From: alan@uts.amdahl.com (Alan Bomberger)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: VP Debate?
Summary: Poor format, Impossible to listen to.  Unbiased(?) eval.
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:13:46 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Well, I must throw in my 2 cents.  It may be because of the format,
but I could not listen to what was advertised as a debate.  The
Pres. debate was SIGNIFICANTLY better.

My worst impression was of Gore.  At one time he was asked
something like ["]What will your administration do to create jobs?["]

Summary of answer:

   30 seconds of: Jobs are our first priority.  We need jobs
   in this country.  We must re-establish the industrial base.

   30 seconds of:  We will do what Clinton did for Arkansas.
   We have a jobs program.
  
   1  minute of Bush hashing:  worst record, lowest this, bad that.

At least during the Pres. debate there was some attempt to answer
the question.  I credit that to the presence of Perot.  Perhaps it
was the format.  We will see when the Pres. debate format is like
the VP debate.

Quayle was little better.  In the parts that I could listen
to, he had 2 or 3 seconds of answer occasionally.  I don't remember
hearing Gore answer any question except on abortion..

Poor Mr. Stockdale.  All he wanted to do was answer the questions.
What a foolish concept.  After he answered the questions, he stopped 
talking.  What a relief.  Had he spent more time at Toastmasters, he 
might have appeared to have a brilliant strategy.  Even as it was, his 
answers stood out from all the bashing.  I would hate to think that
6 months of toastmasters ends up influencing the choice of the next
President.

I think that in future debates the candidates should be given
no more than 10 seconds to answer the question.  Then they
might have to start with the answer rather than start with a speech.

Debate moderators have a sacred duty to make debate participants
answer the questions.  They should point out when questions go
unanswered and repeat the question until it gets answered.

What is worse is that after all this the Demos still insist that only the 
GOP is running a negative campaign.  BullBleep.  98% of what Clinton/Gore
say is how bad Bush did, How bad the country is. This is not negative?
Since Clinton/Gore weren't in charge, the GOP has to go negative on 
personal traits.  To think/say that the Demos are "positive" and the GOP 
is "negative" shows incredible bias supported by the Media.  Only the
Perot campaign covers the issues!  Is that enough of a reason to
vote Perot?  Perhaps, if only to convince politicians that their
campaigns are just so much trash.

[Did you know that 89% of all statistics are made up on the spot?]
 
Topic:  Media Bias

[Made up example].  ["]The bush administration spent only 4.8 billion
 in AIDS research last year.  Clinton is proposing to spend 16
 billion over the next 4 years.["]

The word "only" is a small word and 16 is bigger than 4.8.  

[except that this example is made up and "generic"]....
There are no factual errors, therefore "we the media" are unbiased.  

I get so mad sometimes that I yell at my wife (who is quietly retching 
for the same reasons).  Has our society become so unsophisticated that
we don't recognize the subtle influence of carefully chosen language
as "bias"?

I have really seen things very much like this.

Perhaps:

  1)  The media participants are so stupid that they can't do
      simple arithmetic or don't understand simple declarative
      sentences.  Remember the movie "Network News"(?)
  2)  The media just print what the campaigns hand out because
      they are too lazy to do otherwise
  3)  The media participants have a well established program
      of disinformation.
  4)  The media participants know that bias sells.

Real example:

  Utley(sp) on the "network news" was doing a "truth in political
  advertising" spot one night a couple of weeks ago (Saturday 9/24
  I think).  A GOP add claimed that Clinton had raised the sales
  tax in Arkansas 33%.  Oh No, claims Ultey!  The tax was raised
  ONLY 1% (View chart showing sales tax going from 3% to 4%).  I
  think I could be heard in New York (I was in Bodega Bay, CA at the
  time).  Perhaps Utley should be asked how to spell potatoe.

You know, what really saddens me?  I bet most of the viewers
looked at each other and said.  ["]See Martha, we can't trust
those Bush ads.  Full of distortions of the facts.["]

Of course both of my examples show bias in favor of the Demos because
I observe that there is so much bias in this direction that examples
in the other direction might simply be honest mistakes.

By the way, reaction to the above is a test.

Media personalities have so much influence over "public opinion"
that they must be held to a much higher standard than mere mortals.
 
I am still a "none of the above" voter (that includes all the
other parties as well) but feel that I must vote as perhaps
part of the 2% of possible voters that actually thinks about
all sides of issues before making decisions. :)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot