Are you ashamed of the biased presidential coverage?

[Paper Dragon]

I am, but not to the extent of this guy. I think Joe the Plumber was worth a closer look.

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=6099188

I'll vote for Obama but there's no denying most of the mainstream media is as well. I wish they were more balanced about it because it does reflect on me.

Anyway, discuss:

 

[93Devil]

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&scoring=n&q=obama+ayers - 37,000 hits

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&scoring=n&q=mccain+keating - 7,000 hits

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&scoring=n&q=obama+Rezko - 4,000 hits

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&scoring=n&q=mccain+Shepp&btnG=Search - 15 hits

And this person writes a piece about bias in the media, but he does not mention Fox News or the New York Post? Is that an even article?

 

[txsportsscribe]

yes, very.

and as far as joe the plumber, why was he worth a closer look? it wasn't about him, it was about obama's response. a chimp could've asked the question and it would still be obama's response (except for the story about a talking chimp, of course ).

 

[93Devil]

Joe opened himself up when he started giving interviews and making himself a public figure.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Nope. The media is under no obligation to repeat the McCain campaign's garbage for them. They've been more than fair, considering the direction that campaign has taken since Gov. Youbetcha was named to the ticket.

 

[harbinger]

Malone ignores one of the great tenets of journalism. He assumes. He assumes reasons, individual motivations, editorial conspiracies, but doesn't give specific examples to back them up. He argues that reporters are biased to save their own necks in a dying industry, but doesn't offer anything to prove that assumption. He says nobody has bothered to interview Ayers. I have to believe Ayers has received a million interview requests, and turned them all down. That's a conspiracy by the media? Too many claims, not enough information to back it up.

His article is also as biased as it gets. You would think he might try to hide his personal bias by choosing examples of bias from both sides, given the topic of the article.

I, too, have grave concerns about bias in the media. But if you're going to talk about that, you have to talk about surveys that show Fox viewers are more likely to have the facts wrong when it comes to things like Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction, etc. You have to look at the body of evidence. The bias is real and its implications are frightening. But Malone merely adds to that body of biased reporting with this piece.

 

[Ace]

No.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Malone ignores one of the great tenets of journalism. He assumes. He assumes reasons, individual motivations, editorial conspiracies, but doesn't give specific examples to back them up. He argues that reporters are biased to save their own necks in a dying industry, but doesn't offer anything to prove that assumption. He says nobody has bothered to interview Ayers.

Which is absolutely, positively untrue.

The Chicago Tribune did.

They cornered him at his office at UIC.

He said something along the lines of, "No comment" and when pushed, said, "There's just nothing I can really add," and then closed the door behind him.

 

[spnited]

Why should I be ashamed of something I have nothing to do with?

 

[93Devil]

Shepp + McCain has less than 20 hits on a Google news search.

 

[BrianGriffin]

I don't think Joe the Plumber was worth a single look, but unfortunately for him, the McCain campaign made them have to look.

The point Obama made was arguable, but McCain's campaign was also wrong to think the majority of Americans would be outraged by it. Any half-decent student of economics, history, polisci, sociology, etc., would acknowledge that the creation of the middle class was one of the keys in the U.S. becoming what it is today - the world's most powerful nation. And what created the middle class? A redistribution of wealth through social programs (New Deal, labor laws, etc.) All of these things, the laws, the social programs, etc., encouraged money to be spread among more people in order to stimulate the economy by increasing demand for goods (which increased pressure on supply).

Point being: While the right demonizes any notion of a redistribution of wealth, history has shown that isn't bad in and of itself and only when redistribution of wealth is the cornerstone of the economic philsophy (a true socialist, egalitarian economic policy) is there a philosophical parting of the ways to most Americans.

 

[Stitch]

I don't think Joe the Plumber was worth a single look, but unfortunately for him, the McCain campaign made them have to look.

The point Obama made was arguable, but McCain's campaign was also wrong to think the majority of Americans would be outraged by it. Any half-decent student of economics, history, polisci, sociology, etc., would acknowledge that the creation of the middle class was one of the keys in the U.S. becoming what it is today - the world's most powerful nation. And what created the middle class? A redistribution of wealth through social programs (New Deal, labor laws, etc.) All of these things, the laws, the social programs, etc., encouraged money to be spread among more people in order to stimulate the economy by increasing demand for goods (which increased pressure on supply).

Point being: While the right demonizes any notion of a redistribution of wealth, history has shown that isn't bad in and of itself and only when redistribution of wealth is the cornerstone of the economic philsophy (a true socialist, egalitarian economic policy) is there a philosophical parting of the ways to most Americans.

I think that most of the middle class would have a problem with redistributing wealth. I won't get into what the means because that's not the point. Some undecidedes will get turned off to Obama by what they perceive as his socialist views coming out.