So do I, yet I feel that I am obligated to try to see both sides of the story when possible. I feel it keeps me less close-minded when making decisions about what I believe is right politically.Oh, and I dont have enough time to look at every news source since I do have a life.
Every news channel in our country has some sort of slant to it. FOX news is rightist. CNN is leftist. MSNBC is more or less moderate.
I just watch BBCNews.
lol signature
The sad thing is that slightly right of center is called "leftist" in this country.
Colmes, for example, is most certainly not leftist.
Jebus - BBC News is pretty unbiased when not covering British news or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, yes.
If anything, the BBC is "anti-British" when it comes to domestic affairs. But even that is pushing things a little. As for Israel-Palestine, I've seen comparable reporting of both sides of that conflict, including intense scrutiny of methods and motivations of both groups. They're probably about as balanced as you can get in this day and age, though that's not saying an awful lot.Originally Posted by Doomgaze
I'm more of the opinion that the media is liberal becuase it's better informed than the general public.The media is basically moderate/leftist, and always has been. Why? Because the purpose is to question the government, and the idea of more public involvement is, typically, a leftist ideal.
I used to try to get unbiased news by watching the most biased sources available. I'd watch Fox, and then The Daily Show [insert joke about how equally viable they both are as news sources here]. Then I started getting mad at the biases, on BOTH sides, so I wound up doing exactly what Unne suggested.... google news and the like. While bias-hunting, however, I was struck by much easier it was to watch left-leaning news, so that's my vote. Oh wait, there no poll.
I didn't say it had a cheerleader mentality towards Britain like most American news sources have towards the US, merely that there was a bias there. I'd agree with you on the most part, though.
Europe, in general, seems to be biased towards the Palestinian side.
maybe because europeans are a sensible people?
a little of column a, a little of column lingering anti-semetic feelings
I mean, it's good that they don't treat Israel like some infallible kingdom of God like the US does, but they're also the only democracy in the region and they've had to put up with a lot. Granted, there is a very vocal and powerful minority in Israel that are land-grabbing bastards.
Do you want me to list all the wars and genocides that took place in Europe in the past 250 years, then compare it to the USA? Europeans are in no way sensible - they only wish to appear as so.maybe because europeans are a sensible people?
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
You're right, we are not more sensible. However, it's true that European mentality tends to be less accepting towards the idea of war than people in the US: Probably because no war has been fought in US soil since the civil war more than a century ago. And no; I do not count an attack on a naval base in Hawaai as a "war fought on US soil".
Some people consider 9-11 to be one.
Oh, except when it comes to detaining prisoners. Then that pesky Geneva Convention would come into play, and we can't have THAT.
Hawaii wasn't even a state at the time, anyway. We deposed its Queen and made it a territory. You should have seen Michael Moore's great-grandfather's news reel, "No Blood for Pineapple"
Very true. However, when reluctance turns into sheer impotency... that's bad. Understanding the cost of war, in all areas, is fine. Avoiding it to the best of your ability is needed... but a time comes, when you have to fight a war, and I believe such a time has come. If you say 'No, not yet', I can accept that. But if you say 'No, NEVER!', then you're dead wrong.However, it's true that European mentality tends to be less accepting towards the idea of war than people in the US: Probably because no war has been fought in US soil since the civil war more than a century ago.
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
I think Bertolt Bretch said something like...
"After the war, the country that lost had it's people starving. The country that won had their people starving too."
My point is that war is not of the interest of the people, but of the interest of the few who are in the dominating sphere, the ones that benefit. Basically convince the people that communication with the other country is impossible and that war is justificable, make some nice rethoric talking about the motherland, patriotism and God, and you got your war all set.
As for me, I can understand war when a country is invading another. If you are getting invaded by someone you don't like, then you must obviously fight back. I don't think the invasion is justified, but the defense is.
" Basically convince the people that communication with the other country is impossible and that war is justificable, make some nice rethoric talking about the motherland, patriotism and God, and you got your war all set."
as well as a few bank accounts.
Ah, the media, what a hot button issue.
Unfortunately, in our current atmosphere, at least in the USA, it's become a business of access more than anything else. Just about every network attempts to appease both sides so that they can get the inside scoop before the others. There's been competitions amongst the "Big 3", CBS, NBC and ABC, to see who can break a news story first and oftentimes it means attempting to find their way into a location before the other. Generally, this leads more to sensationalism and generalizations instead of real news as well as sound bites instead of actual news stories.
The TV itself as a medium can be directly contributed to this, as it's essentially programmed us to want information fast and easy to understand. More often than not, "Debate" shows on Fox, CNN and the like boil into shout-fests because apparently the train of thought is that the louder one yells, the more important their point is, or the more truthful they become, when in reality, actual news often has two sides and doesn't need to be completely cut up to make nice little half minute pieces on the nightly news.
Our culture as well, has made us very polarized about politics, with all forms of commercials, campaigning and the like that attempt to show how wrong each side is, when in reality, they're just two sides of the same argument: Politics is all about compromise, how many people can you please at once in order to gain. Sure, every once in a while, you'll have someone on an idealistic or self-rightieous crusade, but they often are candles in the wind, they shine for a moment and are then blown out because they are either too left or right for the general population.
This in a nutshell is what boggles my mind about this current Presidential election:
Kerry and Edwards are being attacked for being too "Liberal". Yet, wouldn't that mean that they are favoring socialism and anarchy? At the same time, Bush and Cheney are being plugged as too "Conservative", yet wouldn't THAT mean they are attempting a dictatorship? In reality, neither are really THAT extreme in real terms of the political spectrum. In my opinion, the differences between Kerry and Bush really aren't that wide, but we are manipulated to think it's huge.
Problem with media is that it can be easily used to fuel wrong or misinformed information, which in turn can completely misinform the public who watch it. Yet, how can we make sure the media gives balanced news when the news itself is becoming leftist or rightist based upon campaign managers, and TV execs?
More than anything else, I feel the best way to be informed is to watch multiple perspectives on something, be it news, sports, whatever. Then, you can sort of filter out all the biases by either side and be left with what is real and truthful. As Unne and others said, check sources that attempt to be impartial, as most TV news IS, whether we like it or not on some form of agenda because they need money as well. So, they will show the news from a perspective their target audiences want to hear it from.
Take care all.
Posting Permissions
