From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: CNN Anchor Admits Pro-Clinton Bias
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:51:07 GMT


born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com (Christopher J. Born) writes:

>In  <1992Sep7.110455.2113@afit.af.mil>  jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>>
>> Well, you've sold me!  I guess all that liberal bias I see in the news
>> isn't really there afterall, since, as you say, it doesn't make any
>> sense for it to be there.
>>
>> You know, it's funny.  When I brought this up (and I certainly wasn't
>> the first), I gave many examples right from the paper, TV, etc.  I
>> posted polls showing the liberal tendencies of the media, I posted
>> statistics on how biased the media was with regard to the abortion

>Unfortunately I haven't seen your appends but await more.
>I will, however, respond to this one.

>> debate, and gave plenty of *reasons* why it exists.  And about the only
>> criticism I received was that my "evidence" was purely annecdotal.

>'my "evidence"'  Could there be "bias" in the creation
>of  "your evidence."

I feel as if I'm repeating myself, but my fault for not realizing the
crossposts...  I have never attempted to *prove* bias with any example.
I merely put them out to show people who refuse to believe bias exists
what it looks like.  (Sorry, used that "people" word again...)

>I follow the topic of "bias in the media" and find it quite interesting.
>I had an append just recently that this append addresses.  It's point
>was that even if the media is biased (maybe it is, I tend to think it isn't),
>people pay for it by reading it, tuning into it, etc...  What are you
>proposing to do about that?  Money talks, media biased just contributes!

The only thing I can do about it is realize it's there and look at the
news very skeptically.  

>> But there is another crowd who try to show that it doesn't really exist
>> because of reasons like you state above.  "There is really a
>> conservative bias, because the media is owned by businesses."  "There is
>> really a consumer bias, because they have to sell papers."  And of

>Definitely.  That's my point.

>> course your assertion that there are indeed reporters who are friendly
>> with the President.  None of this jives with what I, and others, see
>> every night on the news or read in the papers.  These are just attempts
>> to rationalize your own positions and treat the "whiners" as being
>> uncredible.
>>
>> There is one major difference between what I've been saying
>> and people like you.  I see the bias, post examples and look for the

>"people like you"  Whoa!

Been posting long?  I think you may need a little thicker skin if this
kind of stuff offends you.  

>> I still maintain that no honest person can objectively watch or read the
>> majority of the news and *not* see a liberal bias.  It's there, and
>> plenty of people in the news media know it and admit it.  And pointing

>"plenty of people in the news media know it and admit it."  Just because
>one reporter admits biased does a "plenty" make!

Actually, I said "plenty of people".  Does that imply one reporter?  If
this thread is the first you've heard a reporter or editor admit a
liberal bias in the media, you need to get out more.

>> out that there are conservative reporters, or that the media has a
>> product to sell, or that they are owned by business makes for a good
>> foundation for showing why your brand of bias exists, but *nobody* has
>> given us anything other than these premises.  Show me how these premises

>"us"  Who is "us?"

Are you just trying to be obstinate, or something?  

>I find your append very devisive.  Or, is that a "liberal, not 
>politically correct" word to use.
>
>The argument that the media is "biased" is just another means to 
>divide and distract the masses (of which I'm a part of and I 
>admit, I've been distacted) from discussing the issues.  Instead 
>of discussing the issues, we spend our timediscussing the means 
>in which the issues are discussed (which could actually be an
>issue).

What was devisive about it?  Because I used the word "people"?  And
getting to the issues is what this is all about.  If there is a liberal
bias present in the media, some issues won't ever be brought out, and
others will be pummelled unmercifully.  If there were no bias (on any
side) we could look at the facts objectively and make up our minds based
on those facts and not the opinions of reporters and editors.

-- 

Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.news-media,talk.politics.misc