hour at least, I know that I can kick back and not hear anything that’s going on in the world.”

He said that watching Fox had also introduced him to “my favorite new comedian—this hysterical woman named Michele Bachmann.”


“She was doing this bit about how the American Revolution started in New Hampshire, not Massachusetts, and then she started mixing up where Lexington and Concord were,” he said. “OK, I know it sounds really stupid, but I almost peed myself.”
Elsewhere, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said he is not worried about how history will remember him “because if I have my way, there won’t be any history teachers.”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/afraid_to_watch_the_news_millions_turn_to_fox_20110320/
And yes, I see that the top picture is Fox, and that Tokai has miraculously moved from the Cape to Japan! ;)
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X