The US Media Fails America, Again

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:06 pm

Great article - and dead on correct. Regardless of your political opinions, read this and think about what you are seeing now. As far as I am concerned, the corporate owned media is essentially worthless.

http://www.truthout.org:80/041409C

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:52 am

I don't agree with the tone of the article, but I agree that the mainstream media is lazy and incompetent. Investigative reporting is all but dead; journalists don't ask hard questions and don't follow up to expose truth, especially when they're reporting on a lefty.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:54 am

On another note, I think the internet has been a great tool for disseminating information and providing alternative viewpoints. Sure, there's not a great signal-to-noise ration, but at least the information is out there if you want to look for it.

I can't help but think that the internet is at least partially responsible for the recent failure of several big newspapers.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:57 am

I don't agree with the tone of the article, but I agree that the mainstream media is lazy and incompetent. Investigative reporting is all but dead; journalists don't ask hard questions and don't follow up to expose truth, especially when they're reporting on a lefty.

They are lazy and incompetent, and they don't ask the tough questions. Let me assure you that they don't follow up with rporting on conservatives either. Josh Marshall of the blog Talking Points Memo single handedly kept alive the US Attorney firings story until the corporate owned media was forced to catch up. The blog are where the action is and where the real reporting is going on. Case and point - Daily Kos and YPM have doen some great reporting on the MN Senate race which has now been won by Al Franken. Where is the corporate owned media on this? Why aren't we hearing outraged calls for Coleman to give up his challenges and let MN have 2 Senators? Why isn't Coleman being called a sore loser?

And look at the BS of the corporate owned media calling Obama polarizing when he has a 65% approval rating? Its bullshit!

This story is one of the many examples out there that debunk the whole "liberal media" idea.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:07 am

polarizing and a 65% approval rating are not opposite sides of one equation. They can each be true.

Your continued reliance on poll data astounds me. Poll data on a small segment of the population can easily be manipulated by the phrasing of the question and therefore by the agenda of the person or entity asking the question(s). That is bullshit, as you put it.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:16 am

Then what exactly are we supposed to rely on when it comes to gauging public opinion? Seriously, what? And let me just say that polling data is what I am using to say that this whole teabagging thing is an exercise in group circle jerk.

And as far as the polarizing comments go, Turd Blossom Rove was on Fox "News" recently calling Obama polarizing. The irony of this is unbelievable and totally lost on conservatives. Especially give the fact that Bush has something like a 23% approval rating when he left. You want to talk about polarizing?

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:07 pm

I'm not sure you're thinking of "polarizing" in the right way. It seems to me that W's absurdly low approval rating would actually mean that the country was likely to be united in its opposition to W. That's not polarizing. Sure, W's administration created some opposing factions, but in the end you can't use a 23% approval rating to say that someone is more polarizing than someone with a 65% approval rating.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:24 pm

I'm saying that 65% could just as easily be 50% or 80% and that I wouldn't use a public opinion poll to make a point such as to who is polarizing. And you did specifically use the poll data to determine by your account that BHO is not a polarizing force by directly referencing his polled approval rating.
I would say that by virtue of the fact that you accept a label, be it democrat or republican you are polarizing since there are enough folks on each side of the aisle.
Also never said GWB wasn't polarizing.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:28 pm

AA - I think you can. There was no middle ground with Bush, you either loved him or you hated him.

95 - Then let me turn this around on you. How can Obama's critics say that he is polarizing then? It seems that the only ones who don't like him are hard core Republican activists. And I do accept the label of being a Democrat. That doesn't mean I automatically hate Republican. I currently despise Republican politicians, but that is different than hating all Republicans. And I never said you said anything about W.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:10 pm

I would say his polarizing characterization stems all the way back to the election. While the electoral college vote was pretty one sided the popular vote was not nearly so. So regardless of his 65% "approval" rating I would say it's not a stretch to lump him into the category of polarizing for the country. Maybe not on every issue or from every angle but the shoe can certainly fit.
I guess I didn't define my labels enough, I meant being a dem or pub politician, not taking the label as a believer in the party. I don't think that you hate all pubs nor would I expect you to believe that I hate all dems.
I would also take exception with the statement that only hard core Pub activist are the ones that don't like BHO.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:29 pm

Well, then who doesn't like him? Regardless of whether or not you agree with polls, he seems to be very popular with Democrats and Independents. Unless you can prove me wrong, or have better information, it would seem to me that the polls are correct with this one. And given the fact that most Americans seem to like Obama, the whole charge of him being polarizing is bullshit.

And I don't believe you hate all Democrats. I have made my feelings about Republican politicians and the current state of the Republican Party well known here. I just want to clarify where I am.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 4:19 pm

so if dems and indys like him then all pubs are hard core activist? and you're basing your "most americans seem to like Obama" on a poll which I wouldn't put that much faith in.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:53 pm

Then what would you put faith in? Just asking.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:26 pm

I have not read anything before your last post slider, so forgive me but I couldn't resist. I put my faith in God. ba-dum-dum.

Okay, so now I read the rest of what was above...I think a lot of people like what Obama stood for change...but to be honest, I don't think he's changing things all that much from what W. started...W spent to much and now Obama is spending even more. THAT is the point of the Tea Parties. I think it's kind of exciting...just like when Obama did his acceptance speech...it's exciting!

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:31 pm

Fair enough. But as he stated, only the government has the resources to spend what needs to be spent to fix things. And I disagree with you that he hasn't changed what W started. And don't foeget, he ha been in less than 3 months. Give it some time.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:41 pm

You can't fix the problem of too much debt by incurring more debt. It's a Keynesian fallacy. Y'all always say...oh if we just had more money to spend, if we could just spend it fast enough. But it's an economic and mathematical fallacy. The fact that you believe the gubbmint can spend our way out of this hole is all I need to know to disregard your stance on just about any economic policy.

It's an absolute farce, and you've been sold hook line and sinker my friend. Don't get me wrong, it sounds good and I want to believe it too. But the truth is the truth. And we live in reality. In reality, we just can't do it.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:43 am

^^^LOL, you can just look at my bank statements over the past 5 years and tell that spending money does not help reduce debt.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:11 pm

Slider, to answer your question, I don't think there is any poll I'd put faith in (short of the BCS as long as UF is #1). Polls and statistics are so easily manipulated. Despite your comments to the contrary, I would still say the media is biased to the left (no sense arguing this point, neither of us is going to buy what the other is selling) so when these public opinion polls come out I put no faith in them. Nor do I think that you have to put faith in anything along those lines. Polls don't change anything. they're just a reflection of the way the wind is blowing based on the way the poll question is phrased.

TheTodd · Post by **TheTodd** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:31 pm

I can't specifically speak for newspapers, but I can tell you precisely when TV news media failed. That was when they went for more of an entertainment edge versus a hard core news edge. Pretty much the 24hr news channels have brought down the whole industry IMO.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:33 pm

You can't fix the problem of too much debt by incurring more debt. It's a Keynesian fallacy. Y'all always say...oh if we just had more money to spend, if we could just spend it fast enough. But it's an economic and mathematical fallacy. The fact that you believe the gubbmint can spend our way out of this hole is all I need to know to disregard your stance on just about any economic policy.

It's an absolute farce, and you've been sold hook line and sinker my friend. Don't get me wrong, it sounds good and I want to believe it too. But the truth is the truth. And we live in reality. In reality, we just can't do it.

And you can't fix the problem by doing nothing. You are the one who has been sold a bill of goods. This whole Republican line of "government is bad and can't do anything good" is a line of bullshit.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:36 pm

Slider, to answer your question, I don't think there is any poll I'd put faith in (short of the BCS as long as UF is #1). Polls and statistics are so easily manipulated. Despite your comments to the contrary, I would still say the media is biased to the left (no sense arguing this point, neither of us is going to buy what the other is selling) so when these public opinion polls come out I put no faith in them. Nor do I think that you have to put faith in anything along those lines. Polls don't change anything. they're just a reflection of the way the wind is blowing based on the way the poll question is phrased.

OK, fine. Point taken. Then I ask again, how would you determine the mood of the country and determine what the people like or dislike? Based on the polls, I say that Obama is a popular President and Bush left with the lowest approval ratings ever. What information do you have to disprove these comments? I'm not trying to call you out, I am trying to determine what your thoughts are. Maybe there is something more accurate than polls in determining public opinion. If you know, please share.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:39 pm

I can't specifically speak for newspapers, but I can tell you precisely when TV news media failed. That was when they went for more of an entertainment edge versus a hard core news edge. Pretty much the 24hr news channels have brought down the whole industry IMO.

On this I would agree completely. These talking head buffoons have so much time to fill they spout bullshit.

Listen to Don Henley's Dirty Laundry. It sums up my view of the TV media.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:29 pm

And you can't fix the problem by doing nothing. You are the one who has been sold a bill of goods. This whole Republican line of "government is bad and can't do anything good" is a line of bullshit.

Never once have I said we could solve the problem by doing nothing. You seem to think that Obama/Geithner's "plans" are the only options out there. Why haven't we pre-privatized these fucking banks? Why haven't we stopped the fraud and prosecuted the offenders to the absolute fullest extent of the law? The bill of goods that you've been sold is to trust the government to always know better than you how to handle these things when that's just absurd.

You've got a brain. Use it. O0

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:08 pm

I do - every minute of every day. Thank you very much.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:40 pm

Then I hope you'll consider why in the world we can't pre-privatize the banks.