Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Columbia Journalism Review)   You know something is askew when the trust fund liberals at Columbia University start taking note of media bias   (cjr.org) divider line 48
    More: Obvious, Mitt Romney, President Obama, Columbia University, Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Sam Stein, Bush Doctrine, state senate, Vice President Joe Biden  
•       •       •

1819 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 May 2012 at 12:29 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-05-10 11:17:31 AM  
The difference they're missing is that Obama will acknowledge his past decisions on the issue that he's changed his mind on, while Romney dives straight for the doublethink on a daily basis.
 
2012-05-10 11:24:25 AM  
Nyhan was the same guy a couple of months ago trying to convince people that the Etch-a-Sketch comment from Fehrnstrom didn't mean what it meant.
 
2012-05-10 11:45:12 AM  
I didn't know there were enough trust fund liberals to get their own stereotype.
 
2012-05-10 11:51:53 AM  
We are at war with mandated healthcare. We have always been at war with mandated healthcare.
 
2012-05-10 11:53:18 AM  
keep pushing this, republicans. hell, call it a "flip flop." how many has obama got? how many has your boy got?

yes, keep pushing the flip flop thing, republicans. it can only help you this november.
 
2012-05-10 11:54:30 AM  
 
2012-05-10 12:31:31 PM  
Yes, a 15-degree shift is the same as a 180. That's the difference in the terms. Get over it.
 
2012-05-10 12:32:15 PM  
The difference is; Obama explained why he changed his mind.

Romney says he's always held his current stance, even if five days earlier he had always held the previous stance.
 
2012-05-10 12:32:38 PM  
Since Cons are already trotting out their excuses for Romney losing, I guess I'll start this ball rolling.

Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.
 
2012-05-10 12:32:52 PM  
One is from a party that coined the term flip flop, I guess they should have never made it their rallying cry in 2004 if they did not want to be stuck with it.
 
2012-05-10 12:33:29 PM  

Endrick: The difference they're missing is that Obama will acknowledge his past decisions on the issue that he's changed his mind on, while Romney dives straight for the doublethink on a daily basis.


Really, by supposing there is any meaningful comparison between Obama's position change, and Romney's multiple flip flops, this article evinces anti-Obama, conservative media bias.

Did I say "multiple flip flops?" I meant to say "complete lack of any core whatsoever, leading to flip flops on virtually every issue there is."
 
2012-05-10 12:34:47 PM  

Endrick: The difference they're missing is that Obama will acknowledge his past decisions on the issue that he's changed his mind on, while Romney dives straight for the doublethink on a daily basis.


This...
www.tampabay.com

www.tampabay.com

www.tampabay.com
 
2012-05-10 12:35:33 PM  

FlashHarry: on the roof for romney.


FTFY
 
2012-05-10 12:35:59 PM  
The difference in their circumstances-and Romney's lack of skill at glossing over his changed views-help explain the disparity in media coverage.

Yep, It says it right there. iI's all the lieberal MSM drive by lamestream Saul Alinsky media conspiracy.
 
2012-05-10 12:36:19 PM  
Being a southern state political party is never having to be on the right side of history.
 
2012-05-10 12:37:01 PM  
You've got some balls going with "trust fund liberals" when this guy is running for President, subster.

l1.yimg.com
 
2012-05-10 12:37:05 PM  
goo.gl
 
2012-05-10 12:37:11 PM  
Um, Fox is the #1 news network several years running. Headline yesterday was 'Obama Flip Flops on Gay Marriage', or something very similar.

Tell me again about how 'the media' doesn't call Obama a flip-flopper?
 
2012-05-10 12:41:45 PM  

FlashHarry: oh, and as far as media bias in this campaign goes, a recent pew study showed that the "mainstream media" is clearly in the tank for romney.


This.

The media are always behind the Republican candidate.
 
2012-05-10 12:46:41 PM  

blackminded: You've got some balls going with "trust fund liberals" when this guy is running for President, subster.

[l1.yimg.com image 600x420]


The guy on the Right
 
2012-05-10 12:48:23 PM  

Endrick: The difference they're missing is that Obama will acknowledge his past decisions on the issue that he's changed his mind on, while Romney dives straight for the doublethink on a daily basis.


When you're always on both sides of an issue, you can't really flip flop.
 
2012-05-10 12:52:23 PM  

EyeballKid: Since Cons are already trotting out their excuses for Romney losing, I guess I'll start this ball rolling.

Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.


There are two real dangers to the Democrats in this election:

1) That the economy tanks bank into full fledged recession, and

2) That progressives become complacent because they're prematurely convinced they can't lose.

Romney is a non-lunatic, well financed candidate backed by multiple billionaires, a base of support that loathes Obama beyond all reason, and history's most sophisticated propaganda machine. The Democrats can take neither this nor any other election for granted. The meme that they can is one of their worst enemies.

In short, and I say this with all due respect, STFU with the premature gloating. Yours are the kinds of words underdog winners love to make once favored losers eat.
 
2012-05-10 12:53:06 PM  
By contrast, the press has treated the changing positions of Romney, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, far more harshly.

So one candidate changed his mind in a manner that protects/expands constitutionally guaranteed civil rights while the other candidate is a constant flip-flopper who has flopped to a position that denies a subset of our population equality and their guaranteed civil rights.

I also cannot understand why these two are not treated equally.
 
2012-05-10 12:54:05 PM  
To me there is a difference between someone telling you he has changed is mind on an issue and this is why (President Barack Obama) and

telling you his stance on an issue and not acknowledging it is 180 degree turn from his multiple previous statements/actions (Willard Mitt Romney).

If Willard Mitt Romney said "I governed as a centrist/moderate governor but now my stance on the issues of abortion rights, gay rights, health care reform, gun control and women's rights (etc...) have changed and this is why...." I would say he can claim his views have evolved. Instead we are supposed to believe Willard Mitt Romney governed as a "sever conservative" so his current far right views have never changed.

Like we are supposed to believe Willard Mitt Romney can "take a lot of credit" for saving the auto industry in the US even though he wrote at least articles stating his opposition for the government to bail them out. Or that even though he stated multiple times that he was opposed to President Barack Obama's stance on sending forces into Pakistan to go after Osama Bin Laden that he would have made that "of course" he would have done the same thing as the President.

That is flip-flopping.
www.opposingviews.com
I'm the one who saved the US auto industry, not the President. I deserve the credit!
 
2012-05-10 12:59:44 PM  
You know something is askew when the trust fund liberals at Columbia University start taking note of media bias

In the paragraph where the author if the article links to what they perceive the real problem to be, an authenticity fetish, he linked to an earlier article where he observed how the exact same problem afflicted Kerry and Gore during their runs.

Similarly, George W. Bush's campaign helped drive similar coverage asking who the "real" John Kerry was back in 2004. And, perhaps most notably, journalists frequently portrayed Al Gore as inauthentic and asked whether they were seeing the "real" Gore during his 2000 presidential campaign.


The media's bias is against vague, uncharismatic candidates. They want a likeable straight shooter.

The GOP don't have this one this time around.
 
2012-05-10 01:01:41 PM  

blackminded: You've got some balls going with "trust fund liberals" when this guy is running for President, subster.

[My5SonsRmoneyEdition]


Romney and his wife just put together a 100 million dollar trust fund for their kids without paying a single cent of tax.

So... yeah.

Subby can eat a bag of especially salty dicks and choke like a Bush with a pretzel.
 
2012-05-10 01:02:28 PM  

bugontherug: EyeballKid: Since Cons are already trotting out their excuses for Romney losing, I guess I'll start this ball rolling.

Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.

There are two real dangers to the Democrats in this election:

1) That the economy tanks bank into full fledged recession, and

2) That progressives become complacent because they're prematurely convinced they can't lose think both candidates are center-right.

Romney is a non-lunatic, well financed candidate backed by multiple billionaires, a base of support that loathes Obama beyond all reason, and history's most sophisticated propaganda machine. The Democrats can take neither this nor any other election for granted. The meme that they can is one of their worst enemies.

In short, and I say this with all due respect, STFU with the premature gloating. Yours are the kinds of words underdog winners love to make once favored losers eat.

 
2012-05-10 01:09:57 PM  

quatchi: blackminded: You've got some balls going with "trust fund liberals" when this guy is running for President, subster.

[My5SonsRmoneyEdition]

Romney and his wife just put together a 100 million dollar trust fund for their kids without paying a single cent of tax.

So... yeah.

Subby can eat a bag of especially salty dicks and choke like a Bush with a pretzel.



Maybe next time you're born you should consider being born to a rich person.
 
2012-05-10 01:10:39 PM  
A trust fund liberal? So, Bruce Wayne?
 
2012-05-10 01:27:00 PM  
1.) Brendan Nyhan has spent years constructing false equivalencies, worrying about civility and torturing his interpretations of facts in order to show how fair he is. He's of the camp who will say things like "While Ms Malkin's conversational book, where she advocates imprisoning all Muslims, most liberals and any atheist is certainly somewhat disturbing, even worse was the fact that a liberal blogger told her to eat a dick".

2.) Obama, like most upper-middle class people has probably been around gay people most of his adult life. He had to "evolve" this position because the rubes freak out about butt stuff. Hell, most of the movers and shakers at the GOP knew Ken Mehlman was gay and had no issue with it. Take out the elected republicans who are from the holler, and their opposition to gays is just as theatrical as Obama's evolution. I suspect that at his core, Romney probably is anti-gay marriage, but wouldn't spend a processor cycle on it if he weren;t in politics.

The stupid part is that we are forced to go through this theater so as to not offend the hill folk.
 
2012-05-10 01:32:17 PM  

BSABSVR: 1.) Brendan Nyhan has spent years constructing false equivalencies, worrying about civility and torturing his interpretations of facts in order to show how fair he is. He's of the camp who will say things like "While Ms Malkin's conversational book, where she advocates imprisoning all Muslims, most liberals and any atheist is certainly somewhat disturbing, even worse was the fact that a liberal blogger told her to eat a dick".

2.) Obama, like most upper-middle class people has probably been around gay people most of his adult life. He had to "evolve" this position because the rubes freak out about butt stuff. Hell, most of the movers and shakers at the GOP knew Ken Mehlman was gay and had no issue with it. Take out the elected republicans who are from the holler, and their opposition to gays is just as theatrical as Obama's evolution. I suspect that at his core, Romney probably is anti-gay marriage, but wouldn't spend a processor cycle on it if he weren;t in politics.

The stupid part is that we are forced to go through this theater so as to not offend the hill folk.


Blah blah blah, when my guy does it we call it "evolved", when your guy does it we call it "flip-flopping". Stop making lame excuses.
 
2012-05-10 01:36:08 PM  
Walter Kronkite acknowledged that as journalists gain information about the world around them, they do tend to lean to the left and their reportage tends to reflect that.

The difference is that conservative media is considerably more activist in its reportage, saying things like 'some people say...' when 'some people' means the pundit on their show or on the show before theirs.

"Liberal media" implies an activist bent, and it's all nothing more than more projection.
 
2012-05-10 01:39:44 PM  

bugontherug: EyeballKid: Since Cons are already trotting out their excuses for Romney losing, I guess I'll start this ball rolling.

Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.

There are two real dangers to the Democrats in this election:

1) That the economy tanks bank into full fledged recession, and

2) That progressives become complacent because they're prematurely convinced they can't lose.

Romney is a non-lunatic, well financed candidate backed by multiple billionaires, a base of support that loathes Obama beyond all reason, and history's most sophisticated propaganda machine. The Democrats can take neither this nor any other election for granted. The meme that they can is one of their worst enemies.

In short, and I say this with all due respect, STFU with the premature gloating. Yours are the kinds of words underdog winners love to make once favored losers eat.


Yeah, two words:

John

Kerry
 
2012-05-10 01:43:50 PM  
Why do people complain about media bias?

You really think that, if you had your own TV network or newspaper, you wouldn't report things mostly from your perspective?

All news media are biased. Some are leftist, others rightist, some religious, others secular, some are government mouthpieces, and others see government conspiracies everywhere they look.

If you want the truth, (A) get your news from different sources, (B) read history and philosophy to get the perspective and wisdom to put the news into context, (C) try to keep your own biases in check, and (D) wait a couple of goddamned minutes before commenting: all stories are "developing".
 
2012-05-10 01:46:19 PM  

Mearen: Blah blah blah, when my guy does it we call it "evolved", when your guy does it we call it "flip-flopping". Stop making lame excuses.


When your guy flip-flops, he flip-flop-flips right back to where he started the second it's politically convenient. I think Obama's sticking with this one.
 
2012-05-10 01:46:47 PM  

lennavan: quatchi: blackminded: You've got some balls going with "trust fund liberals" when this guy is running for President, subster.

[My5SonsRmoneyEdition]

Romney and his wife just put together a 100 million dollar trust fund for their kids without paying a single cent of tax.

So... yeah.

Subby can eat a bag of especially salty dicks and choke like a Bush with a pretzel.


Maybe next time you're born you should consider being born to a rich person.


Good point. I totally fell outta the wrong vayjayjay this time.

Next time I'll make sure I see a notarized credit rating before popping my head out.
 
2012-05-10 01:48:01 PM  

FlashHarry: oh, and as far as media bias in this campaign goes, a recent pew study showed that the "mainstream media" is clearly in the tank for romney.


This article has continually appeared in a number of threads for a while now and i have to say it is incredibly pointless and shows nothing. The fact that the front runner in a contested race for a nomination got more news coverage than an already chosen and sitting president means nothing. What should have the news reported on during that time? That Obama continued to be president and meanwhile Newt, then Santorum, then Romney, then Newt, then Santorum, then Newt, and then Romney where all changing places in the race for the GOP nomination, that would have been a terrible story.
 
2012-05-10 02:07:37 PM  

Anenu: This article has continually appeared in a number of threads for a while now and i have to say it is incredibly pointless and shows nothing. The fact that the front runner in a contested race for a nomination got more news coverage than an already chosen and sitting president means nothing. What should have the news reported on during that time?


News?

Seriously, most of us had no dog in that race. I'd still rather rip my own throat out than support any of them in any way.
 
2012-05-10 02:13:02 PM  
Obama's positions evolve, whereas you could stick a pair of rotor blades in Romney's hands and use him to fly a helicopter.
 
MFL
2012-05-10 02:18:13 PM  
EyeballKid: Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.

lol.

bugontherug There are two real dangers to the Democrats in this election:

1) That the economy tanks bank into full fledged recession, and

2) That progressives become complacent because they're prematurely convinced they can't lose


I'll go one step further. In order for Obama to get re-elected.

1. Third quarter economic numbers need to far and away surpass expectations.....or he will be toast.

2. If progressives are complacent it won't even be close. If they are motivated it will be.

Romney is a non-lunatic, well financed candidate backed by multiple billionaires, a base of support that loathes Obama beyond all reason, and history's most sophisticated propaganda machine. The Democrats can take neither this nor any other election for granted. The meme that they can is one of their worst enemies.

They should listen to you.

A. Obama just sured up the social conservatives for Romney yesterday. Gay marriage will raise money for the President but will deliver swing states to Romney.

B. Politics is a game of expectations. This president is horrible at that.

C. Keep an eye on Wisconsin. Scott Walker had more votes than either of the Democrats even though he wasn't even on the ballot and almost as many as both of them combined. Was this a fluke or a window into things to come?

D. Obamacare. Is it legal? We'll see.

E. Democrats got destroyed in 2010 and didn't seem to see it coming...Then after it happend refused to place the propper blame and evolve politically.

F. Obama is like the Colts a few years ago. Great on offense....completely horseshiat on defense. It's hard to go on offense with 8% unemployment after being president for 4 years.

My prediction...Romney will begin to pull away late summer and then panic will begin to set in. Once that happens....game over.
 
2012-05-10 02:40:25 PM  

MFL: EyeballKid: Repubs, you lost the 2012 election. Get over it.

lol.

bugontherug There are two real dangers to the Democrats in this election:

1) That the economy tanks bank into full fledged recession, and

2) That progressives become complacent because they're prematurely convinced they can't lose


I'll go one step further. In order for Obama to get re-elected.

1. Third quarter economic numbers need to far and away surpass expectations.....or he will be toast.

2. If progressives are complacent it won't even be close. If they are motivated it will be.

Romney is a non-lunatic, well financed candidate backed by multiple billionaires, a base of support that loathes Obama beyond all reason, and history's most sophisticated propaganda machine. The Democrats can take neither this nor any other election for granted. The meme that they can is one of their worst enemies.

They should listen to you.

A. Obama just sured up the social conservatives for Romney yesterday. Gay marriage will raise money for the President but will deliver swing states to Romney.

B. Politics is a game of expectations. This president is horrible at that.

C. Keep an eye on Wisconsin. Scott Walker had more votes than either of the Democrats even though he wasn't even on the ballot and almost as many as both of them combined. Was this a fluke or a window into things to come?

D. Obamacare. Is it legal? We'll see.

E. Democrats got destroyed in 2010 and didn't seem to see it coming...Then after it happend refused to place the propper blame and evolve politically.

F. Obama is like the Colts a few years ago. Great on offense....completely horseshiat on defense. It's hard to go on offense with 8% unemployment after being president for 4 years.

My prediction...Romney will begin to pull away late summer and then panic will begin to set in. Once that happens....game over.


Can we see your statisticals?

And your point E? Total and complete bullshiat. They knew they would lose seats and probably control.

Point A? More bullshiat. Support outweighs opposition.

It will be about the economy, and it's improving, despite all of the FUD being shoveled at it.

This didn't flip that many people.

By November this will be a distant memory, and people will be focusing on the unemployment number, GDP, and quarterly growth numbers.
 
2012-05-10 02:44:36 PM  

Mearen: BSABSVR: 1.) Brendan Nyhan has spent years constructing false equivalencies, worrying about civility and torturing his interpretations of facts in order to show how fair he is. He's of the camp who will say things like "While Ms Malkin's conversational book, where she advocates imprisoning all Muslims, most liberals and any atheist is certainly somewhat disturbing, even worse was the fact that a liberal blogger told her to eat a dick".

2.) Obama, like most upper-middle class people has probably been around gay people most of his adult life. He had to "evolve" this position because the rubes freak out about butt stuff. Hell, most of the movers and shakers at the GOP knew Ken Mehlman was gay and had no issue with it. Take out the elected republicans who are from the holler, and their opposition to gays is just as theatrical as Obama's evolution. I suspect that at his core, Romney probably is anti-gay marriage, but wouldn't spend a processor cycle on it if he weren;t in politics.

The stupid part is that we are forced to go through this theater so as to not offend the hill folk.

Blah blah blah, when my guy does it we call it "evolved", when your guy does it we call it "flip-flopping". Stop making lame excuses.


Learn to read, ace.
 
2012-05-10 03:16:22 PM  

Anenu: This article has continually appeared in a number of threads for a while now and i have to say it is incredibly pointless and shows nothing. The fact that the front runner in a contested race for a nomination got more news coverage than an already chosen and sitting president means nothing.


try reading the article. it's not the amount, it's the tone.


FTA:

Overall, it was no contest. From Jan. 2 through April 15, Romney's coverage was 39 percent positive, 32 percent negative, and 29 percent neutral, the researchers found. Obama's coverage was 18 percent positive, 34 percent negative, and 34 percent neutral. That means Romney's depiction by the media was more than twice as positive as the president's. So much for liberal bias.
 
2012-05-10 03:43:36 PM  

Mearen: Blah blah blah, when my guy does it we call it "evolved", when your guy does it we call it "flip-flopping". Stop making lame excuses.


Except that when using the word "evolve" regarding Obama's decision, it's a direct quote. Romney's been flip-flopping on every issue since he started campaigning.
 
2012-05-10 03:58:10 PM  

meat0918: The difference is; Obama explained why he changed his mind.

Romney says he's always held his current stance, even if five days earlier he had always held the previous stance.


The tuth is that he was for it before he was against it. Now he's evolved into something that's for it.
 
2012-05-10 04:33:24 PM  

LasersHurt: Yes, a 15-degree shift is the same as a 180. That's the difference in the terms. Get over it.


And "once in a while" is the same as "always, on every single farking issue."
 
2012-05-10 05:42:26 PM  
Equating Obama's shift on gay marriage, which may actually hurt him politically given how well anti-gay marriage laws and amendments have done in so many states, to Romney's very frequent politically expedient flip flops is idiotic.

The Lone Gunman
Walter Kronkite acknowledged that as journalists gain information about the world around them, they do tend to lean to the left and their reportage tends to reflect that.

Knowledge of the wider world around them often makes people more liberal? Huh. What a shock. People learn about other people who are different from them and realize it's okay.
 
2012-05-10 09:58:08 PM  
So one this one issue Obama's personal position has moved somewhat (though his policy position was always pretty gay-friendly); the author of TFA would assert that this is exactly the same as his opponent's numerous 180s on multiple policy issues and ignores the fact that flip-flopping was the Republican's preferred attack against Kerry, so they really can't complain when Democrats legitimately use it against Mitt 'Quantum' Romney.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report