something that didn't make the news

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Quickly, somebody post a picture of US soldiers giving candy to Iraqi children!

Well, our mainstream media haven't given us many/any pictures of US soldiers doing constructive/kind stuff. Perhaps you could provide some?

Look through Yahoo! Pictures.

There are plenty of AP and Reuters pictures that probably didn't make it into the mainstream.

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]Quickly, somebody post a picture of US soldiers giving candy to Iraqi children!

Well, our mainstream media haven't given us many/any pictures of US soldiers doing constructive/kind stuff. Perhaps you could provide some?

It might have something to do that the soldiers are mainly preoccupied by protecting their own asses against insurgents et al.

But, if propaganda is what you desire, then propaganda is what you shall recieve:

The Coalition Provisional Authority Press Releases:

http://www.iraqcoalition.org/pressreleases/index.html

Otherwise for most of your propaganda needs:

http://www.foxnews.com

[farmcoot 0]

Otherwise for most of your propaganda needs:

http://www.foxnews.com

Whats wrong don't like Fair and Balanced?

[denoir 0]

Otherwise for most of your propaganda needs:

http://www.foxnews.com

Whats wrong don't like Fair and Balanced?

Hehe, that's a good one

[farmcoot 0]

Otherwise for most of your propaganda needs:

http://www.foxnews.com

Whats wrong don't like Fair and Balanced?

Hehe, that's a good one  

It's #1 for a reason. MSNBC, CNN down the drain.

[denoir 0]

It's #1 for a reason.

Absolutely, the same reason why tabloids like the Sun are the most read papers in the UK, and the same reason why "reality" TV shows are so popular. It's the same reason why more people read comic books rather than books written by nobel prize winners: it appeals to the great masses.

Mindless flag waving and repeating how great your country, your <s>comrade chairman</s> president is works well with crowds.

[ralphwiggum 6]

I'll believe that there is no bias as long as USMC mil reports any story of there shortcomings as much as they tout their heroism.

[ralphwiggum 6]

ok, once again, i realize that this thread is going to be a potential problem.

[turms 0]

[edc 0]

Why would you expect the leftist media report on this? It's not like it would help their darling Kerry get elected and screw over this country.

[DracoPaladore 0]

I recently read an article, actually part of my english exam, which goes through a writers analysis of societies obsession with good and evil, and how it draws through everyone, etc.

He also mentioned that the news only seems to cover bad news, deaths, or scandals. As many stated: For one bad thing, 1000 good things will pass.

He said that the media covers these events because they're out of the norm. Something like that. Too bad I can't find it. It's called "Something Wicked This Way Comes". Too bad I dont remember the authors name too. It was written a week or two after Madrid.

Anyways, I don't think its media liberalism. Its a simple matter of drawing in people to read your newspaper. People are interested in hearing bad news, I guess. The biggest drawing would be reports on bad things, things that are out of place, things that shouldn't happen.

[Akira 0]

I recently read an article, actually part of my english exam, which goes through a writers analysis of societies obsession with good and evil, and how it draws through everyone, etc.

He also mentioned that the news only seems to cover bad news, deaths, or scandals. As many stated: For one bad thing, 1000 good things will pass.

He said that the media covers these events because they're out of the norm. Something like that. Too bad I can't find it. It's called "Something Wicked This Way Comes". Too bad I dont remember the authors name too. It was written a week or two after Madrid.

Anyways, I don't think its media liberalism. Its a simple matter of drawing in people to read your newspaper. People are interested in hearing bad news, I guess. The biggest drawing would be reports on bad things, things that are out of place, things that shouldn't happen.

Straight outta Media school (I should know...was my major )

Or another way to put it (for the masses):

"If it bleeds, it leads."

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]The Liberal Media: It's No Myth

Many people think the mainstream media have a liberal bias. Media spokesmen, however, usually deny such claims. So who's right? Is there a left-wing bias, or has the right wing conspired not only to influence the media but also to create a false image of unfairness? Some scientific evidence is available in a continuing study, A Measure of Media Bias, by Tim Groseclose of the University of California at Los Angeles and Jeff Milyo of the University of Chicago, presented last March at Stanford University's Workshop on the Media & Economic Performance. These researchers set up an objective measure of bias in U.S. television networks, newspapers, and magazines. The main finding is that the liberal inclination is pronounced. Although Fox News emerges as conservative, it is not nearly as far to the right as many outlets are to the left.

Groseclose and Milyo began with the well-known ratings of the voting records of U.S. senators and representatives by Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a self-described liberal lobbying group. The researchers used data for the 1990s and adjusted the ADA scores to make them comparable over time and across the two chambers. On a 0-100 scale, with 100 the most liberal, the median member of the U.S. House had an ADA score of 39. Thus, 39 is a reasonable measure of a centrist position. Among well-known senators, Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) had a highly conservative score of 4, whereas Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) had a strikingly liberal score of 80.

THE NEXT STEP MEASURED the tendency of Senate and House members in their speeches to cite 200 prominent think tanks. The citations considered were those that referred favorably to a view or fact presented by a think tank. Not counted were negative citations or those purely descriptive of a think tank's actions. As an example, the Heritage Foundation was cited by legislators whose average ADA ratings were 6 -- that is, very conservative. Also highly conservative were the Family Research Council (rating of 6) and the National Right to Life Committee (7). Left-wing think tanks included the Center on Budget & Policy Priorities (80), the Children's Defense Fund (77), and the Economic Policy Institute (72). Surprisingly, the American Civil Liberties Union was centrist (35), an outcome driven by the ACLU's opposition to campaign-finance reform.

The last step measured the tendency of various media outlets to cite the same 200 think tanks. The researchers considered only "news stories" -- not editorials, letters to the editor, and so on. The periods covered ranged from 1990 to 2003. Again, the citations were those that referred favorably to a view or fact provided by a think tank. The researchers used this information to calculate a right- vs. left-wing indicator for each media outlet -- effectively, an ADA rating. The assumption is that media outlets that refer favorably to conservative think tanks are reasonably characterized as conservative, whereas those that refer positively to liberal think tanks are plausibly labeled as liberal. The final product (in a preliminary table provided by the authors) was a list of computed ADA ratings for the media outlets.

On the conservative end, Fox News Special Report came out with a rating of 27; that is, 12 points more conservative than the 39 of the median member of the House. The only other right-of-center outlet was The Washington Times, at 34.

On the liberal end, Newsweek had an astonishing rating of 72 -- that's 33 points more liberal than the House median. Other highly liberal outlets included The New York Times, Time magazine, the CBS Evening News, USA Today, and NBC Nightly News. These scores ranged from 62 to 64, about 25 points above the House median. For viewers seeking truly "fair and balanced" reporting, the best outlets were ABC Good Morning America and NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. The ADA scores for these programs were 39 and 41, respectively. Places moderately left of center were CNN's NewsNight with Aaron Brown (49), The Washington Post (53), NPR's Morning Edition (55) and ABC WorldNews Tonight (55).

Because of problems in data collection, the list excluded The Wall Street Journal, but it will be added soon. Also excluded is talk radio, which seems to have a conservative bent. Bottom line: The Groseclose-Milyo study shows the media are skewed substantially to the left of the typical member of Congress. Thus, if the opinions of viewers and readers are similar to those of their representatives, the media slant is far to the left of that of most of their customers.

Robert J. Barro is a professor of economics at Harvard University and a senior fellow of the Hoover Institution ( rjbweek@harvard.edu)

[Schoeler 0]

Medal ceremonies are usually kept quiet. I don't think that's bias per se, but rather public disinterest.  

Kind of reminds me of that 'medal ceremony' where John Kerry threw his medals out into the crowd at that one protest in the 70's! Barely any coverage of this unpatriotism on the news!

Blackdog, as a veteran I take umbrage with your characterization of this as an unpatriotic act.  First, Kerry earned those medals.  They are his.  If he wants to wear them pinned to his ass, he's earned that right and no one who hasn't served, especially in combat has anything to say about it.

Next, protest is a wholly American and patriotic thing to do.  Our nation was founded by unhappy protesters who disagreed with the policies of their current government.  That is why soldiers serve, to preserve your right to disagree and to say so.  Kerry had just served in an immoral war.  he knew other young men were being asked to serve and he spoke out about it to prevent these men from having to go over and risk their lives for no goddamned good reason.  I lost an uncle in Vietnam.  My father served two tours.  All the rest of my uncles served as well.  Not one of them today believes the war was justified or worth it.  Speaking out against the government when it is behaving wrongly is not only a patriotic right, it is the duty of free people.  I'd suggest you have a gander at the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and while your at it, John Lockes treatise on the social contract.  You know, keeping silent when the government is wrong is among the most cowardly and terrible things a person can do.  There were a lot of good German burghers who kept their mouths shut in the Third Reich and let the government have free reign.  Do you consider them patriots?

While I don't often side with protesters, I do believe in the First Amendment and think it is an obligation of free people to speak out when they feel the government is behaving badly.  Whether I think protesters have the right or wrong opinion, I do appreciate their compassion and their dedication to their cause and I wholeheartedly support their exercising of their hard won rights.  Freedom has a price, we may not always like the other guy's point of view, but we should damn well respect his right to express it without tearing him down

for doing so.

One thing that deeply angers me about the current administration is its willingness, even eagerness to paint anyone who feels it is out of line or heading in the wrong direction with an anti-American brush.  That is simply despicable and I cannot condone it.  Protest is a wholly American thing to do, considering this nation was founded by a group of unhappy miscreants who protested and objected to the actions and policies of their current government.

Think what kind of world we would live in today if people did not have the courage to speak out about their convictions.  I don't see Kerry's having protested against a war he fought in as aiding or abetting the enemy in any way and I think leveling charges like that really stinks.  Its like calling James Madison a pussy or labeling Jefferson un-American.  Free people have a right to disagree, and many people have given their lives to earn and sustain that right.

Kerry served, he did what was asked of him even though he had the means to dodge his duty.  He became disillusioned by a War that most of the vets I know also felt was unnecessary and he did something to try and stop it.  I can't fault him for that.  Speaking out against what he percieved as immorality or

injustice is not an unpatriotic or dangerous thing to do, rather speaking out on behalf of fellow veterans and those who may have to go over and fight for no articulable reason despite the criticism he faced for doing so, to me, seems much more like the ultimate act of patriotism and is far more admirable than simply doing your duty, keeping you mouth shut and then forgetting about the next guy who has to go over to take your place.  Passionate men with strong feelings and concern for the others around them have made this country great.  Men like that died by the thousands on the beaches of Normandy and in the forests of Belgium and France and even in the hellholes of Vietnam.  They die every day in Iraq.  If they do their duty and disagree with the war, I am the

last person to malign them for that, I'm sure their perspective is far sharper than mine and they've certainly earned the right to speak up.  I think we dishonor their service and dedication to this country, when out of some misguided sense of patriotism or fear of criticism we allow our voices of concern for their welfare or well-being to be silenced.  We do them no favors by forgetting the sacrifices they have to make and refusing to question whether or not they should be being asked or continue having to make them.  I know if my butt was in Iraq right now, I would appreciate all the concerned citizens I swore to protect and defend who were keeping the government honest and looking out for my welfare, and I damned well wouldn't be putting them down.

[blackdog~ 0]

Schoeler the thing is that most vets that I know have gotten over it (certainley not forgetting their lost friends in such a changing time) and are proud to have served their country whether right or wrong - and I know quite a few now that I'm in the hobby of military vehicles :]

Indeed this country was built by protesters, but now adays everyone has too much power (which is why they were protesting). Too bad there isn't a small little island all the liberals could go and start a country on.

It's quite a difference transitioning from an all-american and a-few-euro board with mostly republicans and a few lefties to a all-european and some-american board with mostly lefties and a few republicans. And it's also funny seeing how this one is so fiercely moderated and the american board was 'anything goes, if you're feelings get hurt then too frigging bad". And they named it quite honestly as well, "General Bitchin & Politics".

[Schoeler 0]

Schoeler the thing is that most vets that I know have gotten over it (certainley not forgetting their lost friends in such a changing time) and are proud to have served their country whether right or wrong - and I know quite a few now that I'm in the hobby of military vehicles :]

Indeed this country was built by protesters, but now adays everyone has too much power (which is why they were protesting). Too bad there isn't a small little island all the liberals could go and start a country on.

It's quite a difference transitioning from an all-american and a-few-euro board with mostly republicans and a few lefties to a all-european and some-american board with mostly lefties and a few republicans. And it's also funny seeing how this one is so fiercely moderated and the american board was 'anything goes, if you're feelings get hurt then too frigging bad". And they named it quite honestly as well, "General Bitchin & Politics".

While I would agree with you about the seemingly obvious double standard when it comes to these subjects, I have to ppint this out to you.

You criticized Kerry for protesting against the Vietnam war, even going to the point of calling that behavior unpatriotic. I disagree. While most veterans have gotten over Vietnam. Kerry was doing what he was doing while the war was still raging. Can you not see that trying to stop an unjust war and prevent more of your fellow servicemen from needlessly dying is not a supreme act of patriotism? Think of the anger Kerry's actions generated, and yet out of principle, he did it anyway. Can you not see the bravery in that? To stop needless killing and death and to point out the shortcomings of a government that is supposedly of the people, by the people and for the people is the right, and the American thing to do. Our government works for us. They are our employees and they are supposed to look out for our best interests. When they do not, it is our duty under the Constitution and the social contract to speak out in protest, and if necessary, to replace the government, by non-violent means first through the democratic process, or if that fails by revolution. If the government fails to uphold its end of the bargain between it and the people, it loses its legitimacy. This government came very close to doing that in the Vietnam era and some believe it is very close to doing that now.

[ericz 0]

Schoeler, as an American and a veteran, I also believe that protesting is a fundamental right of Americans.  The problem I have with Kerry is that he threw his medals (or someone elses, as his campaign reports) away in protest of what he considered an immoral war and yet fastforward to 2004, he now has them or replacements proudly displayed in his office. He is also using his Vietnam service as a selling point in his election bid.  So which is it? Is he ashamed to have served in Vietnam and his committing of atrocities there or is he proud of his service in Vietnam and does he feel he is better for his experiences there?

I was not very pleased when we got involved in Iraq, and even went sightseeing to a rally held in Los Angeles.  Sorry, I was less pleased with the protesters.  There were groups like California Socialists, communists, anarchists and assorted leftists subversives, not to mention the very loud but idiot college students who couldn't explain to me why they were against the war except to say bombing civilians is bad, .  As many misgivings as I have about this war, I can't bring myself to join forces with those that would gladly wipe away our American way of life.

TBA has made quite a few mistakes and so this coming election is going to be painful either way.  I sure hope Mcain runs in 2008 regardless of the outcome.

It would be great to see some stories about the outstanding public works that our troops are doing for the benefit of the Iraqi people on CBS, NBC and ABC to name a few. Unfortunately, all I see is gloom and doom.

[EiZei 0]

If fox news is supposedly the least biased news channel then how the hell their viewers have the most misperceptions about the iraq war?

[blackdog~ 0]

ericz hit it right on the nose - couldn't of said it better myself.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Schoeler the thing is that most vets that I know have gotten over it (certainley not forgetting their lost friends in such a changing time) and are proud to have served their country whether right or wrong - and I know quite a few now that I'm in the hobby of military vehicles :]

like SS guys of Germany?

Quote[/b] ]Indeed this country was built by protesters, but now adays everyone has too much power (which is why they were protesting). Too bad there isn't a small little island all the liberals could go and start a country on.

respect my authoritah!

[blackdog~ 0]

Don't worry Ralph & Friends, there's already a special place for you....... a few miles underneath the earth's surface...

(just kidding)

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

lol, this is a funny thread.. keep it coming!

[ralphwiggum 6]

Don't worry Ralph & Friends, there's already a special place for you....... a few miles underneath the earth's surface...

(just kidding)

yeah where we will be subjecting likes of you to eternal damnation.

[Schoeler 0]

Schoeler, as an American and a veteran, I also believe that protesting is a fundamental right of Americans.  The problem I have with Kerry is that he threw his medals (or someone elses, as his campaign reports) away in protest of what he considered an immoral war and yet fastforward to 2004, he now has them or replacements proudly displayed in his office. He is also using his Vietnam service as a selling point in his election bid.  So which is it? Is he ashamed to have served in Vietnam and his committing of atrocities there or is he proud of his service in Vietnam and does he feel he is better for his experiences there?

I was not very pleased when we got involved in Iraq, and even went sightseeing to a rally held in Los Angeles.  Sorry, I was less pleased with the protesters.  There were groups like California Socialists, communists, anarchists and assorted leftists subversives, not to mention the very loud but idiot college students who couldn't explain to me why they were against the war except to say bombing civilians is bad, .  As many misgivings as I have about this war, I can't bring myself to join forces with those that would gladly wipe away our American way of life.

TBA has made quite a few mistakes and so this coming election is going to be painful either way.  I sure hope Mcain runs in 2008 regardless of the outcome.

It would be great to see some stories about the outstanding public works that our troops are doing for the benefit of the Iraqi people on CBS, NBC and ABC to name a few. Unfortunately, all I see is gloom and doom.

eric, I agree wholeheartedly.  As I said, I don't often side with protesters, but I respect their right to voice their opinion, and I even appreciate their opposition.  How has man learned anything in this world except from those who give us a fresh and alternative point of view?  I look at the opposition to any debate with respect for two reasons:  1)They give me a fresh perspective I would not have seen otherwise and 2)Even if I remain unconvinced by their arguments, they have done me the favor of solidifying my own point of view and strengthening my arguments in support of it.

Kerry's stance on the war is somewhat troubling, but I believe that psychologists and philosophers have both stated that the sole difference between human and animal inteliigence is that human beings can hold two conflicting thoughts in their head at the same time and see no need to reconcile the two.  Think about how many conflicting things you have in your mind right now.  Emotion does strange things to people.  

Kerry for instance has a perfectly natural reaction that I understand a lot of veterans of that war share.  They oppose the war and the reasons for it, yet they are proud of their service.  Show me how he differs from the majority of Vietnam vets before you cast aspersions on his frame of mind.  It is not strange at all for an angry and disillusioned young man to throw away (his ribbons, not medals by the way) his symbols of service and then years later as a middle-aged man, be proud of that service and proud to display those symbols.  The fact that the Bush administration is using this in an exploitative manner is disgusting and cheap.  His medals aren't replacements, they are the medals he recieved.  He threw away his ribbons, and who really cares?  Again, they were his to do whatever he pleased with.  Are you telling me a man does not have the right to change his mind?  That shifting emotions and feelings over decades is unnatural or something to be maligned?  How many of your ex-girlfriends do you still love?  How do you feel about your high school experiences now compared to how you felt about them then?  This whole argument is ridiculuous and petty and it only goes to show how desperate and to what lengths the Bush Administration will go to to score points against their opponent.  The Republicans have enough problems selling their candidate.  Perhaps they should come up with some sort of platform to present to the American public instead of trying to win an election by tearing the other guy down.  Anyone with any sense at all, who can look at things with anything other than a narrow-mided ignorant worldview can see the desperation and the deciept behind the Bush election team's efforts to use this issue to smear Kerry.  It's simply retarded and machiavellian and it has done nothing but convince me these people need to go, not just to lose, but TO GO.  That is, away from the seats of power and influence forever.

[Placebo 29]

1. This could have gone in the Iraq thread and should have gone in there, there was no real need to make a new thread.

2. People in glass houses (amnesty) shouldn't throw stones (squabble), nobody did anything wrong, that's not the point I'm making, the point is that a polite debate easily becomes a heated debate, a heated debate easily becomes a flaming debate, a flaming debate easily becomes amnesty revoked, just be careful please, youth+emotions=a volatile combination