Media Bias, We report - you decide

Close enough!

Why, both ways, of course. Just like quantum physics.
I never said all northern Republicans are racists and bigots, only that northern Republicans are no less racist than southerners. Of course, if you think all southerners are racist, then the statement could be interpreted (wrongly) as saying all northern Republicans are racist. Fortunately, racism among most groups is now as low as it has ever been, and likely to remain so. To the extent racism does continue to be a problem, it is just as much a problem in the north as in the north. Furthermore, I think overt racism now tends to be directed at white males who are not members of the ruling elite (which is most of us) more than at any other group. As others have pointed out, the media largely ignores or excuses racial statements directed at white males. On the other hand, one bad (and fairly mild) joke was enough to get Earl Butz fired.
And, while not all suburbanites are racist (and those moving to the suburbs today probably do so more for economic reasons than racial ones), you would have a hard time convincing that when white flight started in reaction to forced integration that a good number of the whites moving to the suburbs weren't doing so for racial motives. Frankly, white flight, combined with a lost War on Poverty and misguided Urban Renewal, left behind a legacy of concentrated, mostly minority, poverty that is every bit as pernicious today as slavery was in it's time.
In short, while there is no doubt isolated racists still exist, you are as likely to find them in a northern suburb as the Georgia hills--although the suburbanite will likely be more hesitant to express his or her racism publicly, and will likely pay severely up doing so. For most of us, racism is a smokescreen used by politicians to divert us from their peccadillos.

Ok, now I got ya. Now that I understand your statements better, I agree with them.

There is a term that came out of the media that I severely object to: reverse discrimination. Reverse? (That statement should be a double negative) Why is it reverse discrimination when a white male is discriminated against? GRRRR! Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination. That phrase is a large source of anger for me.

Since the thread started as "media bias" and has turned toward racisim, here is a recent article that pertains.

Judge quits over racist chat

Swanny

Interesting article. Thanks.
I wonder how long it'll take for some habeas corpus petitions to be filed, using the judge's chat room statements, seeking to overturn cases he decided.
A comparison of the media reaction to this case, relative to the case that started this thread, might also be interesting. The judge's words, however offensive, don't seem to be any worse than the words by black politicians that seem to be considered by the media to be not even worthy of reporting on. If there is a black public official who has resigned for something like this, I sure haven't heard about it.

Here's a possible media bias:

Dan Rather, in an January 28 interview with Kerry carried on CBS?s Up to the Minute overnight show, but possibly run in Western time zones since it was conducted during the 10pm EST hour when EST/CST CBS affiliates were airing a Judging Amy re-run:

"Senator, you know what they say about you at the White House. They say, 'Listen, he?s just a tall Dukakis. He?s another McGovern. He?s a Ted Kennedy disciple, he?s just another Northeastern liberal' and they intend to run against you that way. Do you think you can win and, if so, how against that kind of characterization?"

But a few hours later when the January 29 Early Show viewers saw the very same exchange, they heard this from Rather:

"Senator, you know what they say about you at the White House. They say, 'Listen, he's just a tall Dukakis. He's just another Northeastern liberal' and they intend to run against you that way. Do you think you can win and, if so, how against that kind of characterization?"

What's the difference? A two-second edit leaving out "He?s another McGovern. He?s a Ted Kennedy disciple". Now it can certainly be argued that the network really needed to save those two seconds, and therefore an edit was required. Or maybe the "offending words" were too much for CBS to tell their viewers. Media bias also includes the Sin of Omission.

Good point, Sir S. We need to read between the lines and consider the sources and biases when reading ANY news article.

I guess that's what irritates me the most, Sir M. 99.999% of us do not have the time, with our so-very-busy days, to doube check and cross reference what is issued to us by the news outlets. For better or worse we say, "Honey, I heard it on CNN so it has to be true." And through misleads, omissions, or blatant lies, we are like sheep with an evil shepherd.

The best thing that ever happened for information was the internet and it's micro-second cross-reference with sources around the world. Oh yeah, some are from those tin-foil hat people that just escaped Area 51. But 10 years ago I could never have checked CNN/ABC/CBS/NBC/Fox/AP/UPI/Reuters all in one morning.

1. The Liberal Media Loves Uncle Saddam:
Diane Sawyer: "I read this morning that he?s [Saddam Hussein] also said the love that the Iraqis have for him is so much greater than anything Americans feel for their President because he?s been loved for 35 years, he says, the whole 35 years."
Dan Harris in Baghdad: "He is one to point out quite frequently that he is part of a historical trend in this country of restoring Iraq to its greatness, its historical greatness. He points out frequently that he was elected with a hundred percent margin recently."
-- ABC?s Good Morning America, March 7, 2003.

2. Ted Kennedy Is A God-send
"If she had lived, Mary Jo Kopechne would be 62 years old. Through his tireless work as a legislator, Edward Kennedy would have brought comfort to her in her old age."
-- Charles Pierce in a January 5, 2003 Boston Globe Magazine article.

3. Any Tax Cut Is A Dangerous Thing
"The President?s tax cut is beginning to show up. Will three extra dollars stimulate the national economy?"
-- Peter Jennings teasing a July 8, 2003 story on ABC?s World News Tonight

4. The Conservatives Are Attacking
Host Cal Thomas: "Many conservatives and religious people in this country feel that much of the media, especially the broadcast media, is biased or at least insensitive to their points of view..."
CBS?s Lesley Stahl: "I?m going to attack the premise of the question, because I think today you have broadcast journalists who are avowedly conservative....The voices that are being heard in broadcast media today, are far more -- the ones who are being heard -- are far more likely to be on the right and avowedly so, and therefore, more -- almost stridently so, than what you?re talking about."
Thomas: "Can you name a conservative journalist at CBS News?"
Stahl: "Well, I don?t know of anybody?s political bias at CBS News. I really think we try very hard to get any opinion that we have out of our stories, and most of our stories are balanced."
-- Exchange on Fox News Channel?s After Hours with Cal Thomas, January 18, 2003.

5. Bush's Ads, v.1
"One September 11th widow told the [New York] Daily News this morning she was offended by the use of 9/11 images in these ads, saying quote, ?After three thousand people were murdered on his watch, it seems to me that takes an awful lot of audacity. Honestly, it?s in poor taste.? What?s your response to that?"
? NBC?s Katie Couric to Bush campaign adviser Karen Hughes on the March 4 Today. Couric skipped quotes in the same article from 9/11 relatives who support Bush.

6. Bush's Ads, v.2
"The firefighters union says in a statement that it was a cheap trick to use even fleeting images of the real events of 9/11."
? ABC?s Diane Sawyer to Hughes on Good Morning America, March 4. Sawyer did not mention that the same firefighters group has endorsed John Kerry and is actively campaigning on behalf of his presidential campaign.

7. McCain, We'd Love You If You Were A Democrat
"I think that?s just everybody?s wishful thinking that he might switch parties and join his Vietnam buddy. But he?s a pretty loyal Republican, so that?s unlikely, I think."
? ABC?s Claire Shipman, Good Morning America, March 3.

8. Being A Liberal Is Not An Issue
"He [President Bush] said, you know, ?Let?s talk about the issues.? Well, we all know that one of the first things they?re going to do is not talk about the issues. They?re going to define John Kerry, and they?re going to try to paint him as a left-wing liberal who?s out of touch with the rest of the country."
? Bob Schieffer on CBS?s The Early Show on March 3

9. Here Come Those Christians Again
"It?s hard to imagine the movie [Mel Gibson?s The Passion] being anything other than a flop in America, given that it has no major Hollywood stars and that its dialogue is in Aramaic and Latin."
? New York Times Arts editor Frank Rich on August 3. In the 12 days following its February 25 release, The Passion had grossed more than $200 million.

When checking "alternate news sources", try some more of those outside of the US, like "Business Day" (South Africa) and Irish Times. I am sure there are many others. It is good to get perspectives on American news from outside the US.

Sometimes I do like to see us from other's eyes, although I find many of them also have hidden agendas just like our own media, making them interesting, refreshing, and sadly suspect. We are the most powerful and richest, so by that alone many outside our borders have a bad taste for things American. And when you add our cocky attitude to the mix, I can surely see why many in other countries are simply tired of hearing anything about the US.

And I have an easier and more fun time debunking and exposing the media inside our own borders!

for the best news coverage "inside our borders", try www.theonion.com

Today's installment is about which loser would have made a better President, and why you can't say certain things.

(1) Sen. Trent Lott, awhile back, remarked that the country would have been better off if former segregationist Strom Thurmond had won his 1948 bid for presidency. The Democrats demanded Lott's ouster due to his racially-insensitive remarks. Flanked by the Congressional Black Caucus, they pumped their fists at Lott and demanded that he vacate his post. There was tremendous media coverage.

(2) Sen. Robert Byrd, the longstanding Democrat from West Virginia, cast his 17,000th vote in the chamber last week. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) saw fit to mark the occasion with a rousing tribute in which he proclaimed, "There is no one I admire more. There is no one to whom I listen more closely and carefully when he speaks on any subject matter than Sen. Byrd." There is Dodd, on the Senate floor, demanding that Sen. Byrd "would have been a great senator at any moment. He would have been right at the founding of this country. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this Nation..."

The problem with #2 is that Byrd is a former Grand Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan. Byrd voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd broadcast his racial insensitivity by using the N-word during a 2001 appearance on Fox News. So, according to the public words of Dodd, a former Klansman would have been great during the Civil War?

There has been no media coverage of this event. There have been no Democrats demanding Dodd's ouster.

Had a Republican praised a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, the media would have been up in arms. But when a Democrat makes racially-insensitive remarks, they avert their eyes. Some things should not be ignored. Some things should not be subject to the whims of partisan politics. When our elected leaders spew racist remarks, they need to be held accountable - regardless of their political affiliation.

It would be nice if the party that demanded Sen. Lott's ouster for praising a former segregationist could be equally outraged when one of their own praises a former Klansman. It will probably happen after I win the lottery - never.

The St. Petersburg (Florida) Democratic Club paid for an ad in a local newspaper this week. That ad, which was a general diatribe against George Bush, contained the following line:

http://www.drudgereport.com/stp.gif

I bring this up for one reason: what if it had been a Republican group that placed the ad? What if the ad had called for the assassination of a prominent Democrat? Do you think that there is a chance that you wouldn't have heard about it on virtually every network newscast yesterday? Do you think that there is one front page of a major newspaper that wouldn't have carried the story?

Also, MoveOn.Org, a liberal advocacy group, is running the television ad featuring an actor purporting to be Mr. Bush testifying before the September 11 commission.

"Before 9/11, I was obsessed with Iraq," says the actor in a voiceover as the screen displays a picture of Mr. Bush at a microphone. A disclaimer at the bottom of the screen says, "President Bush's voice is being imitated."

"Then I used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq," says the actor in a compelling impersonation of the president's accent and voice inflections. "So now we're less safe than we were before."

One person associated with the group said the ad is not misleading because it includes an on-screen disclaimer that the president's voice is merely an imitation. But Republicans said the disclaimer is slyly camouflaged as white lettering at the bottom of an overly bright screen and blends into the background. All the other lettering in the advertisement is dark.

Again, if it were the Republicans doing the same sort of advertisement don't you think there would be cries of 'dirty politics' coming from the media?

Just wondering.

The DNC and Kerry campaigns have denounced the add suggesting shooting Rummy, and it is being retracted. The other add is simply too true for your comfort.