Join 3,558 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Foxy?
October 8, 2003 8:23 AM   Subscribe

US TV news too liberal, say Americans. Nearly half of Americans think its news media is too liberal despite the rise of controversial hard-right cable channel Fox News. Only 14% of Americans believe the media to be too conservative, according to a poll by Gallup.
posted by MintSauce (68 comments total)

 
Did they actually define "liberal" in the survey, or did they leave that up to Rush?
posted by aeschenkarnos at 8:28 AM on October 8, 2003


hmm... maybe this means most americans aren't very liberal? who can say?
posted by mokey at 8:30 AM on October 8, 2003


File under obvious. To further prove the point, it would be interesting to see how many American newspapers, mags etc publish articles about the poll, and how they'll react to it. I suspect there will be the usual awkward silence that follows any fact contradicting the shameful leftist bias that's destroying the American media, the American academic life and American community weblogs.
posted by 111 at 8:40 AM on October 8, 2003


duh
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:51 AM on October 8, 2003


111, obvious as in large parts of the American public haven't got a fucking clue?
posted by magullo at 8:54 AM on October 8, 2003


The funny thing is, Americans owe everything good that they take for granted about their lives to progressives:

Do you work a 40 hour week? Thank progressives.
Do you get overtime? Thank progressives.
Vacation? Thank progressives.
Sick time? Thank progressives.
Retirement (SS or pension)? Thank progressives.
Employer contributed medical/dental? Thank progressives.
No more child labor? Thank progressives.
Public school for those that can't afford private tuition? Thank progressives.

Meanwhile, everything bad that Americans are complaining about in their lives they owe to conservatives:

Are you exempt? Thank conservatives.
Do you lose your vacation when you change jobs? Thank conservatives.
Do you lose your retirement vestment when you change jobs? Thank conservatives.
Decreasing vacation time? Thank conservatives.
Reduced sick time? Thank conservatives.
Slow destruction of the public schools? Thank conservatives.

Amazing how that works out.

Most Americans are left of the Republican party (and right of the Democratic party as well: see the definition of "middle"), they've just been sold a bill of goods over a generation's time. Eventually they'll wake up.
posted by Cerebus at 8:55 AM on October 8, 2003


magullo's point is the best one here. It's so true.
posted by djspicerack at 9:00 AM on October 8, 2003


I think it just shows how the traditional media as defined in the U.S. is entering the death throes. Not only do many conservatives perceive the media as "too liberal," they want - and are getting - alternative sources that play entirely to their biases. Same thing with liberals, actually; weblogs, for me, have become a significant source of news that often winds up buried if carried at all, say, on the evening newscast.

More and more, people don't even want to consider things that fly in the face of their particular ideological bent. The rise of alternative media sources means they no longer have to.
posted by kgasmart at 9:01 AM on October 8, 2003


less filling!

*looks around expectantly*
posted by UncleFes at 9:03 AM on October 8, 2003


Cerebus...I think it's obvious, painfully obvious to state that the world is becoming more liberal by the day. Liberalism is giving individuals rights they never though possible, slowly. But, to suggest that liberal thought is correct at all times, or even most of the time, is silly. The reason conservatism exists is to make fully sure that any new liberal policy/idea has been tested, debated, and made as flawless as possible. That's politics.

And it's funny, because most Liberals, because they know the world is going left, automatically assume that they're correct most of the time, which is presumptuous and idiotic. Conservatives automatically assume that since history has shown policy to be successful, no point in reinventing the wheel, hence their reluctance to try new policy. (Of course, these are stereotypes, to a degree, but the world has not become what it is overnight)
posted by BlueTrain at 9:08 AM on October 8, 2003


More and more, people don't even want to consider things that fly in the face of their particular ideological bent. The rise of alternative media sources means they no longer have to.

This is so true, and so pathetic and sad. I was raised to believe that the basis for a republican (little r) form a goverment was education and compromise. It saddens and sickens me that more and more in this country, people don't want to challenge themselves and their beliefs, that just want affirmation that they're right top believe what they believe (no matter how ignorant and or hateful those views might be). Man, it's only Wednesday, and I'm already this depressed.
posted by psmealey at 9:11 AM on October 8, 2003


But, to suggest that liberal thought is correct at all times, or even most of the time, is silly.

I didn't.
posted by Cerebus at 9:13 AM on October 8, 2003


111, obvious as in large parts of the American public haven't got a fucking clue?

Well, lemme play devils advocate here, and say that maybe that's on purpose. That that same large portion of the population is probably poorly educated, overworked, filled will diffuse anger and frustration and fed disinformation and propoganda. Perhaps because, politicians and large corporations would like to keep it that way.

Yes, I realize that they don't have to swallow it, but there's not much else on the political buffett. And yes, they could study political journals and go to lectures and watch PBS, but the factors I mentioned above make that difficult and impractical for many. Plus after working your ass off all day the last thing people wanna do is work more, even if it may benefit them. The fact that a lot of leftist commentary is accusatory in tone ("this is all your fault, you privileged white male american") makes it even less appealing to many people since it can be irksome to come from a day of being kicked around by your boss, to being kicked around by some know-it-all commentator.

I realize taht some of these know-it-all's may be right. And that the policies they advance may actually benefit this segment of the population. and that emotion should not rule politics. but we're emotional beings.

the shameful leftist bias that's destroying.... American community weblogs.

don't be silly. last time I checked there's no ideological test for mefi membership. that fact that a lot of people disagree with you me or anyone here, dosen't mean there's a bias.
posted by jonmc at 9:21 AM on October 8, 2003


I think that the single greatest victory that conservatives have won in the last decade is firmly entrenching the myth of the liberal media in the collective consciousness. It's such a foregone conclusion for many people that they never bother to question it. The net result is that any questioning of conservatives by the media is largely dismissed as partisan.

Also, what magullo said. And kgasmart.
posted by LittleMissCranky at 9:27 AM on October 8, 2003


89% of Americans say television news coverage fails to match their own political views.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 9:33 AM on October 8, 2003


Nearly half of Americans think its news media is too liberal

Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ...
posted by joquarky at 9:34 AM on October 8, 2003


Even those people on Jay Leno who can't name the Vice President would be comfortable using the phrase 'liberal media' in conversation. It's not that the phrase has lost meaning to these people; it's that it never had meaning for them in the first place. See family values. See weapons of mass destruction. See Islamic fundamentalism.

The key is to ask them to give an example of the liberal media.

It is time to reattach to the phrase the conservative assumptions that go with it. Conservatives would tend to view a media channel as liberal if it (1) references homosexuality wiithout condemning it, (2) reports statistics on how much women get paid compared to men, or (3) reports statistics on black-versus-white prison populations. The media need not even draw a conclusion based on the facts they report; if the facts don't support the conservative view, they'll throw out a handy catchphrase to combat it.

on preview: You're absolutely right, BlueTrain. Thanks god we didn't enact civil rights legislation a moment too soon. We're so much the better for it.
posted by troybob at 9:34 AM on October 8, 2003


Compared to a commercial for dish soap which promotes the dish soap as the greatest invention of the century--a study of the soap which reveals that it's only "pretty good" will come off as anti-dish soap. Americans are so used to having things sold to them that anything that offers a second side of the story will be seen as having a bias.

In other words, when your whole world is built on a slant, level ground appears to be sloped.
posted by jpoulos at 9:42 AM on October 8, 2003


I, for one, think the media is just liberal enough.
posted by probablysteve at 9:50 AM on October 8, 2003


don't be silly. last time I checked there's no ideological test for mefi membership. that fact that a lot of people disagree with you me or anyone here, dosen't mean there's a bias.

If you're really suggesting there isn't a leftist bias on metafilter - that is silly.

Interesting that's it's said in this mostly liberal thread that because "Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ..." there possibly couldn't be a liberal bias in the media - or that those people who think there is are obviously stupid and not as smart as liberals.

[ As for the poll - it was taken by you and others as absolute fact, without criticism or examination. If you're going to 'prove' your ideological opinions by using polls, I feel very sorry for you. ]

For progressive tolerance, this certainly leads me to believe that the left is not so much about tolerance or progressiveness than the more lazy tactic of callling all conversatives stupid, or indeed half the population stupid.

Maybe leftist bias isn't just silly ...
posted by alethe at 9:52 AM on October 8, 2003


Alternate headline for the study:
Are the News Media Just Right?
Many Americans say yes
The difference between "Just Right" and "Too Conservative" is not significant. Plus, I'd still like to read the questions.
posted by Blake at 9:57 AM on October 8, 2003


If you're really suggesting there isn't a leftist bias on metafilter - that is silly.

The majority of Mefi may lean left (by American standards) but it's not like Matt's barring the door to conservatives or promoting the site as "the voice of liberality." There are plenty of conservative, libertarian and centrist and just plain befuddled (that would be me) voices here too, and I don't see anyone telling them to leave.


Interesting that's it's said in this mostly liberal thread that because "Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ..." there possibly couldn't be a liberal bias in the media - or that those people who think there is are obviously stupid and not as smart as liberals.

reread my last comment, alethe. That attitude is a problem, and exactly what I was trying to address.
posted by jonmc at 10:00 AM on October 8, 2003


This is just proof that if someone (like Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly) keep saying the same thing (like the words "liberal news media") enough times, people believe it even if it's not true. Repetition really does work.
posted by whirlwind29 at 10:01 AM on October 8, 2003


If you're really suggesting there isn't a leftist bias on metafilter - that is silly.

There's a critical difference between and outright bias (as the one we're talking about in the media) and there just being more lefties here than righties. There's no one, after all, editing what you post or preventing you from linking prominent conservative sources in your arguments.

For progressive tolerance, this certainly leads me to believe that the left is not so much about tolerance or progressiveness than the more lazy tactic of callling all conversatives stupid, or indeed half the population stupid.

I don't get it.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 10:01 AM on October 8, 2003


alethe: Personally I find the word 'leftist' to be silly. It's one of those words that's usually only used by somebody who has already closed their mind.
posted by mosch at 10:02 AM on October 8, 2003


Interesting that's it's said in this mostly liberal thread that because "Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ..." there possibly couldn't be a liberal bias in the media - or that those people who think there is are obviously stupid and not as smart as liberals.

A lot of very poor assumptions there alethe. Can you prove any of them? Heh, and BTW, are you actually saying that you think liberals ARE SMARTER? I'd like to see that proof also.

Eric Alterman does a very effective job exposing this myth in his book "What Liberal Media." If you're truly interested in the subject and "not too stupid" I heartily recommend reading the entire book.

Most people don't understand how much time and money has gone into building this popular myth. And it all started when Nixon had to resign from office, which was, of course, all the fault of the media and those hippies!
posted by nofundy at 10:04 AM on October 8, 2003


Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ...
posted by joquarky at 9:34 AM PST on October 8

this certainly leads me to believe that the left is not so much about tolerance or progressiveness than the more lazy tactic of callling all conversatives stupid, or indeed half the population stupid.
posted by alethe at 9:52 AM PST on October 8


I find it ironic that alethe finds a lefty bias in joquarky's (objectively true) statement.
posted by jpoulos at 10:13 AM on October 8, 2003


Wait.

The article says 45% of Americans think the media is too liberal... which means most Americans... umm... you know... don't. The same survey indicates a majority of Americans have confidence in their media. So the real trickery here is attempting to imply that the belief in liberal slant of the media is the reason what there isn't a majority of trust in the media... funny, the article actually notes how both of those statements are false.

Even more interesting is how the article notes the success of Fox News in regards to accusations of liberal bias in the media... yet a paragraph later it notes that confidence has slipped in the American media since the mid-70's when there was a larger majority of confidence. Gosh, you'd think examining the slip in confidence starting from around the early 80's and the dawn of cable news would be significant. Silly me.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:20 AM on October 8, 2003


Haha. It's always a hoot to see you Libs get your knickers in a bunch as soon as any alternative point of view dares to speak.
posted by HTuttle at 10:21 AM on October 8, 2003


oh please, jpoulos, look at the context of joquarky's statement. It's quite obvious that there's a bias. I'm not necessarily agreeing with alethe's premise, but a spade is a spade.
posted by BlueTrain at 10:21 AM on October 8, 2003


So what else is new? Are we now to be shocked at what the majority of the American public believes? I thought we had fairly well proved that what the American Public believes ain't exactly true (evidence in the majority beliefs of Iraq 9/11 links, Iraq WMD proof exists, etc.).

Sadly I think the truth is that the majority public believe what they are told, and with Fox News, Infinity Broadcasting and all telling them the media is liberal...what do you think people believe facts or no?
posted by aaronscool at 10:39 AM on October 8, 2003


"Nearly half of Americans have a below-average IQ..." - joquarky

"I find it ironic that alethe finds a lefty bias in joquarky's (objectively true) statement." - jpoulos

I find both these statements interesting - assuming by "average" we mean "median," exactly half of Americans, by definition, have a "below average IQ."
posted by Pressed Rat at 10:40 AM on October 8, 2003


BlueTrain: You're confusing bias with opinion, as usual for arguments from the right. For a collective entity to be biased, it must be shown that there is a concerted effort to suppress the opposing opinion. Merely showing that the constituents of that organization have a particular opinion is not the same thing.

Metafilter, then, is not biased. But many people on Metafilter share an opinion.

Learn this distinction.
posted by Cerebus at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2003


oh please, jpoulos, look at the context of joquarky's statement. It's quite obvious that there's a bias. I'm not necessarily agreeing with alethe's premise, but a spade is a spade.


It was a joke. You know, because average IQ is the mean number, so half the people would be above it and have the people would be below it.

As for a bias, here's the common definition from dictionary.com: "A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment." I don't think the percentage of left-wing partisans is any higher than the percentage of right-wing partisans here; there might be more of them, but I think a good deal of the more intelligent posters here for fairly open to criticisms of leftist thought--if, and this is the big one, there's any basis to it.
posted by The God Complex at 10:49 AM on October 8, 2003


for = are
posted by The God Complex at 10:50 AM on October 8, 2003


metafilter: we're not suppressive, we're expressive
posted by poopy at 10:58 AM on October 8, 2003


For a collective entity to be biased, it must be shown that there is a concerted effort to suppress the opposing opinion.

Did you just create that definition to suit the purpose of your argument? Because I don't remember any definition of bias suggesting active suppression of opposing ideas.

Learn this distinction.

The only thing I've learned is that MeFi becomes rather defensive when called "left-leaning".

I don't think the percentage of left-wing partisans is any higher than the percentage of right-wing partisans here; there might be more of them,

Please clarify...because by itself, that makes no sense.
posted by BlueTrain at 11:19 AM on October 8, 2003


Forgive me, if you're suggesting "there might be more [partisans in general], I would disagree. I would also disagree that the number of partisans on each side is equal. What I will say is that, especially based on the MeTa thread discussing the political compass, there is objective information suggesting that a slant exists.
posted by BlueTrain at 11:23 AM on October 8, 2003


Y'know, I see far more right-wing lunatics on Metafilter than I ever have in real life.

Just sayin'.
posted by influx at 11:24 AM on October 8, 2003


bias, n.: 2b) An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.

I'd count suppressing the other side as 'unfair'.

Of course you can avail yourself of the definition offered by The God Complex; in which case, everyone is biased-- including you-- and the term loses any real meaning.

Funny how that works, innit?
posted by Cerebus at 11:34 AM on October 8, 2003


I should also add that by the definition offered by The God Complex, Metafilter cannot be biased, because it-- as an entity-- is incapable of rendering any judgment. Now, if we had a rating system a lá Plastic or Slashdot, then an accusation of bias would have more stick to it.

But not here.
posted by Cerebus at 11:38 AM on October 8, 2003


the shameful leftist bias that's destroying.... American community weblogs

Time to close the MeFi borders to Canucks, Brits, Swedes and Portugeezers. Recall Matt Haughey! Adam Curry for #1!
posted by liam at 11:38 AM on October 8, 2003


I'm impressed by how far the memes "left-liberal" and "right-conservative" has gone. I've seen a few people trying to characterize the "left wing liberal people" and the "right wing conservative people" ..but they didn't impress me much , it's just a ton of stereotypes and propaganda memes.

Ok propaganda is part of politics...wait, of mediatic section of politics..hell what was politics again ? ..last time I checked it was discussing about future decisions in a debate with people giving facts and figures , now it's like watching which Survivor will steal the food from the other.
posted by elpapacito at 11:39 AM on October 8, 2003


It was a joke. You know, because average IQ is the mean number, so half the people would be above it and have the people would be below it.


That's the median, not the mean.
posted by archimago at 11:41 AM on October 8, 2003


It was a joke. You know, because average IQ is the mean number, so half the people would be above it and have the people would be below it.

Thank you. Yes, it was a joke.
posted by jpoulos at 11:47 AM on October 8, 2003


That's the median, not the mean.

OT: Now that I think of it, given that there is a gap on the low end, due to people born with mental handicaps, the median is probably somewhere above the average, and joquarky's statement is probably not true.

posted by jpoulos at 11:49 AM on October 8, 2003


Look, there are probably more left-wingers than right-wingers on MeFi (according to American standards), but that does not mean that MeFi has a left-wing bias. For instance, the city of Buffalo may have more white people than non-white people in it, but it does not necessarily follow that Buffalo has a pro-white bias. It's all about external factors, and no one is stopping non-white people from moving in.

Similarly, there is no ideological litmus test for joining MeFi, and as far as I can tell, posts and comments are not weeded out because of their political ideology. If anyone can show us otherwise, I for one would love to see the evidence.

Whether Metafilter has a political bias or not is not the same question as whether the New York Times or Fox News have such biases, because the latter institutions have a coherent editorial policy by which all material is subjected and judged before it is published. On Metafilter, text is published first, and then judged, and removal of that text - for any reason - is the exception rather than the rule. In other words, no one is stopping right-wingers from joining, posting and commenting here, even to complain about MeFi's leftist slant. So, whither the "bias"?
posted by skoosh at 12:10 PM on October 8, 2003


When will we admit that those polled are worthless for most anything we need an answer to?

"43% of idiots with no experience or expertise, who are silly/bored enough to answer the phone think their news media is too liberal."

Well, good for them. So what.
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:25 PM on October 8, 2003


Is it me or is the US getting stupider?
posted by i_cola at 12:39 PM on October 8, 2003


Maybe part of the problem is people thinking in terms of "left-wing" and "right-wing" groups, which then become quasi-tribes with their own "group agendas" and so on. That sort of thinking may be useful for building political coalitions (i.e. the Republican Party and the Democratic Party), but not for getting at the truth of the matter - which is that there are plenty of pro-life, anti-gay marriage people who oppose the death penalty, welfare cuts, and increased mililtary spending, and others who want to end both welfare, Social Security, and the war on drugs. And still others who defend a woman's right to choose and a zealous separation of church and state, and want to invade half a dozen countries to spread that philosophy everywhere. And so on.

To interprete vehement disagreement in a leftists-vs.-rightists frame of mind is to miss an opportunity to hash out our differences and really stay open-minded to different possibilities, rather than simply cling to our predetermined opinions as totems of our party loyalties. I think it would be better to answer a differing opinion with, "Why do you believe that? And what about this?" rather than with, "Aha! I knew it! You left/right-wing fanatics are all the same! Always ganging up on us decent, clear-thinking right/left-wing folks!"

I'm just sayin'.
posted by skoosh at 12:43 PM on October 8, 2003


Anecdotal evidence suggests that many Americans believe the word "liberal" to be an epithet meaning "of an opinion differing from my own, regardless of political orientation" With that in mind, a poll with these results really should not be surprising at all.
posted by majick at 1:49 PM on October 8, 2003


For a collective entity to be biased, it must be shown that there is a concerted effort to suppress the opposing opinion.

That's insane - an entity does not need to actively suppress a point of view in order to be biased towards their own. Suppression is much different than bias. Also, a basis is not necessarily a bad thing in the arena of free speech, it seems suppression would be a bad thing in that arena.

Mefi is biased towards the left, leftist, or whatever you want to call it - that does not mean it suppresses other views - it just means that those other views get riduculed ; )
posted by alethe at 2:18 PM on October 8, 2003


Nearly Less than half of Americans think its news media is too liberal
posted by inpHilltr8r at 2:51 PM on October 8, 2003


Alethe nails it. Conservatives are free to speak their minds on MeFi. But we're definitely more likely than liberals on MeFi to get 1) shouted down as trolls or 2) wuss out and not engage in BushFilter and other threads in the first place because we just don't see the point. Better to pick your battles...
posted by Asparagirl at 3:23 PM on October 8, 2003


They may think the media is biased to the left, but they're wrong. (See magullo's link to the study.)

Personally, I can sum up why I'm a liberal in two quotes:

"Politics is not about power. Politics is not about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It's about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in our world. Politics is about doing well for people." -Paul Wellstone

"If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people." -- Joe Conason
posted by nath at 3:28 PM on October 8, 2003


Good quotes, nath. Conason's one from his latest book is excerpted here.
posted by homunculus at 4:15 PM on October 8, 2003


George Lakoff: How conservatives control political debate and how progressives can take it back
posted by homunculus at 4:20 PM on October 8, 2003


Yeah, that's actually where I stole the quote, homunculus. :)

To sum, I'm a liberal because politics is about doing what's right for people-- all people, and throughout history liberal causes have been the ones that do so.
posted by nath at 4:39 PM on October 8, 2003


"I see far more right-wing lunatics on Metafilter than I ever have in real life."

You haven't ever been anywhere near Utah, I take it.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:34 PM on October 8, 2003


Alethe speaks the truth. I considered myself to be on the left until I started reading MeFi. Opinions I disagree with but consider reasonable are drowned in a sea of partisan rebuttals. The most vocal people in political threads are the left-wing equivalents of Rush Limbaugh. MeFi's political discourse blows goats because a relative minority of left-wing bigots monopolizes the discussion.
posted by fuzz at 5:59 PM on October 8, 2003


thank you alethe: i also consider myself to be a liberal, but it's disheartening to see ANY political dissent - no matter how admissible or informing - pounced upon almost immediately by the vocal majority here.

and Cerebus, what the fuck are you talking about with the whole 'biased=suppressed' crap?
posted by poopy at 7:26 PM on October 8, 2003


poopy: i also consider myself to be a liberal, but it's disheartening to see ANY political dissent - no matter how admissible or informing - pounced upon almost immediately by the vocal majority here.

Well, when a healthy chunk of the more conservative members of MeFi state their opinions in florid prose such as this,

I suspect there will be the usual awkward silence that follows any fact contradicting the shameful leftist bias that's destroying the American media, the American academic life and American community weblogs.

they shouldn't be suprised when people at the other end of the spectrum feel inclined to stick it to them. If you want to have your perspective commented on in a thoughtful, respectful fashion it would be wise to lose the Faux News venomous language.
posted by echolalia67 at 11:29 PM on October 8, 2003


111 - "What the FUCK ( thanks, FCC ! ) do the terms "Left" and "Right" refer to anymore? Does "Right" mean "Run up an historic federal deficit and hand huge chunks of cash to corporate friends while hacking down old growth forests"? Last time I checked, the US left had become kind of - well - Conservative and prudent on public fiscal matters while conservatives had turned into the party of financial excess.

So what does this "Left vs. Right" language mean? Such as: "...shameful leftist bias that's destroying the American media, the American academic life and American community weblogs."

Right....

111 forgot to mention in this above list of left-wing crimes "...and contaminating our precious bodily fluids" (General BucK Turgidson).

Anyway, I'd say it's far more effective to keep " it's disheartening to see ANY political dissent - no matter how admissible or informing - pounced upon almost immediately by the vocal majority here" "

Isn't it more prductive to stic to facts which can be agreed on - and wokr from there?
posted by troutfishing at 12:09 AM on October 9, 2003


"They charge me with fanaticism. If to be feelingly alive to the sufferings of my fellow-creatures is to be a fanatic, I am one of the most incurable fanatics ever permitted to be at large." --William Wilberforce, speech, House of Commons, 19 June 1816
posted by johnnyboy at 5:55 AM on October 9, 2003


111 forgot to mention in this above list of left-wing crimes "...and contaminating our precious bodily fluids"

What, you mean there are communists in my phlegm?? My god, they're everywhere!!

As far as the bias goes: yes, there are some obnoxious lefties on mefi, but there's obnoxious righties, too. Both are ignored, mostly, unless people feel like getting into a "my asshole is better than your asshole" type debate, which is utterly pointless. Reasonable people shouldn't let the largest mouth rule the roost.
posted by jonmc at 6:22 AM on October 9, 2003


"my asshole is better than your asshole" type debate

Looking forward to that one. What are the judging criteria?
posted by Summer at 7:14 AM on October 9, 2003


I think the goatse gentleman would win hands down.

Oh wait, sorry, you said "better", not "bigger".
posted by beth at 11:36 AM on October 10, 2003


Hmm... I notice they also covered trusting the media to report fairly, but what about well? What about the fact that modern news aside from a very, very small number of outlets (how bad is it that the only newsmagazine that even approaches being about news and not feel-good scare tactics crap is Britain's The Economist?) is largely about ratings and pushing crap stories on people? I stopped watching CNN after a month or so where the top story every day was whether something happened or not in the O.J. Simpson civil trial. Local news is often police blotter stories, someone getting shot downtown, something sensational, weather, sports, and a human interest story but no actual news. Network news isn't much better. Liberal, Conservative, I don't really give a damn most of the time and just wish I could get some real, actual news.

Bah! I'm off to go watch C-SPAN for the next 12 hours until I can figure out what's going on. At least I know it isn't biased.
posted by Belgand at 2:08 AM on October 11, 2003


« Older Kennedy To Receive Bush Public Service Award...  |  Weblogging, the fad most poplu... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments