SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (159146)1/29/2003 9:51:20 AM
From: Alighieri  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1582381
 
So help me...you have no ethics. Read the way your supposedly neutral media watch organization begins the articles...Two examples below:

Liberals want this year’s election campaigns to be dominated by economic issues, and no wonder: TV news has organized the discussion of key economic issues such as tax cuts, prescription drugs, and new government regulations on business in ways that aid the liberal cause and give short shrift to conservative arguments. Media Research Center (MRC) analysts reviewed economic policy news on ABC, CBS, CNN, FNC and NBC and discovered that this summer’s television coverage was almost entirely organized around liberal themes and arguments.

Liberal politicians have made no secret of the fact that they hope this fall’s congressional elections revolve around economic issues, including the federal budget deficit, lack of a prescription drug entitlement for senior citizens and this year’s corporate accounting scandals. Perhaps one reason for this desire is that liberals watch Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings every night, and they recognize that TV news has framed the discussion of all of these important economic issues in a way that benefits liberals and gives short shrift to conservative arguments.

This is not a news watch group. It's another conservative propaganda machine.

Contrast the way FAIR addresses the issue.

FAIR classified each guest by both political ideology and party affiliation. Only two ideological categories were used: conservative and non-conservative. Guests affiliated with openly conservative think tanks, magazines or advocacy groups, or who promote openly conservative views, were labeled as such. All other guests were grouped together in the non-conservative category, including centrists, liberals and progressives; non-political guests (e.g., Cheney's heart doctor); and "objective" journalists who do not avow any ideology. Republicans were not automatically counted as conservatives: Moderate Republicans like Christopher Shays, Christine Todd Whitman and David Gergen, for example, were classified as non-conservatives.

Sixty-one percent of guests were current or former Democratic or Republican government officials, political candidates, staffers or advisors. These guests were classified as either Democrats or Republicans. All others -- including conservatives with no official party connection, such as Jerry Falwell or David Horowitz -- were classified as non-partisan for the purposes of the study, along with bipartisan officials such as career diplomats.

The numbers show an overwhelming slant on Fox towards both Republicans and conservatives. Of the 56 partisan guests on Special Report between January and May, 50 were Republicans and six were Democrats -- a greater than 8 to 1 imbalance. In other words, 89 percent of guests with a party affiliation were Republicans.


Facts, figures, a methodology by which conclusions are drawn, which is how the rest of the articles are put together. And by the way, the article does not mention the champion tabloid propaganda show, Fox and Friends...this is the ultimate in trash, raw sewage propaganda. Give me a break.

Al