more BIAS, it never ends

Cite your own examples of news slant, right and left. Contribute your own take on the news.

more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby MrSinatra » Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:55 am

regarding israel elections:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29107818/

i am only talking here HOW it is reported, portions like:

Inconclusive election results sent Israel into political limbo Wednesday with both Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and hard-line leader Benjamin Netanyahu claiming victory and leaving the kingmaker role to a rising political hawk with an anti-Arab platform.


so one, (the more liberal of course) , is just a "foreign minister" while the other (right wing of course) is a "hard-line leader" who will ally with a hawk it goes on to say.

Gains by right-wing parties give Netanyahu a better chance of forming a coalition with his natural allies.


no mention the other party is liberal.

more crap:

Ultranationalist may have final word
However, the final word may be up to ultranationalist Avigdor Lieberman, a former Netanyahu protege and perhaps Israel's most divisive politician, whose rightist Yisrael Beiteinu gained four seats in the election to hold 15.


i love this part:

Overall, right-wing and religious parties won a total of 65 seats, compared to 55 for center-left and Arab parties.


so one side is "right wing and religious" while the other is CENTER-left??? (and apparently godless)

now...

this post isn't about the issues there, i am anti-terrorist/rockets and also anti-settlements. what i want to draw attention to isn't that, its the BIAS all over this AP piece. its sick.
SYF Rocks!
www.LION-Radio.org

steve1633 wrote:if you havent realized yet that pp posts offer little in the way of intelligent discourse then youre dumber than i suspected, if its just easier to argue with someone like her then ya go ahead keep it up.
User avatar
MrSinatra
Mod Team
 
Posts: 4582
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 5:24 am
Location: 6' under

more BIAS, it never ends

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby TerryAnne » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:40 pm

This week's Newsweek was really bad on bias, too. I've been trying to post some excerpts from it, but the connection here keeps doing crazy things. So...I'll post the 'good' points this weekend.
Is a proud member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. :twisted:
User avatar
TerryAnne
Media GOD!
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:41 am
Location: On the road again....

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby Ken92081 » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:48 pm

What I saw in that was "we have a moderate, a lefty, and a righty" what part of that is not true?
Ken92081
Media analyst
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:52 am

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby MrSinatra » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:51 pm

Ken92081 wrote:What I saw in that was "we have a moderate, a lefty, and a righty" what part of that is not true?


that explains a lot.
SYF Rocks!
www.LION-Radio.org

steve1633 wrote:if you havent realized yet that pp posts offer little in the way of intelligent discourse then youre dumber than i suspected, if its just easier to argue with someone like her then ya go ahead keep it up.
User avatar
MrSinatra
Mod Team
 
Posts: 4582
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 5:24 am
Location: 6' under

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby TerryAnne » Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:28 pm

Not so fast, Ken. First, look at the article on page 7 about Orly Levy. Where in the article does it call Netanyahu's party what it really is, all the while saying that Levy's party is "hard-right", or that the fact that Israelis are responding to the right, it is "a troubling fashion trend, indeed".

Also, complaining about "Alberto Gonzales blames his unemployment on the "tough economy". Yes, that's why a man who can put "former US attorney general" on this resume can't find a job". Also on page 7.

How about page 15, where it implies that people have been and are continuing to go into the monastic world because of the recession? They have the nerve to say that monastic school attendence has been rising in recent years becasue of that?!?!

Page 19, where the guy - amid an almost entire magazine full of articles complaining about people making money - claims that "I learned the hard way: while blogs can do many wonderful things, making huge amounts of money isn't one of them".

Beginning on page 23, with the article that shares the title page: "We remain a center-right nation in many ways - particularly culturally, and our instinct, once the crisis passes, will be to try to revert to a more free-market style of capitalism - [my emphasis here] but it was, again, under a conservative GOP administration that we enacted the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years: prescription drugs for the elderly."

Sure that last comment is technically true, as it was passed under Bush's rule, but was it really GOP, or was the Senate and House really more bipartisan back then?

Page 30 where it sats that "In short, race, class and education are more serious issues for overall employment than the headline numbers convey". That quote right there implies the pushing of socialism...and it is commentary by the author.

The crap on page 31 saying that Canada has it right and that their "legal" work study program is a good idea that we should adopt because it will bring in foreigners who want to work here. Again, this is amid an edition that complains about there not being enough jobs for Americans.

Page 35 that says we "pity journalists".

The one article that came close to being right swinging was on page 39, "The Inside Game". Didn't live up to the hype, though.

B*tching about Yousuf Raza Gilani on page 48. I distinctly remember hearing about how the left wanted the former Pakistan PM out because he was too close with Bush...now they're bashing this guy?!?

The praises for WIll Ferrell's Broadway show that spends 80 minutes joking on Bush.

And, finally, the last article: "On Their Own Terms: American women have found a new way to keep abortion a personal and private responsibility". It promotes RU-486...which is still abortion.

What did you see that was so "right"?
Is a proud member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. :twisted:
User avatar
TerryAnne
Media GOD!
 
Posts: 2287
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:41 am
Location: On the road again....

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby Ken92081 » Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:08 pm

TerryAnne wrote:Not so fast, Ken. First, look at the article on page 7 about Orly Levy. Where in the article does it call Netanyahu's party what it really is, all the while saying that Levy's party is "hard-right", or that the fact that Israelis are responding to the right, it is "a troubling fashion trend, indeed".

Also, complaining about "Alberto Gonzales blames his unemployment on the "tough economy". Yes, that's why a man who can put "former US attorney general" on this resume can't find a job". Also on page 7.

How about page 15, where it implies that people have been and are continuing to go into the monastic world because of the recession? They have the nerve to say that monastic school attendence has been rising in recent years becasue of that?!?!

Page 19, where the guy - amid an almost entire magazine full of articles complaining about people making money - claims that "I learned the hard way: while blogs can do many wonderful things, making huge amounts of money isn't one of them".

Beginning on page 23, with the article that shares the title page: "We remain a center-right nation in many ways - particularly culturally, and our instinct, once the crisis passes, will be to try to revert to a more free-market style of capitalism - [my emphasis here] but it was, again, under a conservative GOP administration that we enacted the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years: prescription drugs for the elderly."

Sure that last comment is technically true, as it was passed under Bush's rule, but was it really GOP, or was the Senate and House really more bipartisan back then?

Page 30 where it sats that "In short, race, class and education are more serious issues for overall employment than the headline numbers convey". That quote right there implies the pushing of socialism...and it is commentary by the author.

The crap on page 31 saying that Canada has it right and that their "legal" work study program is a good idea that we should adopt because it will bring in foreigners who want to work here. Again, this is amid an edition that complains about there not being enough jobs for Americans.

Page 35 that says we "pity journalists".

The one article that came close to being right swinging was on page 39, "The Inside Game". Didn't live up to the hype, though.

B*tching about Yousuf Raza Gilani on page 48. I distinctly remember hearing about how the left wanted the former Pakistan PM out because he was too close with Bush...now they're bashing this guy?!?

The praises for WIll Ferrell's Broadway show that spends 80 minutes joking on Bush.

And, finally, the last article: "On Their Own Terms: American women have found a new way to keep abortion a personal and private responsibility". It promotes RU-486...which is still abortion.

What did you see that was so "right"?


The fact that the general premises about the new Isreali government and its 3 party system (sign me up for that any day) is right. There are lefties, righties, and centeries, thats all I meant.
Ken92081
Media analyst
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:52 am

Re: more BIAS, it never ends

Unread postby WeaponOfMassInstruction » Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:08 pm

But Mr. S's larger point remains.

Why did the writers see it as necessary to attach labels like "ultranationalist" and "religious" to only one side- the Right?

If there is an "ultranationalist" party on the Right, then there must be a party that could not give less than a damn on the Left, correct?

If there is a "religious" party on the Right, then there must be an atheist party on the Left, no?

While there might actually be more than a bit of truth in both of those statements, it would have been far more intellectually honest of the writers to have stated that the "center-right" or "right-wing" parties had won more seats than the "center-left" or "left-wong" parties and leave it at that. To have added the additional adjectives, especially when they are of a perjorative nature, does the reader and the process no favors.
"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views."
William F. Buckley, Jr.
User avatar
WeaponOfMassInstruction
Mod Team
 
Posts: 3854
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:38 pm
Location: Alabama


Return to More Bias and Arrogance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron