Fairness Doctrine Video

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Had ABC devoted more time talking to Rudy or McCain, I would assume the producers at ABC thought the commutation was a good thing.  I can only assume that the producers felt it was a bad thing since they devoted more time to the critics of it.

Something like 80% of the population is opposed to Bush giving away a pardon on this guy, and even though this isn't a quite a pardon, you expect equal time for someone's case that 80% of the population is opposed to.

They don't give time to every lunatic fringe to explain their views on Scooter Libby.  Why would they give time to an opinion that isn't even held by a majority of Republicans?  Heck, equal time would probably have been less than they got, all views considered.

And how do you know that McCain or Rudy weren't asked?  If I were either one of them, there would certainly be no reason to touch this.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Had ABC devoted more time talking to Rudy or McCain, I would assume the producers at ABC thought the commutation was a good thing.  I can only assume that the producers felt it was a bad thing since they devoted more time to the critics of it.

Something like 80% of the population is opposed to Bush giving away a pardon on this guy, and even though this isn't a quite a pardon, you expect equal time for someone's case that 80% of the population is opposed to.

They don't give time to every lunatic fringe to explain their views on Scooter Libby.  Why would they give time to an opinion that isn't even held by a majority of Republicans?  Heck, equal time would probably have been less than they got, all views considered.

And how do you know that McCain or Rudy weren't asked?  If I were either one of them, there would certainly be no reason to touch this.

So news should be populist-based?

Rudy & McCain both released statements in support.

Personally, it's a "big-to-do-about-nothing" issue.  I could care less if Libby does time or not and predicted Bush would step in at some point since his legacy is pretty much hosed.  

I'm more concerned about convicted child molesters walking around on appeal bonds than some admin official convicted of being too stupid to say: "I don't recall" being allowed to walk.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

So news should be populist-based?

It doesn't matter if they "should be", they are mostly.  The exception being, as usual, anything that will piss you off or horrify you.  It's about money, not politics.  You can make a huge "whoopity do" over it, but it's the media, it's how they work.  Like I said before, people don't want to hear some guy talking about how great everything is.

quote:I'm more concerned about convicted child molesters walking around on appeal bonds than some admin official convicted of being too stupid to say: "I don't recall" being allowed to walk.

Then you should really love the heck out of the media.  They'll let you in on it, they love that crap.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

people don't want to hear some guy talking about how great everything is.

I do.  Call me weird.

[cannon_fodder]

Conan, one of the biggest changes with 24/h news is the need to create news.  It used to be you could always fluff out a 30 minute news report or fill the front page with something.  With 24 hours news, you need people like Paris and the ever present "going to kill you" story of the year (SARS, West Nile, Killer Bees, Solar Radiation, Global Warming...).  I barely watch "news" anymore, it is certainly more entertainment based than news based.

Which, after all, they are really in the business of selling advertising.  So it shouldn't be surprising that the news is full of hyperbole, fluff, and partisanship.  Its too bad, but not surprising.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

people don't want to hear some guy talking about how great everything is.

I do.  Call me weird.

You want to hear how great everything is...for child molesters right?  That's exactly it.  What in the high blue blazes do I care if someone goes on a drunken car theft rampage and kills a blind man and his dog while driving a Mini Cooper in freakin Vermont?  I don't, but apparently it pays.  Same goes for "child molesters", missing blondes in the caribbean, drunken Brittany's, and whatever other nonsense you can think of.  People eat that stuff up.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Which, after all, they are really in the business of selling advertising.  So it shouldn't be surprising that the news is full of hyperbole, fluff, and partisanship.  Its too bad, but not surprising.

We're actually pretty close, except I'll deny partisanship on the mainstream media.  The Mainstream media went full bore after Clinton, they watched the run to Iraq War without questioning the Bush Administration, they have already started taking shots at Democratic controlled congress, and the idea of partisanship is mostly put forth by admitted partisans.  People who literally want to destroy the Mainstream Media.  

While, on the other hand, populism and fluff and a hankerin' for thumpin' gov't, already known to exist, explain any perceived "partisanship", perfectly.

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Which, after all, they are really in the business of selling advertising.  So it shouldn't be surprising that the news is full of hyperbole, fluff, and partisanship.  Its too bad, but not surprising.

We're actually pretty close, except I'll deny partisanship on the mainstream media.  

Does Faux News count as Mainstream?

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

Does Faux News count as Mainstream?

If it didn't, about all you'd have is McNeil-Lehrer.  And, I can't think of another.

Unless of course by Faux you mean Fox.  They don't even want to be, or pretend to be "mainstream."

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by mr.jaynes

Does Faux News count as Mainstream?

Unless of course by Faux you mean Fox.  They don't even want to be, or pretend to be "mainstream."

Precisely who I was referring to.

[rwarn17588]

Fox News certainly has strong, mainstream-type ratings. If it's trying to position itself as a David-vs.-Goliath thing or an us-against-the-world, that seems very disingenuous.

Fox News is nothing more than niche programming. It positioned itself as an "alternative" to "liberal" media, whether the liberals were real or imagined.

It's little more than good marketing, really.

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Fox News certainly has strong, mainstream-type ratings. If it's trying to position itself as a David-vs.-Goliath thing or an us-against-the-world, that seems very disingenuous.

Fox News is nothing more than niche programming. It positioned itself as an "alternative" to "liberal" media, whether the liberals were real or imagined.

It's little more than good marketing, really.

With the possible exception of Fox anchorman Shepard Smith, it comes off as equal parts propoganda and eye candy.

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Damned capitalism allowing companies to produce products that people want and that make other people want to advertise with them.  Damn them!!!

If you want that stupid Bull Sheet they call "news" like Anna Nicole and Paris Hilton then you have got  a problem man.  I don't want that stupid crap on my TV...   Does anyone else in this forum really think that Paris Hilton should have EVER been the lead story on CNN, FOX, CNBC, CBS, and ALL the major stations?  This is not news this is a distraction and I don't want that crap therefore it is NOT capitalism because I DON'T watch it and the only reason most mindless Americans do watch it is because like the guy said the NEWS IS OWNED and there is NOTHING else on.

[mr.jaynes]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Damned capitalism allowing companies to produce products that people want and that make other people want to advertise with them.  Damn them!!!

If you want that stupid Bull Sheet they call "news" like Anna Nicole and Paris Hilton then you have got  a problem man.  I don't want that stupid crap on my TV...   Does anyone else in this forum really think that Paris Hilton should have EVER been the lead story on CNN, FOX, CNBC, CBS, and ALL the major stations?  This is not news this is a distraction and I don't want that crap therefore it is NOT capitalism because I DON'T watch it and the only reason most mindless Americans do watch it is because like the guy said the NEWS IS OWNED and there is NOTHING else on.

Sometimes, what is billed as News, is little more than Infotainment.

[cannon_fodder]

Fox draws more people to its news broadcasts each day than anything else on the planet.  So I would have to say it is mainstream.  As I have said before, all studies have shown that Fox News is the least biased of all major networks (I believe the study was by Stanford, it was based on source material).

NEWS.  Not programming.  So Hannity doesnt count against them because it is not news.

I don't watch Fox, nor CNN, nor any of the other network news channels.  You get 5 minutes of news every hour...
- - -

MichaelC, good points on the media going after Cliton and buying into the war.  But overall, a bias presents itself.  Study after study, political donation by political donation.  Subtle things always give it away, their choice of stories, the snowball questions to liberals, and even the vernacular chosen sometimes.   I don't think its the end of the world and I understand why (if the people making the news hold a view, it will probably creep in), just sayin' its there.