I've always said that the big three, NBC,CBS, ABC slanted their news. I have not, however watched them in quite some time. Last night, I got home from work and clicked on the TV, while I was paying my bills and the nightly news with Tom was on. They were doing a story on Miguel Estrada, the DC attorney general the Bush nominated for DC supreme court. The correspondent was talking about the partisan fight in the Senate of Miguel. He would have been the first Hispanic on the court, but the Dems filibustered his vote. Anyway, the correspondant was said that the Dems filibustered him because of his secracy. As he put it, "his refusal to release internal memos" from his work as Attorney General. Now, did he mention the reason for this? Noooooo! It is a breach of legal code. Internal memos regarding cases cannot be released. They never have been for prior nominated justices and never will be for future justices. NBC happened to leave that part out. The reason the Dems filibustered was because the Attorney General would not break the law and NBC doesn't think that is an important part of the story. It renforced what I already knew. Tom, Peter and Dan are rabid liberals and slant the news to make the Reps seem unreasonable and the Dems seem like the redeemers. Will it never end?

__________________
Jason
Lynn Swann 06'

"Individualism is absent when other peoples' standards, not reality and reason, are ones primary guide."

While I've been classified as a liberal, I must say that I agree with you wholheartedly. Journalism is no longer a profession about fact, it is about interpretation of fact. I may be liberal, but I'm not stupid. I don't need the nuewpaper or TV or radio telling me what to think.

I think that we touched on this in another thread. It seems that there are very few, if any, unbiased media sources.

Where do you gentlemen turn to for news and information? What sources/resources do you consider to be unbiased?

What I don't get is where this notion came from that news coverage used to be or should be completely unbiased. You say the Big Three have a leftward slant, I say Fox News tilts far enough to the right to counter all three of them. Why is it bad? As long as you think independently, see the contradictions when they arise, and seek other sources of information, what's the problem?

I do see a problem when a news outlet promotes itself as completely unbiased and clearly isn't, but I think that gets back to the false expectation that people who report the news, the people who immerse themselves in the issues, are somehow supposed to banish their personal feelings about them from their work.

There are degrees of bias, too: there is clear and acceptable bias as is found on editorial pages, and then there is the more subtle bias illustrated in Zogby's anecdote. If your facts are correct (I haven't followed the Estrada nomination closely), then they probably should have been a bit more thorough in their reporting.

That said, none of these networks even reported on the real issue behind Bush's election, even though all the investigation was done for them by a British reporter. I'm speaking of how Katherine Harris, FL Sec'y of State and chair of the FL GW Bush campaign, hired a firm whose board and management is filled with big Republican supporters, to compile a list of names that needed to be purged from FL voter registration rolls. The 58,000 names included some felons, but over 90% of the list was people who had a constitutional right to vote. Harris passed the list, largely consisting of African Americans, unchecked to the counties and ordered the names purged. A bunch of these people were turned away at the polls. Given the rate at which African Americans in FL voted for Gore, it is pretty clear (as clear as things can be for which there are no records kept), that this act of illegal disenfranchisement by Gore's opponents which can at best be described as willfully neglectful, cost Gore the election. Not chads, not Nader, not under votes or over votes.

And this story was 100% absent from the "liberal" US mainstream media. Actually, the guy who reported it gave it to a colleague at CBS. But Jeb's media office said it didn't happen that way, so the story was dead. :roll:

__________________
Thomas Taylor

Interested in NP tech, kids and snark? Follow me on Twitter.

I believe you. You may not be stupid, but so many people are. That's a big reason why people like telling us what to think. Americans act so independent, like we're free spirits, but really we always look to others for how to think and act.

Fox News is not biased in its reporting. It's opinion shows have a right slant, but they are presented as opinion, not fact. The networks present their news as fact. That's the problem. Also, you need cable to get Fox. The networks are picked up without. Compare the news with Britt Hum and all the network news and the slant will be obvious in the networks, but not on Hum.

__________________
Jason
Lynn Swann 06'

"Individualism is absent when other peoples' standards, not reality and reason, are ones primary guide."

There are a number of stories that get buried. There are also rumors of stories that get buried and are fabricated. It is hard to tell which are which.

In terms of bias, if a source presents itself as the product of journalists, then that source should be unbiased in terms of its news coverage and express any bias in its editorials. News should be a collection of facts and factual acccounts and editorials should contain opinions.

We are the viewing/reading/listening public are often duped in believing that opinion is fact and that facts are irrelevent.

actually, you only need cable to get FoxNews. you can still watch news on Fox's network station. as for voter fraud, what else is new? there was massive voter fraud in the Nixon v. Kennedy putting Kennedy in office. the only difference is Nixon conceded instead of challenging it. I think there is fraud in every election but it only surfaces when the results are that close. i'd be VERY surprised if no fraud turned up in favor of Gore as well.

If I remember correctly in several states there was reporting of Gore supporters hanind out cigarettes to homeless people to get them to vote for Gore. I can't remember the specifics, but it was something like that. El is dead on. I think that there is fraud at all levels.

I think that both major partys are dirty to some point and if you think your candidate is squeaky clean you are naive. Unfortunately, it seems that we are stuck with choosing the lesser of two evils rather than the best person for the job.

Do you think the media goes too far in giving up objectivity for access?

The local Fox station is not the same as Fox News. Not even close. The local station has local news and weather. Not much else. The networks have world news after local news. That is what were talking about.

__________________
Jason
Lynn Swann 06'

"Individualism is absent when other peoples' standards, not reality and reason, are ones primary guide."