 Mac BridgerLate to the partyPremium
join:2001-01-11
West Newton, PA | reply to Big Dawg 23
Re: Off-topic observation What does party affiliation matter? Both parties are full of corrupt scumballs. Does it really matter which way they lie to you?
--
Fight Cancer! Join DSLR's Team Discovery |
|
 R4M0NBrazilian Soccer Ownz Joo
join:2000-10-04
Glen Allen, VA | said by Mac Bridger:What does party affiliation matter? Both parties are full of corrupt scumballs. Does it really matter which way they lie to you? We are making a commentary on the media coverage, not the party. You are right, both parties are full of crooks. |
|
 NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1
1 edit | reply to Mac Bridger
It does not matter, except that it demonstrates the media bias which the media denies.
Media bias is not so much about which stories are reported but how they are reported and the inferences made and those omitted, so as to taint the readers view in the direction desired by the media.
I recently pointed this out to some co-workers in a local news paper article about a scandal where the politicians political party affiliation was not mentioned until near the end of the article. But when it is the other party which the media is opposed to most of the time, the political affiliation is usually in the first paragraph or even part of the headline. They just have to have that bashing effect.
It is sort of like asking a question with the desired answer embeded.
For example, ‘so and so did not talk to you about such and such did they?’
--
Be a Good Netizen - Read, Know & Complain About Overly Restrictive Tyrannical ISP ToS & AUP »comcast.net/terms/ »verizon.net/policies/
Say Thanks with a Tool Points Donation |
|
 TsumePremium
join:2004-02-23
Johnson City, TN
 ·Comcast
| said by NOYB:It does not matter, except that it demonstrates the media bias which the media denies. Media bias is not so much about which stories are reported but how they are reported and the inferences made and those omitted, so as to taint the readers view in the direction desired by the media. I recently pointed this out to some co-workers in a local news paper article about a scandal where the politicians political party affiliation was not mentioned until near the end of the article. But when it is the other party which the media is opposed to most of the time, the political affiliation is usually in the first paragraph or even part of the headline. They just have to have that bashing effect. It is sort of like asking a question with the desired answer embeded. For example, ‘so and so did not talk to you about such and such did they?’ Exactly. The media in general seems to think this "selective fact reporting" bias is okay. Our local paper, the Orlando Sentinel, is particularly bad (way worse than Karl could ever dream to be even in his most biased moments which are rare). They report on the merits, morals, and virtues of building red light cameras every week at least once, yet fail to mention the numerous studies disproving their "safety" despite many comments and emails and letters to the editor notifying them. Every story mentioning a murder does not include a physical description of the suspect unless they are white. They spam the front page with stories about how a light rail train will save Orlando's economy while omitting the fact that many similar projects in the USA fail and the train is likely to be a huge revenue loss (they already spent 300,000 consulting for a name and logo for this train that has yet to see approval from the legislature). I'm not picking on the left-wing biased news agencies either, the Union Tribune in San Diego was pretty bad with "fact omission" bias with a very right-wing political slant to nearly every article.
In general the editors here do a good job of keeping the articles unbiased, although this "fact omission" slant appears from time to time. It's just the way things are in today's times, I guess. I can't really think of a truly neutral news agency for any type of news. |
|
|
|
 KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | reply to NOYB
I would like to see direct examples of this.
Next you come across such articles, provide direct links to the online stories, or scan the articles and post. I've never seen blatant bias for either party in the media in this regard...some stories mention the party affiliation up front, others do not, regardless of which party the subject is a member of.
Would like to see examples of this theory...
KM |
|
NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1
1 edit | Tell you what. Subscribe to a major news paper and start a database to track politician scandal articles and log their party affiliation and how prominently it is revealed in the article.
Within article headline.
Lead off sentence of first paragraph.
Within first paragraph.
etc.
Also log which page the article is run on and if it continues to another page and if the party affiliation is buried in a subsequent page.
Report back next year and let us know your findings.
--
Be a Good Netizen - Read, Know & Complain About Overly Restrictive Tyrannical ISP ToS & AUP »comcast.net/terms/ »verizon.net/policies/
Say Thanks with a Tool Points Donation |
|
KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Yeap, that's what I thought. You really don't have any real proof of this, just your own biased impression.
You're the one making the claim; it's on your shoulders to back it up. If you're not willing to, that's fine...but it also speaks to the validity of your theory.
I don't believe this theory, as I stated, so plainly not my burden to prove yours.
KM |
|
NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1 |
If you want data, go get your own. I have my data. It is not just a theory, it is a fact that I have witnessed many times in person.
|
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to KoolMoe
said by KoolMoe:I would like to see direct examples of this. Here's one.
Remember Mark Foley? Of course you do. He was a Republican. The media made sure the sick things he did in his personal life were national news prior to the 2006 elections.
His replacement, Tim Mahoney, a member of the Democrat party, was accused of giving campaign money to a mistress. While these events were reported in local media in Florida, they did not make national news in most mainstream media outlets. Thankfully, the voters in this district came to their senses and voted this guy out in 2008.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! |
|
KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | reply to NOYB
Hard to prove a theory without presenting any data, right?
That's all I was asking. If this is true, present the evidence.
If not willing to, makes the theory pretty baseless.
Typical partisan process. Nice. How come you didn't put your party affiliation next to your comment? 
KM |
|
KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | reply to pnh102
I heard about both. Mahoney's issues seemed a lot less controversial than Foley's! And certainly you realize what passes for news these days is influenced by its controversial properties.
And regardless, that doesn't address this subtopic. Was Foley's party affiliation clearly identified and Mahoney's was not? From my recollection, was pretty clear the party of each member as the news reported the stories.
KM |
|
