I've been absolutely disgusted the last few days with the way some press outlets are setting up n equivalence between the McCain campaign of hate and fervent fear and the Obama campaign.

the truth hurts!

Quick example:

But in these last weeks of the campaign, Obama and McCain are going farther in their efforts to raise doubts about each other. McCain's code is to suggest something sinister about Obama, to say there is something lurking in his past that Americans should fear. Obama, by using the word "erratic" to describe his rival seems to suggest that he is in some way unstable and therefore unacceptable.

As though they are the same.

This works everywhere!

Student 1: 2 + 2 = 4
Student 2: 2 + 2 = 16

Truth: 2 + 2 = 10

And since when is anything about segregation correct? Or civil rights for everyone regardless of race incorrect? I thought these questions were settled.

Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct? Or civil rights for everyone regardless of race incorrect? I thought these questions were settled.

Self-pwned. That'll teach me not to read the article.

McClatchy?? Objective?? I think not. If they subject the Obama administration to 1 tenth the scrutiny they hold the current one to, I'll be surprised.

DamnYankees: I've been absolutely disgusted the last few days with the way some press outlets are setting up n equivalence between the McCain campaign of hate and fervent fear and the Obama campaign.

That's because the GOP did such a successful job over the last 10-15 years of making the "liberal media" tag stick. So now all of the media outlets are bending over backwards to appear "fair and balanced" - so they equate Obama calling McCain "erratic" with McCain calling Obama a muslim terrorist. I shouldn't say "the media"...Fox is still running 24x7 Ayers coverage. (I don't watch much Fox - every time I've turned it on the last few days THAT'S what they were talking about...).

Good job McClatchy newspapers now STOP LAYING OFF YOUR JOURNALISTS.

Etchy333: I thought these questions were settled.

You don't get out of CA much do you?

In the past week, nearly 100% of McCain's ads were negative/attack ads. Obama: about 1/3 were negative/attack ads. NPR did a good job of discussing this, and others mentioned it (in passing), but I still hear "both campaign have gone negative" most often.

I guess "balanced" is more important than "fair." Too bad.

If you write an article that's critical of John McCain, must you devote an identical number of words to criticism of Barack Obama?

The Fox News philosophy in a nutshell. Reality be damned.

Equal time alone does not equate to fair and balanced.

Fair and Balanced aren't the same thing. And if you don't believe me, try imagining the principle applied to the Westboro Baptist Church.

The headline's absolutely right. The problem arises when you keep in mind that the archetypical Objective Journalist is something of a fossil nowadays.

Lionel Mandrake: In the past week, nearly 100% of McCain's ads were negative/attack ads. Obama: about 1/3 were negative/attack ads. NPR did a good job of discussing this, and others mentioned it (in passing), but I still hear "both campaign have gone negative" most often.

I guess "balanced" is more important than "fair." Too bad.

Andrea Mitchell just had a McCain campaign rep on. He actually had the audacity to say that Obama was wrong for repsonding to the resurrection of Ayers.

In essence, defending yourself from scurrilous attacks is now considered "unfair."

submitter: Does the truth lie halfway between segregation and civil rights, or between communism and democracy? If you write an article that's critical of John McCain, must you devote an identical number of words to criticism of Barack Obama?

Yes, I'm pretty sure that's in the FArQ.

Cataholic: McClatchy?? Objective?? I think not. If they subject the Obama administration to 1 tenth the scrutiny they hold the current one to, I'll be surprised.

well, to be fair but not balanced, if the obama administration does one-tenth of the things worthy of intense scrutiny that the bush administration has done, i'll be surprised.

Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct?

Chicago wants a school for gay kids only and people don't seem to mind.

cburkard: Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct?

Chicago wants a school for gay kids only and people don't seem to mind.

Link?

I have spent the last few months listening to Fox, ABC, CNBS, CNN and so on for news on the election as well as using online sites. Fox has always had a slant (I don't listen to MSNBC often, so I can't really comment). But I'll be damned if Fox hasn't started getting a lot louder lately. And the other stations are slowly being impacted by this.

But since I voted early, I can only watch and wait.

Wait until Obama's elected and sworn in if you think the media is carrying the GOPs water now. You ain't seen nothing yet.

The voters will be giving Republicans the finger but the media won't get the message.

yes, parity is not objectivity.

John Walcott: Truth is not subjective

Yes John, it is.

Senescent Dawn: The headline's absolutely right. The problem arises when you keep in mind that the archetypical Objective Journalist is something of a fossil nowadays.

How's the view from your high horse, you BBC-watching elitist? I bet you hate Fox News because you think news mixed with entertainment is unsophisitimicated. Well you can take your sophistication and stick it.

I'll keep watching the babes while I get my news.

If they subject the Obama administration to 1 tenth the scrutiny they hold the current one to, I'll be surprised.

...

Bush blew through $5 trillion dollars of debt in his term. Do you think he only deserved the same amount of scrutiny for those dollars as Clinton, who basically generated less than 1/5 of that debt amount?

This is the old "put one foot in ice water and one in boiling water and you're fine on average" argument applied to journalism. I'd be satisfied if the truth is ascertained by the media sending the same size and intensity reporter horde to dig up dirt on an Obama as it does for a Palin.

DamnYankees: cburkard: Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct?

Chicago wants a school for gay kids only and people don't seem to mind.

Link?

It's true. I plan to prowl there in the evenings to pick up some young studmuffin.

jjorsett: This is the old "put one foot in ice water and one in boiling water and you're fine on average" argument applied to journalism. I'd be satisfied if the truth is ascertained by the media sending the same size and intensity reporter horde to dig up dirt on an Obama as it does for a Palin.

Actually, its not that at all. Your analogy has both side (ice and fire) being harmful. The argument is balancing 2 wrong extremes, but balancing truth and falsity.

No.

America has been cut free of morality, common sense and factual analysis for so long you can't even find your way back to a basic level of truth.

This is the basic requirement for a 100% malleable underclass. You need to be able to believe anything.

Cataholic: McClatchy?? Objective?? I think not. If they subject the Obama administration to 1 tenth the scrutiny they hold the current one to, I'll be surprised.

This is an excellent example of why the media tends to equate objectiveness with the middle point between what each side is saying. Conservatives have spent the last three decades working the ref.

There was an analogy earlier in this thread that, in the media's eyes, if one student says 2+2=4 and the other says 2+2=16, the answer is 2+2=10. That's a great analogy, because it not only captures the basic flawed reporting, but also the motive beyond why conservatives spend so much time criticizing the media. 2+2=16 may be an utterly ridiculous conservative talking point or agenda item ("Drill, Baby, Drill"), the kind of idea that intelligent people should laugh at. But instead of laughing, the media is forced to treat the idea as having some merit, and also is forced to move what it reports as the truth away from the actual correct answer.

Kind of sad that such a transparent tactic has been so successful.

DamnYankees: I've been absolutely disgusted the last few days with the way some press outlets are setting up n equivalence between the McCain campaign of hate and fervent fear and the Obama campaign.

Of course you're disgusted. You're in the tank for your guy and anyone expressing a difference of opinion with you or your guy, or anyone attacking your guy, is met with unyielding hatred by you and your kind. We get it. Now get over it. It's politics. It's ugly.

By the way, why aren't you crowing about the unending free ride of good PR and softball questioning your guy is getting?

Darconix: Why do you libs always froth at the mouth over Fox News? You have ALL the rest of the farking media in the tank for Obama, and yet you complain about the ONE outlet that hails from the other side?

You libs need to get a grip.


That's not what TFA is about. I suggest you read it, as you might learn something. I sure did.

Darconix: Why do you libs always froth at the mouth over Fox News? You have ALL the rest of the farking media in the tank for Obama, and yet you complain about the ONE outlet that hails from the other side?

You libs need to get a grip.

Everybody laugh at the 26%

Darconix: Why do you libs always froth at the mouth over Fox News? You have ALL the rest of the farking media in the tank for Obama, and yet you complain about the ONE outlet that hails from the other side?

You libs need to get a grip.

Yep, it's you and Fox against the world. How do you withstand such persecution?

Cataholic: McClatchy?? Objective?? I think not. If they subject the Obama administration to 1 tenth the scrutiny they hold the current one to, I'll be surprised.

If you think that anyone in the media is subjecting the Bush Administration to scrutiny, you can console yourself by the fact that they are just trying to average it out from the complete lack of scrutiny in the early years.

Besides, it is an Administration where the Justice department refuses to provide information to Congress, the Vice President thinks he can randomly determine which branch of government he works for, people fire for incompetence are awarded the "Medal of Freedom", the White House routinely interferes with the findings of Scientists, and this Administration has been repeatedly caught misinforming Congress and the American public about important issues.

Gee, I wonder why they may get scrutinized. I don't think everything that comes out of the White House is a lie, but I do double check.

Trey Le Parc: Of course you're disgusted. You're in the tank for your guy and anyone expressing a difference of opinion with you or your guy, or anyone attacking your guy, is met with unyielding hatred by you and your kind. We get it. Now get over it. It's politics. It's ugly.

By the way, why aren't you crowing about the unending free ride of good PR and softball questioning your guy is getting?

Your guy your guy your guy!!

I love it. He makes an objective observation about reality, and because the reality isn't what you want it to be, you cry about.

jjorsett 2008-10-10 03:26:58 PM
"I'd be satisfied if the truth is ascertained by the media sending the same size and intensity reporter horde to dig up dirt on an Obama as it does for a Palin."

And what will you say if there isn't as much dirt to dig up?

Some truths are subjective, some aren't. Words are vague, parameters need to be stated. The best flavor of ice dream or the best candidate for office depends what you mean by best. The problem with the news media is they do not generally examine their assumptions or state their POV before framing the news with their prejudice. Not surprising, if you want to search for truth you become a scientist, if you want to have people pay attention and stroke your ego you become a performer. If you have no performing talent but still seek a certain class of celebrity you become a journalist.

In a rational world journalists would post their credo for your examination so you would know how to judge their reporting, oh and men would ride sidesaddle.

Modern media needs a "narrative" for some damned reason. They do the same things reality shows do, show selective parts to make someone the villain and someone the hero. They'll work in other archetypes as well - the mentor, the herald, the trixter, etc. In the end, you have a compelling story (that changes only in the interest in prolonging itself) but are no more informed than when you started.

El_Dan

Bounding Debate. You make such crazy statements that the entire conversation becomes about those statements and the refutation of those statements.

The act of even talking about those nutty remarks gives them validity. It's how the US has become this weird Idiocracy.

cburkard: Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct?

Chicago wants a school for gay kids only and people don't seem to mind.

you mean happy "gay" kids?
at what age does one decide to be gay?
or base their entire existence on a sexual preference for that matter? (label ones self)

Trey Le Parc: DamnYankees: I've been absolutely disgusted the last few days with the way some press outlets are setting up n equivalence between the McCain campaign of hate and fervent fear and the Obama campaign.

Of course you're disgusted. You're in the tank for your guy and anyone expressing a difference of opinion with you or your guy, or anyone attacking your guy, is met with unyielding hatred by you and your kind. We get it. Now get over it. It's politics. It's ugly.

By the way, why aren't you crowing about the unending free ride of good PR and softball questioning your guy is getting?

So why is it that you feel the need to molest retarded children? I think that is deplorable!

Now don't get all disgusted just because I have a difference of opinion with you.

As an-Alt Troll, I find it kinda funny. In the beginning I used to devote equal time to pro-left, pro-right content. However, no matter how much ass-spittle I spewed out for the left, most Farkers would reply with "zomg, I love Noam Chomsky! Cool, you read Abdel Rahman Sharkawi, also!"

It was frustrating, cause my carefully calibrated barbs of subtle sarcasm were merely deflected of the mesh-armour of your unified socialist leanings.

Now, that I spend more time on "the right", I get way more "bites", and aside from a few knowing few who are able to discern my unique brand of "making shiat up and pretending that's how I really feel", most assume that I am a pariah, and I love it.

/ tl;dr: Ya'll a bunch of purple-pissing liberal ladyboys who want to take away my gunz and redristibute mah incomez.

impaler: Darconix: Why do you libs always froth at the mouth over Fox News? You have ALL the rest of the farking media in the tank for Obama, and yet you complain about the ONE outlet that hails from the other side?

You libs need to get a grip.

Everybody laugh at the 26%

Actually, I understand it's 19% now.

Democracy is the opposite of communism?

That is a weird, weird definition.

This deserves the OBVIOUS tag.

ragekage: Everybody laugh at the 26%

Actually, I understand it's 19% now.

It is still going down slower than the Dow!

ragekage: Actually, I understand it's 19% now.

I didn't want to bother photoshoping the correction...

Darconix: Why do you libs always froth at the mouth over Fox News? You have ALL the rest of the farking media in the tank for Obama, and yet you complain about the ONE outlet that hails from the other side?

Some folks considered the US media to be highly dysfunctional, lazy, and outright incompetent. Examples abound, including but not exclusive to:

the media's obsession with Monica Lewinsky & every Clinton "scandal" imaginable,

the media's tendency to act as stenographers rather than reporters (cheerleading the War in Iraq instead of questioning),

the media's fascination with trivia - Al Gore's "sighs" and 3-button suits,

the media's insistence on false equivalences - all space given to highlighting right-wing failure must be accompanied by real or imagined left-wing failures, whether appropriate or not,

etc. etc.

Other folks consider the media to be a partisan thing - "Whaa, only FOX news gives us full-blown right-wing hate 24/7, thus all the other networks are "liberals!!1!"

I'd imagine you must be one of the latter.

Ask yourself this: Ever meet a "liberal" who proclaims his or her love of -any- US news media?

cburkard: Etchy333: And since when is anything about segregation correct?

Chicago wants a school for gay kids only and people don't seem to mind.

You are wrong, says the Chicago Tribune (new window)