I've honestly tried listening to the other side. I tape Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Larry King, Dave Letterman ... etc.. Honestly, if you don't think there is a left-wing bias in our media, well ... you haven't been watching. Now that the campaign is will under way, and getting close to the elections, theses guys are absolutely vicious.
And on the "Fairness Doctrine:" Would you also be in favor of evening out the professorships in our universities? You know ... for every left-wingnut professor, we'll balance that with a right-wingnut professor?
On the taping ... I even taped "The View" when O'Bama was a guest and again when McCain was a guest. The difference was so obvious it was sickening.
Vi
Hey, you know what? Although you and I differ, greatly, on most topics that we've chatted about on this thread, I find I can at least talk to you and be heard (unlike that nut previously mentioned).
Re the myth of the liberal media. Now, this is where you and I and anyone reading this are getting into my realm--my background, areas of study, etc. No, I'm not into revealing personal information online, so I'm not going into details about my credentials.
The myth of the liberal media began back in the days of Nixon. He was utterly paranoid about the media. And quite honestly, he rather had a point, or at least a reason to be upset about how he was portrayed. The debates with JFK left Nixon devastated. He just did not photograph well, had a wicked five-o'clock shadow that could not be tamed, and well, if you've ever seen tapes of those debates, you'll get it.
Once upon a time, the media were, if not liberal, for the most part, uh, fair, balanced? Why? Because of who owned each outlet, radio station, newspaper, and so on. If you look at who owns what now, you'll see that the [fascist] powers are at work, buying up lots of newspapers, radio stations, television stations, and so on.
This is an extremely complicated topic, one that I have spent a l-o-n-g time studying and writing about, and I just don't have time right now to go into it in great detail.
Are there liberals on the air? Well, Bill Maher is not a liberal, for one thing; he's a libertarian. I agree with much of what he has to say, but I've also noted some heavy duty hypocrisy on his part during hte last twelve years or so. HOWEVER, remember what happened to him right after the attacks in '01? Oh my, he dared to say something that ABC--owned by DISNEY--did not like. Why didn't Disney like it? It's a gigantic corporation, with a honey of a deal with the current administration regarding taxes. Do not badmouth America and Maher might have stayed on Politically Correct. He was CENSURED by corporatism.
And get this: you will never, ever, on ABC hear one bit of bad news about Disney or its many affiliate companies. Never. That's not
news on a Disney-owned network. That is filtered propaganda. Sure, they do the weather, the sports, the CRIME (which everyone just loves .. . it's a national past time, isn't it? Another tenet of fascism: fixation with crime and punishment, something I think people on this board ought to take notice of). and yes, they will report on the "news," but you are NOT getting a unbiased facts, as best they can be known.
NBC. I am not 100% sure anymore, because it's been a while since I last checked, but they are owned by GE, one of the worst super dump polluters in the entire world. Are they going to report about yet another one of their sites contaminating us, and wherever else our god damned pollution goes? Hell, no.
CBS? Viacom. Google them.
Fox News? Who owns that station? Why did Cheney agree to do an interview ONLY for Fox news after he got drunk and accidentally shot his buddy? Why was the liberal media not all over that, with the changed stories: "Yes, they had beer, but only one at lunch." (Yeah, just like I told my parents after showing up drunk at age 17 and driving home from a party.) Then the story was changed: No, no beer at all.
Come on. This is not liberal media. It is an URBAN MYTH that most of us have bought in to--with good reason. It's been very, very well done, in a damn near perfect public relations campaign. And I am talking about public relations in the literal sense: real PR campaign people who know what they are doing when they manipulate the people. If you google "pat buchanan liberal media" you should be able to find the same quote from him in a few different areas. He admits it: they made up the myth about the liberal media, and we all fell for it.
And if we have such liberal media in this country, why does Limbaugh call the Fairness Doctrine, and the campaign to bring it back, "the Hush-Rush" law? If the media are so liberal, and a fine upstanding conservative "journalist" like Limbaugh were the victim of this outrageous liberal bullshit, why would he NOT want the Fairness Doctrine to be enacted again? Uh, can we all agree that sounds just a tad bit preposterous? Makes no sense, not if you're into logic, and I AM.
I have so much more on this topic, and it's one that I've studied--in depth--but I'm out of time. I do wish I had more time, because this is one hell of an important topic. I WILL be back to explain more of this, I promise (and CCDiane, I'm sick of your ugly comments, so don't even bother to reply. You waste my time and everyone else's. Go back to high school, sweetheart.)
Re those in academia being so liberal? True, there are many liberals in academia and in education, in general. How come? Not a whole heck of a lot of money in it, is there? It's a vocation, that's all. I will say, in all honesty, that I did have some very liberal professors when I was in school, but for hte most part, most were open to all views, as long as one could back up one's opinions and assertions with CREDIBLE sources. Opinions are one thing; argumentation and logic are in another realm completely, and most people in academia know that and value it. Trust me on this one: they're not in it for the money. They do it because they love to teach, to turn on minds, to teach HOW to think, how to reason, and how to learn.
And yeah, I had some very conservative professors too. I will say the same about them. ALthough my views were quite different from most of them, they were respectful toward me. One even wrote on a paper of mine: well done. I don't agree with you at all, but to criticize is to cavil. I swear--that's a direct quote.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss those in the Ivory Towers. They're committed to knowledge, learning, and scholarship for hte LOVE of it.
More later on the media. It's a huge topic and one that does deserve our attention.
Edited to add: Chris Matthews is no liberal. He's quite the jackass, imo. But definitely not a liberal. No way, no how.
Edited again to add: How come we don't see photographs of the dead from the war on terror arriving back here, like we did long ago during the Viet Nam war? If our television stations are so liberal, why are they going along with that? And how come we, as a people, just don't get it--how many of our troops have been KILLED and MAIMED? Well, the television stations are not showing it, that's why. If you are getting your news from television, you are doing youreslf a disservice. It really is the electronic valium. More on that when I have time, and what Karl Rove said about campaigning via television.
It's not liberal, folks, it's not. It's so tricky, the way we are being manipulated. It's also called "manufactured consent." Google that term and see what you come up with. Be afraid, be very afraid.
