|
|
McCain's camp has been complaining that the heightened coverage of Obama's Iraq trip is proof that the media is "in the tank" for Obama.
Here's why that's not true:
McCain made the story important. By continually insisting that Obama go to Iraq, by stressing the importance of such a visit, and by building anticipation for the trip by keeping the story in the media, McCain invited this coverage. It's not a liberal bias, it's a get-the-story-that-gets-us-ratings bias. and mccain helped make the story a ratings-getter. i'd be willing to bet that, in a way, he's glad that the coverage has been nearly non-stop, because it allows him another opportunity to rail against the so-called liberal media.
Also, why is the lack of negative stories from the Iraq/Europe trip a sign of bias. I'll be the first to admit that this trip is nothing more than an international photo-op tour (but so was mccain's trip to a heavily guarded marketplace with a heavily armed security escort and helicopter air support overhead). However, the idea that McCain's tour was meaningful went unchallenged. He and his supporters can't expect the media to challenge obama for the same thing.
I remember Bill O'reilly saying that he would give the media "the benefit of the doubt" and wait and see if there were any negative stories that they reported from overseas. but he added that if none of the stories were negative, he would embark on a "Journalistic Jihad, the likes of which you've never seen." of course there won't be any negative stories, because there is nothing for obama to screw up. he's not going to screw up handshakes and smiling and generally looking presidential. what negative story could possibly come out from obama's trip abroad? of course, o'reilly knew this when he pretended to be reserving judgement on the press coverage of obama's trip. so now he can go on his "journalistic jihad." wow bill o'reilly is one tough son of a bitch, isn't he? go get'em, tough guy.
anyway, stop bitching about liberal bias.
--
"What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Surely, He that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and God-like reason to fust in us unused."
|
Posts:
1,669
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(86 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 12:30 PM
|
> It happens once - it's lousy editting. remember: all
> interviews are editted and there may be several
> "takes"
i could maybe understand "lousy editing" if they simply left that part out of the interview completely. but to keep the question and replace the answer with one from an entirely different question is blatantly dishonest.
--
"What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Surely, He that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and God-like reason to fust in us unused."
|
|
|
Posts:
8,494
Registered:
6/12/07
|
|
(85 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 12:10 PM
|
> > Only if it happen over & over - editting to put
> > McCain in a good light & editting to put Obama
> in a
> > bad light.
>
> What?
>
> They purposely edited out his egregious mistake/lie,
> and substituted it with an answer he gave to an
> entirely different question.
>
> How is that not the height of bias?
>
It happens once - it's lousy editting. remember: all interviews are editted and there may be several "takes"
If it happens a few more times, then it may be bias.
If it happen a few more times
|
|
|
Posts:
4,739
Registered:
3/25/08
|
|
(84 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 11:42 AM
|
> Only if it happen over & over - editting to put
> McCain in a good light & editting to put Obama in a
> bad light.
What?
They purposely edited out his egregious mistake/lie, and substituted it with an answer he gave to an entirely different question.
How is that not the height of bias?
--
"If you're gonna survive out here, you've got to know where your towel is."
--
Edited by prettywitty at 07/24/2008 8:43 AM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
8,494
Registered:
6/12/07
|
|
(83 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 11:13 AM
|
> > I think you would be shocked to find out how
> often
> > almost every network chops and edits interviews
> and
> > has been for years. First of all, there's time
> > constraints and sometimes people ramble on.
> Second,
> > sometimes gaffes are made and corrected. I dare
> say,
> > many times there's been "I'm sorry, can we stop
> the
> > camera and redo the question please, I got lost
> in my
> > answer" or something.
>
> they have the unedited interview on their website.
> he never asks for a redo. and i don't think you can
> n show me another example where a democrat's gaffe
> was "made and corrected" by editing it out of the
> interview. is this not an example of "conservative
> bias?">
Only if it happen over & over - editting to put McCain in a good light & editting to put Obama in a bad light.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,669
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(82 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 10:57 AM
|
> I think you would be shocked to find out how often
> almost every network chops and edits interviews and
> has been for years. First of all, there's time
> constraints and sometimes people ramble on. Second,
> sometimes gaffes are made and corrected. I dare say,
> many times there's been "I'm sorry, can we stop the
> camera and redo the question please, I got lost in my
> answer" or something.
they have the unedited interview on their website. he never asks for a redo. and i don't think you can show me another example where a democrat's gaffe was "made and corrected" by editing it out of the interview. is this not an example of "conservative bias?"
--
"What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Surely, He that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and God-like reason to fust in us unused."
|
|
|
Posts:
24,609
Registered:
12/1/04
|
|
(81 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 4:33 AM
|
|
Sometimes I wonder if all the news outlets accurately reported on Everything, maybe we wouldn't have a two party system anymore because the more I read and learn the reps have been toxic to our democracy and success and health for many decades.
|
|
|
Posts:
24,609
Registered:
12/1/04
|
|
(80 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 4:31 AM
|
Well, when Jon Stewart puts together his 'media spin' funny video clips....it's not just Fox doing it....Wolf Blitzer on CNN will softball question reps and inquisition dems sometimes...and they all do that repulsive echo chamber soundbite shit...this week's phrase is 'stay the course' and 99 reporters are saying that 24/7 for two weeks.
There's a site called Media Matters that keeps track of partisan advantage given by the various TV news and newspapers and most of it is beneficial to republicans.
Probably because the media moguls who own almost everything news related are almost all republicans themselves.
Are any of them dems?
|
|
|
Posts:
2,157
Registered:
4/11/08
|
|
(79 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias"
Jul 24, 2008 1:12 AM
|
I think you would be shocked to find out how often almost every network chops and edits interviews and has been for years. First of all, there's time constraints and sometimes people ramble on. Second, sometimes gaffes are made and corrected. I dare say, many times there's been "I'm sorry, can we stop the camera and redo the question please, I got lost in my answer" or something.
I know celebrities oftne have contracts that are signed before interviews are even conducted. I wonder if politicians do.
I remember when Howard Stern tried to bid for the famous interview with Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie that ultimately Diane Sawyer conducted. I think an entire contract was drawn up about questions that could and could not be asked.
I dare say there's a lot of shit that goes on behind the scenes that we, the public, are oblivious to. Now, in the age of interent and YouTube, it's just getting harder to get away with such things. And of course, live interviews or ones conducted before an audience are the hardest to edit.
I'd love to get my hands on the miles of film that has ended up on the cutting room floor over the years.
|
|
|
Posts:
8,494
Registered:
6/12/07
|
|
(78 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias"
Jul 24, 2008 12:49 AM
|
> to cbaz, luggit, laststand, justice, rdfan, and all
> the others who have been complaining about "liberal
> bias."
>
> if the media has a liberal bias, why would they
> deceive audiences to help mccain like cbs did?
>
> in case anyone hasn't heard yet, mccain credited the
> surge with starting the anbar awakening, which
> decreased violence in the once volatile province.
> however, the surge wasn't even announced until after
> r the anbar awakening. but the really weird part of
> this story is that rather than air mccain's blunder
> and/or lie, CBS kept the question, but cut out
> mccain's answer, and REPLACED IT WITH A PART OF
> ANOTHER ANSWER that mccain gave to a completely
> different question later in the interview. CBS
> intentionally, blatantly, and deceptively manipulated
> the interview to paint mccain in a more favorable
> light.
>
> is that not bias?
>
I finally saw the youtube clip. I can understand while Obama supports may be upset. I would if the shoe was on the other foot.
BUT
I don't think it was bias. I think it was lousy editting. I wouldn't be surprised if someone was quietly let go because of it. For it to be bias, there, they would have to constantly praise McCain while putting down Obama. And I don't think that is happening.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/07/22/couric-showcases-obama-over-mccain-admits-media-obamathon
|
|
|
Posts:
3,788
Registered:
7/15/07
|
|
(77 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 24, 2008 12:11 AM
|
> i'm going to keep this thread at the top of the
> boards until i get a response from a "liberal media"
> complainer other than nemeses about what they think
> of cbs covering up mccain's big mistake on the surge
> timeline.
>
Seems to me that they didn't do a very good job of covering for Ole John if they put up the entire piece on the web. And, though I didn't see the piece, I'd be willing to bet they said something about catching the entire interview online at CBS.com.
Reverse psychology?
|
|
|
Posts:
1,669
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(76 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 23, 2008 11:41 PM
|
i'm going to keep this thread at the top of the boards until i get a response from a "liberal media" complainer other than nemeses about what they think of cbs covering up mccain's big mistake on the surge timeline.
--
"What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Surely, He that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and God-like reason to fust in us unused."
|
|
|
Posts:
3,057
Registered:
3/8/08
|
|
(75 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 23, 2008 9:50 PM
|
RainyKincaid and brdc4........
I thought at least one of you were educated......
someone better go back to that college and get......
their money back.........
|
|
|
Posts:
1,669
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(74 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias"
Jul 23, 2008 7:48 PM
|
to cbaz, luggit, laststand, justice, rdfan, and all the others who have been complaining about "liberal bias."
if the media has a liberal bias, why would they deceive audiences to help mccain like cbs did?
in case anyone hasn't heard yet, mccain credited the surge with starting the anbar awakening, which decreased violence in the once volatile province. however, the surge wasn't even announced until after the anbar awakening. but the really weird part of this story is that rather than air mccain's blunder and/or lie, CBS kept the question, but cut out mccain's answer, and REPLACED IT WITH A PART OF ANOTHER ANSWER that mccain gave to a completely different question later in the interview. CBS intentionally, blatantly, and deceptively manipulated the interview to paint mccain in a more favorable light.
is that not bias?
--
"What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Surely, He that made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and God-like reason to fust in us unused."
|
|
|
Posts:
5,147
Registered:
9/15/07
|
|
(73 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias"
Jul 23, 2008 7:22 PM
|
Nemeses, keep your nonsense to yourself.
--
"Thank you...No." Major Charles Emerson Winchester III
|
|
|
Posts:
24,609
Registered:
12/1/04
|
|
(72 of 86)
Re: Why the Coverage of Obama's Trip isn't Evidence of "Liberal Bias&q
Jul 23, 2008 7:12 PM
|
> 4bee said:
>
> >
> > One thing is certain about Mccain- what ever he
> does,
> > he does it for America with all his heart and
> soul.
> > He has completely given himself for that.
> >
>
> So McCain refusing to support all those bills for
> civil rights and women's rights were done for
> America? Maybe for the white male part that lives in
> America, but not for America. The only things that
> McCain has completely given himself to are the
> corporations (especially, the military industrial
> complex and big oil companies).
nutinbutanumber,
True. And we have a 20 year senatorial record to review that shows his votes accordingly. That would cover a period in time from the 1980s till now. When the majority of our country supports the equality of all people in America despite gender, race, etc. McCain was still voting against laws that would help civil rights.
|
|
|
|
|
