dkp993
Footballguy
So kinda like if I said Androids are the best phones on the market if you don’t count Apple products
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Hello group....my name is Opie... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Opie
- Start date
The Commish
Footballguy
Breitbart
Infowars
Daily Caller
Red State
Blaze
Conservative Tribune
Federalist
Drudge
NY Post
Daily Mail
Probably some I forgot, but take away FoxNews and there's still plenty in the "completely pointless propaganda" department.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
That’s a bit a extreme since there are so many other news outlets in existence. Still there is a weird disconnect with Fox where many of their viewers and even hosts don’t see it as MSM. For example Tucker Carlson will go on and on about “elites” while failing to acknowledge he is a millionaire several times over with a father who was an ambassador and media executive and a stepmom who was an heir to the Swanson frozen food fortune with a weekly platform on one of the most watched news networks in history ran by a man worth $20 billion. The Tucker Carlson show on Fox is as elite and MSM as it gets.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
dkp993
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Every one of them has seen an uptick in viewership. There would be no place for them if a significant desire to shift right didn't exist.
Id hope they have a smaller foot print than those you listed. And i shouldn't consider the ones you listed as propaganda. Different category
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I don’t think we were differentiating between propaganda or anything, just media bias
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
Then it's roughly the same in the number of sources....a few more "liberal". With groups like NBC, NPR, BBC, Reuters, ABC and CBS being squarely in the "neutral" category compared to all the possible sources.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I’ll be honest this is a boring element of the discussion because it’s been talked to death and people won’t fully agree on what’s neural or not so we know where it ends.
Herb
Footballguy
My favorite part of the "liberal media" argument is that no one realized just how pervasive and awful and slanted it was until Rush Limbaugh and Fox News enlightened us all about it. Thank god they came along when they did.
My second favorite part is how the individuals that rail hardest against those awful, biased lib outlets are the same people that openly embrace the incisive, bold, balanced investigative reporting excellence offered by Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al.
My second favorite part is how the individuals that rail hardest against those awful, biased lib outlets are the same people that openly embrace the incisive, bold, balanced investigative reporting excellence offered by Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al.
The Commish
Footballguy
Yeah...I leave it to the experts.
As I said before....if it's in comparison to Fox...you're hard pressed to find any large news source that isn't "left" of them....thus the problem
Last edited by a moderator:
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Then you have subtle things like this that happen frequently...but yea, lib media and all.
https://twitter.com/spanbergerva07/status/1132746829018357760?s=21
https://twitter.com/spanbergerva07/status/1132746829018357760?s=21
They are biased period. MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration. If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching. That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV. This is not even a topic which should be debated. It is obvious.
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
Could it be that if an intelligent person actually took time to look into a topic deeply, the viewpoint they come away with would be considered "liberal" by today's standards?
Let's start with the obvious: global warming. 97% of all people qualified to study it have come to believe it's man-made (or something along those lines), yet this is still debated along partisan lines. If media reports it as fact, "LIBERAL BIAS!"
moleculo
Footballguy
One other point: of course media is not conservative. By definition. Conservatives are against change - they want gov't to have as light of a touch as possible, to maintain status quo.
Progressives see the ills of society and want change - rights wronged, innocent protected, etc.
Which side sells more papers or gets more clicks: "everything is fine, nothing to see here" or "OMG, won't someone think of the children?"
Progressives see the ills of society and want change - rights wronged, innocent protected, etc.
Which side sells more papers or gets more clicks: "everything is fine, nothing to see here" or "OMG, won't someone think of the children?"
The Commish
Footballguy
As I said:When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger". When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible". When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".
I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea. I never said they weren't biased. That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%. The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner? Now, for me, I don't think they do. I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views. It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.
That is an extremely condescending point of view. Just because there is a problem such as man-made emissions, does not mean the solutions being proposed are correct. It does not justify exaggerating the doom and gloom scenerios. Look at how the media fawns all over the New Green Deal when in fact it is almost entirely a socialistic laundry list of a huge government takeover of our economy that only pays lip service to solving climate change. There are a lot of issues with how many in the GOP deny the basic science, but that does not mean the media is playing it straight either.
Mischaracterizing what "conservative's" position on abortion kind of illustrates my point. One law does not define what conservatives think and even that law is widely exaggerated on what is actually does.
When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger". When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible". When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".
I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea. I never said they weren't biased. That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%. The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner? Now, for me, I don't think they do. I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views. It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.
moleculo
Footballguy
Are there conservative solutions proposed that the media ignores? I really hope so, because all I hear from Conservative media, POTUS, and my dad's Facebook feed is that global warming is a hoax.
The Commish
Footballguy
This is the exact reason I was careful to use quotes because this is what you do. I gave you specific instances and no where did I ever say it applied to all conservatives. You aren't illustrating anything other than your desire to be disingenuous and purposefully missing the point starring you right in the face in order to "win" some argument on the internet.Mischaracterizing what "conservative's" position on abortion kind of illustrates my point. One law does not define what conservatives think and even that law is widely exaggerated on what is actually does.
When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger". When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible". When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".
I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea. I never said they weren't biased. That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%. The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner? Now, for me, I don't think they do. I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views. It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.
The best part of this whole line of argument for you is that you continually complain about the "echo chamber" you so willfully participate in.
....You said:When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen"
That sounds like that is 'the' position for all conservatives.
I did not criticize the media for taking on the position that many in the GOP thinks it is a hoax. My issue with the bias is the media is not critical of the liberal position and the media in most cases actively participates in the exaggerated fear-mongering. Maybe it is just the sensational headlines is to attract viewers, but the sensationalism in the media is usually to the left.
moleculo
Footballguy
but why is there even a liberal position? Why has discussion of science and its implications devolved into conservative and liberal?
and of course sensational headlines drive viewers. Who wants to read an article titled "Global Warming Might be Quite Pleasant"?
Ilov80s
Footballguy
This is certainly a factor as well and no coincidence the conservative media took off when they found a way to sell their viewpoint as part of a persecuted majority.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
I don't know how to say it differently. How about this as a continuation.....jon_mx said:
When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen"
That sounds like that is 'the' position for all conservatives.
When the "conservative" position on abortion is "it's absolutely disgusting as a go to method of birth control" it isn't as "conservative" as "under no circumstance can an abortion happen". So when the media is reporting on abortion these days, it's on these positions that are so absurdly "conservative" because those are the positions being offered. They aren't making the position up.
I can't believe I have to break down simple English, but I'm willing if it helps get the point across. WHEN here is to read "in the instance of" or "the times where".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the root of it all jon......while you have been
about AOC and stumbling over yourself trying to prove she's the end of civilization as we know it the GOP and Trump have taken the label you identify with and completely changed the meaning. How do I know this? Because I identified with it to. "Conservative" no longer means what it did even 15 years ago. There is NO room in the "conservative" movement for someone who thinks abortion is understandable when the mother's life is in danger.....just one example I can illustrate this sprint to the right phenomena in just about any topic you want to bring up. You choose. So while I agree and have said such three times now in this thread alone that bias is throughout media, I completely disagree with the perceived reasons for the bias. It seems pretty clear and painfully obvious that, as I said above:
liberal ----------x----------conservative
has become
liberal------------x-------------------------------------conservative
Yeah....there's some lean there, but that lean is GREATLY exaggerated by people unwilling to look inward and realize what's happening with the term "conservative" and the group who identifies as such. The further right this thing goes, the more crazy even moderate positions look. That speaks to the shift, not the position remaining constant.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is always a fight between liberals and conservatives between government intervention and market-based solution. Global warming was used as a power grab and eventually the right was able to fend it off with the hoax rhetoric. There should be a discussion on the topic without all the big socialists programs attached to it and without all the hoax stuff. But unfortunately that is where politics is today with the wings controlling too much of the discussion.moleculo said:
Seems like you, or the media you watch, is vastly misrepresenting the debate over solutions to climate change
How about characterizing 'the conservative position' as what it actually is which is the extreme wing of the conservative position?I don't know how to say it differently. How about this as a continuation.....
When the "conservative" position on abortion is "it's absolutely disgusting as a go to method of birth control" it isn't as "conservative" as "under no circumstance can an abortion happen". So when the media is reporting on abortion these days, it's on these positions that are so absurdly "conservative" because those are the positions being offered. They aren't making the position up.
I can't believe I have to break down simple English, but I'm willing if it helps get the point across. WHEN here is to read "in the instance of" or "the times where".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the root of it all jon......while you have been
So while I agree and have said such three times now in this thread alone that bias is throughout media, I completely disagree with the perceived reasons for the bias. It seems pretty clear and painfully obvious that, as I said above:
liberal ----------x----------conservative
has become
liberal------------x-------------------------------------conservative
Yeah....there's some lean there, but that lean is GREATLY exaggerated by people unwilling to look inward and realize what's happening with the term "conservative" and the group who identifies as such. The further right this thing goes, the more crazy even moderate positions look. That speaks to the shift, not the position remaining constant.
moleculo
Footballguy
but that's the problem: any rational response requires governmental intervention. People aren't going to stop burning fossil fuels without it. There is no market based solution, because there is no mechanism without governmental intervention to tie the true cost of CO2 emissions to the producer.
As long as any government intervention is labeled as "socialist" or a "power grab", we have a problem.
sho nuff
Footballguy
You just admitted the conservative position was calling it all a hoax earlier to defeat the left. Didn’t you? So what Ian the position now? Other than POTUS denying all of it...
Also, there was no hoax.
The most talked about 'solution' in the media and by Democrat Candidates is the New Green Deal.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
That link had a ton of options in the middle or just slightly leaning one way or the other. You can choose to use those outlets.jon_mx said:
Like somebody said, when Fox is the most watched and you see where that lands, sure everything else is going to feel like it is all liberal bias.
sho nuff
Footballguy
My fault...but the point would remain about abortion. What is the conservative position? Because his was pretty spot on what the party is pushing.
I also think it was odd to celebrate the right defeating a hoax that wasn’t a hiax by claiming it was one.
Of course there are market based solutions and we are doing it today. We are subsidizing and advancing technology so that it actually makes economic sense to implement green solutions. The ultimate solution requires more of a partnership than just hard government mandates which always end up having unintended negative consequences.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
So you don't agree with that chart is what you are saying. Something they classify as skews right or minimal lean right (but still use fact reporting) like CBS news or WSJ are left? That chart is a lie?
ETA: if this is the type of stuff you are claiming, I think you are proving The Commish's point.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Maybe it’s just my media consumption but most of the things I saw or read about The Green New Deal were hit pieces on it.
Mile High
Footballguy
"Hostile towards their point of view." That's why I'm for this country needs a divorce. The point of views are pass the point of no return of going back to the middle imo. It was a good run, no need to make it messy, just agree to split and move on from each other.jon_mx said:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
That's what I did...you protested. I was even specific about the position, you protested. What you post here is a generalization. Am I supposed to believe that you'd be better with this generalization rather than the specific? Give me a break jon.....I tried
The Commish
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Of course it's "left"....the problem is the starting point (FoxNews)...very little is "right" of it, so most everything is "left" of it. That's not a problem with those other things, rather using FoxNews as your starting point in a discussion of things "left" and "right".
Mister CIA
Footballguy
That's an outdated script.moleculo said:
moleculo
Footballguy
so it seems. somehow "conservative" has morphed into "authoritarianism". Didn't see that one coming 3 years ago.
jonessed
Footballguy
It’s complete nonsense. Both parties are pulling in completely opposite directions. Anybody that believes that either is rooted firmly in the status quo isn’t paying attention.
Similar threads
