From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: CNN Anchor Admits Pro-Clinton Bias
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:49:30 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <BuBDF1.496@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
]In article <1992Sep9.035421.24960@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
]>There are two problems with this viewpoint:
]>
]>  (1) The media themselves pretend to be objective, and in fact publicly
]>      pat themselves on back for it all the time.
]
]  This is just PR.  Companies, politicians, etc are always patting
]  themselves on the back for doing all kinds of "good deeds".  So what?
]  Only someone with a child's naivete about the world believes it.

Unfortunately, the media themselves believe it.

]  
]>  (2) There is a serious lack of balance. All 3 of the major TV networks
]>      exhibit the SAME bias, which they loudly proclaim does not exist.
]
]   Again, *you* know they're biased, *I* know they're biased -- is there
]   anyone in this discussion who genuinely doubts that they're biased?
]   This seriously calls into question your idea that many people actually 
]   believe these guys are "objective".   I mean, I'm sure there's *someone*
]   out there who believe that if Dan Rather said it it must be the final 
]   word on the subject, but I think that most people are a little smarter
]   than you give them credit for.   I think especially the "movers and
]   shakers" (educated, powerful, or well-connected people) understand
]   this.  It's just that many of them share the essential bias of the
]   major networks and news magazines.

Are you familiar with the term "the big lie?" It means that if
even untrusted sources give the same mis-information over and over again,
and they have a monopoly on information, people will start to believe
some of it. In this case, where most americans get all of their news
from television, and all that they ever hear on television is the
liberal viewpoint, they are likely to get a distorted view of things,
even if they know that the source is biased.
]
]   As to having the SAME bias -- no kidding: they're all going after
]   the SAME market, and with the SAME set of advertisers.   It's the
]   free market at work!    If people didn't like it they wouldn't watch
]   it.    Or is this another case of "You and I have free will but everyone
]   else is brainwashed"?    I used to be the world's biggest TV addict,
]   so if I could see through the B.S. and stop watching anybody can!

The SAME bias has nothing to do with the same market and same advertisers.
News advertisers don't buy on bias, they buy on coverage. When you
have a monopoly on national TV news, they don't have any choice
at all. Perhaps this is why TV news viewership has been going down
a lot lately.

And yes, this is another case of "You and I have free will but everyone else
is brainwashed." That is, for that vast majority of americans who get
ALL of their news from network TV, they are being misled. If I got all
of my information from there, rather than from the variety of sources that
I read, I would also likely come to different conclusions about things...
ie, the propaganda would work on me also.

]>      conservative bias or a libertarian bias or anything other than
]>      the standard left-liberal, statist, anti-traditional bias that
]>      they have today.
]
]    So start one!   Jeesus, it's always a hoot to hear libertarians
]    complaining when the free market doesn't go their way!   Ted Turner
]    started a TV station in Atlanta which was such a success that he 
]    took it national (and international) and called it CNN.  In recent
]    years A&E, Discovery, MTV, Home Shopping Club, Fox, Nickelodeon, and
]    a bunch of others have proved that NBC/CBS/ABC/PBS don't have a lock
]    on TV viewers.

Can you spell oligopoly? There are only 3 national VHF TV networks,
and that is all that there is room for due to frequency allocations.
Cable doesn't help much, because people tend to watch local news
on the same channels as national news, and guess what channels they
get local news on. Your story about Turner, by the way, is incorrect.
He took WTBS national, not CNN. Then he founded CNN, which in fact is
somewhat more objective than the major networks (except on environmentalism).
We are not talking about a free market here. We are talking about a
very restricted market which functions as a monopoly. 
]
]>      Anyone who watches all three networks should notice that they show
]>      a remarkably consistent view of everything, even though that view
]>      is not universal in the printed press.
]
]   I'm sure they do, and they watch anyway!   Doesn't this tell you
]   something, like maybe they like what they're getting?

No, it tells me that they have few alternatives. And.... they are
watching less and less, and when polled they put the news media
down as no more trustworthy than congress, which is down somewhere
below lawyers and used car salesmen. I don't think they like what they
are getting.... they simply prefer it to nothing at all, which is
the only choice for the non-readers (which is too many people).
]
]>I would like to see DIVERSITY in the mass media. As it is, if I want
]>conservative news I have to go to Rush Limbaugh (who is by his own words
]>an entertainer, not a journalist) or the Wall Street journal editorial
]>page, or National Review. None of these are mass media. If I want to
]>see liberal news, all I have to do is watch any major TV network news
]>or list to network radio. If I want to see an anti-war-on-drugs viewpoint,
]>I can occasionally find it in National Review or the Wall Street journal,
]>but never on national TV.
]
]
]   But I still say this is the market at work.  Look, I'd like all kinds
]   of things that the market doesn't provide.  But that's the way it 
]   goes.

And once again, I say that it is not a market. If you think it is a
free market, go out and buy a TV transmitter and start transmitting
YOUR views. Very soon the FCC will come along and shut you down. It
seems that only a few are allowed to do broadcast (due to the natural
scarcity of frequencies).


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Comment too controversial for management - Deleted :-) -
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -