While true in the broad sense, there are definitely instances of that overreacting that appeal to liberals or conservatives and once the networks realize that they make a ton of money doing that, it continues to spiral in that direction until there really is a liberal bias for a network or a conservative bias for another network. Of course, that political bias is a side-effect of their bias for wanting to make as much money as possible.

Nate Silver has become Ric Romero!

Seriously, though, hellloooooo? Does anyone doubt this? I've known this for quite awhile- I knew it when I was an avid Fox News viewer, when I was still an active Republican and proud Bush supporter. They catered to an audience, they made tons of money off of it; but I never thought they were impartial or "fair and balanced".

MSNBC seems to have titled to the left in a similar fashion, but not to the degree that FOX News has, most likely because of the aforementioned "Corporate Overlord" bias mentioned earlier, and due to the fact that "liberals" tend to get their news and discussions via other methods, like the Intarwebs, so it's not as lucrative a TV market for them.

But in the end, it's the money. If Rupert Murdoch saw a way to make billions more dollars by suddenly shifting the focus of FOX News dramatically to the left, he'd do it; vice versa, et all.

Conservatives should buy a stake in some media outlets so that they can have a chance to get their message heard. Being captains of industry who succeed at every business venture they touch, this should be a slam dunk.

Shostie: DamnYankees: because conservatives whine WAY more

Really, dude? I hear a lot of conservative whining right now, but I heard quite a bit of liberal whining over the last 8 years.

and THIS is definitely true. The silly war got more attention than mustardgate which is an absolute travesty of justice.

Shostie: Mordant: Shostie: DamnYankees: because conservatives whine WAY more

Really, dude? I hear a lot of conservative whining right now, but I heard quite a bit of liberal whining over the last 8 years.

and THIS is definitely true. The silly war got more attention than mustardgate which is an absolute travesty of justice.

I say nothing about whether or not the whining was justified. I don't give a shiat either way.

Me neither, I don't think the libs should have said anything about the events of the last 8 years. From their position they had nothing of substance to offer anyway so it was nothing but noise about all sorts of trigling matters.

"trifling"

Shostie: I say nothing about whether or not the whining was justified. I don't give a shiat either way.

Have you heard of the term "false equivalency"

They're biased towards whatever will keep them from getting fired this week.

/Please do not forget the mindless Pro-Bush bias in the year after 9/11.

//Or the mindless Pro-Obama bias of the last year.

I'd hit that, skinny geeks tend to be hung like donkeys.

The obvious tag is well used on this one.

sigdiamond2000: Mordant: From their position they had nothing of substance to offer anyway so it was nothing but noise about all sorts of trigling matters.

Behold: Palin Derangement Syndrome

Funny, I read that as 'trifling'.

Please stop pointing out your ailments. It's really unnecessary.

The media is out to make money, which comes from higher ratings, which are brought by sensationalist journalism. Calling it 'biased' is just stupid. You can sensationalize supposed left-wing causes (AIDS will infect everyone! People just like you are becoming HOMELESS!) as you can the traditional right-wing causes (Our national debt is at RECORD HIGHS! The Muslims will kill us all!). I think the 'media is liberal' meme comes from the fact that liberals have a lot more causes that they care about while conservatives are more insular. It's easier to rile up left-wingers about injustice than it is bible thumpers who don't really watch anything other than the 700 Club.

detfrost1: I'd hit that, skinny geeks tend to be hung like donkeys.

Dammit, I thought I was special in that regard.

Wendy's Chili: The GOP has spent every waking hour fear-mongering about government takeover of healthcare, and CNN helped them out by running a story about a $1200 medicare wheelchair a dozen times in one day.

I noticed that. I guess the Freeper world this means that ObamaCare is sooooo left wing that even CNN can't come up with a way to justify it. Or in the real world, it's because by making a controversy, they rake in $$$

Shaggy_C: I think the 'media is liberal' meme comes from the fact that liberals have a lot more causes that they care about while conservatives are more insular. It's easier to rile up left-wingers about injustice than it is bible thumpers who don't really watch anything other than the 700 Club.

No way. The right wing has O'reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. They get riled up about ANYTHING. John Kerry ordering the 'wrong' cheese on his Philly steak sandwich is enough.

And there's this latest on the "deserting soldier should be executed" from the vomitorium of Fox News.

Letter from Congress to Roger Ailes, professional butthole (new window)

It's a corporate bias.

It looks like a liberal bias on social issues like civil rights because corporations find it unprofitable to regard lucrative markets like childless gay couples with loads of disposable income as subhuman.

It looks like a conservative bias on nearly everything else because they're corporations who like to make money regardless of the cost to others.

Then there's the problems causing just plain poor journalism:

* Beltway media is predominantly upper-class white males who are insulated from reality and mistake their cocktail parties for the real world.

* Belief that "neutrality" and "fairness" means giving equal time to two sides and pretending the truth is somewhere in the middle. Check out the birther stuff - one side is just plain objectively *wrong* and the media still struggles to be "fair". Which leads to

* a tendency to simply regurgitate what others said and not independently evaluate the veracity of their remarks. The media doesn't note that Congressman So-and-So was wrong when he said Barack Obama isn't a US citizen. They say "Democrats say Republicans are wrong." and portray it as a "he said, she said" situation.

* Less/lower quality investigative journalism because it doesn't make enough money for the corporation to justify the expense and it frequently uncovers inconvenient information about advertisers.

Shostie: Mordant: Shostie: DamnYankees: because conservatives whine WAY more

Really, dude? I hear a lot of conservative whining right now, but I heard quite a bit of liberal whining over the last 8 years.

and THIS is definitely true. The silly war got more attention than mustardgate which is an absolute travesty of justice.

I say nothing about whether or not the whining was justified. I don't give a shiat either way.

Then you are an idiot, because there are things worth making a stink about and bringing to the country's attention, and there are things that aren't. There are ways to bring it to attention and there are ways that aren't. If the sky IS falling, or a wolf IS coming, you should damn well react appropriately and the correct people need to be notified.

Also I probably just got mildly trolled by a fark independent.

Bacontastesgood: No way. The right wing has O'reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. They get riled up about ANYTHING. John Kerry ordering the 'wrong' cheese on his Philly steak sandwich is enough.

Those are opinion shows though. I mean the actual news.

One word: SENSATIONALISM. That's the one true across-the-board media bias.

The American definition of Liberal would be considered conservative in most other developed nations.

detfrost1: I'd hit that, skinny geeks tend to be hung like donkeys.

You sound deep.

Crunch61: detfrost1: I'd hit that, skinny geeks tend to be hung like donkeys.

You sound deep.

And cold...

The key words to this article and his own statement is "I don't think".

Is there any way in this world that we (the people) could change or force news agencies to be unbiased? Seriously. If we could bring integrity back to reporting, how can it be done?

You can't trust the Government to run them. If they were Government owned, yet publicly run? Bad guys are going to infiltrate no matter what. Look at our own Government, the best organized mafia in the nation.

Kind of like Las Vegas. I understand Las Vegas was better when the mafia ran it. Now that they had to "become legal", it's not as good. (Something I had heard.)

Stoker: If we could bring integrity back to reporting, how can it be done?

Stop buying cable. They're the worst offenders.

Shaggy_C: Those are opinion shows though. I mean the actual news.

A paid Fox News analyst on an "actual news" show said that the captured PFC deserted his unit. The pentagon is going apeshiat over this. The point is the right wing nutballs make up lies and then pump it out there as "we report, you decide". There is no line between their opinion shows and their fake news, because they don't care about the facts.

I am only glad that I am not actually conservative, because it must be damn embarrassing to have freaks and liars representing your policy preferences in 99% of the media.

I have noticed one thing: in matters of war and foreign affairs, the press has a definite "whatever the Pentagon and/or State Department says is the penultimate Truth" bias.

Which is BS, of course.

Crunch61: detfrost1: I'd hit that, skinny geeks tend to be hung like donkeys.

You sound deep.

Nah, not very deep at all, I'm a top, I just appreciate being able to play with another hung wiener.

Shaggy_C: Those are opinion shows though. I mean the actual news.

Unfortunately there are people that take those opinion pieces as hard hitting investigative journalism. What they fail to understand is people like Limbaugh and O'Reilly are selling an entertainment product. It's no better or different than people that get their "news" from Olbermann and Maddow. While all of it is based on the actual news, it's more of infotainment product, and it's meant to elicit strong feelings from the viewer. The big problem occurs when the emotions it elicits are racism, elitism, and martyrdom on the part of the listener/viewer. The people that author/host these shows know exactly what kind of response they're going to get from their audience because someone has gone and done the market research for them, and they tailor their opinions accordingly. It only becomes "news" when the listener happens to agree with the opinions stated by the speaker. Some listeners are sophistacated enough to realize it's all propaganda, but there exists a contingent that takes what Rush says as the biblical truth, just as there are those that take what Olbermann has to offer as gospel, but you aren't going to do that unless you were already leaning that direction in the first place.