SO YOU DO GET ANGRY!! I KNEW IT!usmarine wrote:
no, i save that rage if i ever meet the trash who do that to the animals....destruktion_6143 wrote:
mmhm, doubtful. just dont take your rage out on the innocent puppies at the shelter plz
not when its the "slobber obama" network no i dont. they could use the balance.Turquoise wrote:
So, a show that is supposed to just be reporting on a topic goes into full editorial mode, and this doesn't strike you as bias?usmarine wrote:
what does bias have to do with anything? i agreed with what rick said, and dont agree with jon. pretty straight forward tbh.Turquoise wrote:
I thought you were one of those same people always slamming the media for bias and such. When an opportunistic bit of populism makes the airwaves, you come to its defense?
Interesting.
So, in effect, bias is ok if you agree with it.
nope. but when the bias is always in one direction, i have no issue with a u turn once and a while. stop trying to draw your own conclusions.Turquoise wrote:
So, in effect, bias is ok if you agree with it.
cmon guys, you are making an argument where there isnt any..
Last edited by destruktion_6143 (2009-03-06 18:14:36)
I just find it funny that people bitch about liberal bias but rarely complain about conservative bias when it occurs.
It just shows that it's not really objectivity that people want in reporting. They just want to hear what confirms their already existing beliefs.
It just shows that it's not really objectivity that people want in reporting. They just want to hear what confirms their already existing beliefs.
who is bitching about lib bias? you brought it up.Turquoise wrote:
I just find it funny that people bitch about liberal bias but rarely complain about conservative bias when it occurs.
people here bitch about fox news bias ALL the time. but the fact is, is that fox is the ONLY major network with an overly conservative bias. all others are primarily liberal bias. sad but true. has always been like that.
Good point on Fox, but I think we're too quick to assume the other part you mentioned.destruktion_6143 wrote:
people here bitch about fox news bias ALL the time. but the fact is, is that fox is the ONLY major network with an overly conservative bias. all others are primarily liberal bias. sad but true. has always been like that.
In effect, they've "worked over the ref" so much that any liberal bias is easily recognized, while the conservative bias is perceived as a balance. It's a subtle but very effective way to slowly get media overall to lean more to the right as a reflex.
You stole this technique from Bubbalo, didn't you? I bring something up that occurs in other threads, and then you pretend you've never seen or read it.usmarine wrote:
who is bitching about lib bias? you brought it up.Turquoise wrote:
I just find it funny that people bitch about liberal bias but rarely complain about conservative bias when it occurs.
im all for the general media moving to the right more, why? bc it will hopefully neutralize the bias. i have a dream! a dream of un biased, only facts, media! the way it was intended to be!
the fuck are you talking about.Turquoise wrote:
You stole this technique from Bubbalo, didn't you? I bring something up that occurs in other threads, and then you pretend you've never seen or read it.usmarine wrote:
who is bitching about lib bias? you brought it up.Turquoise wrote:
I just find it funny that people bitch about liberal bias but rarely complain about conservative bias when it occurs.
If you watch enough media, you realize the sum effect is actually one of a corporate bias, not specifically to the left or right.destruktion_6143 wrote:
im all for the general media moving to the right more, why? bc it will hopefully neutralize the bias. i have a dream! a dream of un biased, only facts, media! the way it was intended to be!
Look, destruktion was right. I'll just drop it.usmarine wrote:
the fuck are you talking about.Turquoise wrote:
You stole this technique from Bubbalo, didn't you? I bring something up that occurs in other threads, and then you pretend you've never seen or read it.usmarine wrote:
who is bitching about lib bias? you brought it up.
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
kTurquoise wrote:
Look, destruktion was right. I'll just drop it.usmarine wrote:
the fuck are you talking about.Turquoise wrote:
You stole this technique from Bubbalo, didn't you? I bring something up that occurs in other threads, and then you pretend you've never seen or read it.
better run away before GS gets back
GS could at least follow what I was talking about.usmarine wrote:
kTurquoise wrote:
Look, destruktion was right. I'll just drop it.usmarine wrote:
the fuck are you talking about.
better run away before GS gets back
ya i follow what you are "trying" to get me to argue about, but i dont see how that has anything to do with my agreement of what rick said.Turquoise wrote:
GS could at least follow what I was talking about.
i guess, but then when all networks are biased and acknowledging it, where will we get the truth?Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
guys! i thought u agreed to drop it! USM no! no more baiting. lolusmarine wrote:
ya i follow what you are "trying" to get me to argue about, but i dont see how that has anything to do with my agreement of what rick said.Turquoise wrote:
GS could at least follow what I was talking about.
That mostly comes from cross referencing sources. If you gather information from enough sources and verify what you've read from other multiple sources, the end result is a more accurate interpretation of events.destruktion_6143 wrote:
i guess, but then when all networks are biased and acknowledging it, where will we get the truth?Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
that is true, never thought of it that way...Turquoise wrote:
That mostly comes from cross referencing sources. If you gather information from enough sources and verify what you've read from other multiple sources, the end result is a more accurate interpretation of events.destruktion_6143 wrote:
i guess, but then when all networks are biased and acknowledging it, where will we get the truth?Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
I don't think he (Santelli) could have been anymore obvious when describing it as HIS view. It's a consistent view also.. despite Stewarts implication. This is another example of people hearing what they want to hear because they are too lazy to do a little investigation. They'd rather take "Comedy Central" at it's word .Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
And funny thing is, Stewert has stated publicly that if people watch his show as a credible news source, then they need help, lolKmarion wrote:
I don't think he (Santelli) could have been anymore obvious when describing it as HIS view. It's a consistent view also.. despite Stewarts implication. This is another example of people hearing what they want to hear because they are too lazy to do a little investigation. They'd rather take "Comedy Central" at it's word .Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
The fact remains that most financial news markets had been leading people astray for the last 2 years. That is what Stewart's general argument was.Kmarion wrote:
I don't think he (Santelli) could have been anymore obvious when describing it as HIS view. It's a consistent view also.. despite Stewarts implication. This is another example of people hearing what they want to hear because they are too lazy to do a little investigation. They'd rather take "Comedy Central" at it's word .Spark wrote:
I take the Orwell view: bias is fine as long as it's acknowledged and not disguised.
This isn't even really as much about Santelli as it is about how much the average person was getting duped by Wall Street.