PDA

View Full Version : I hate biased journalists...


Dark Luther
11-24-2008, 02:33 PM
Unproffessional jackass.
I hate some things in particular...
Now - one can be partisan, and one can be a journalist,
and one can be a biased journalist.
But at least a good one can hide it somewhat...

This looks as if written by a complete novice...
I'm surprised it was the main story on AOL.



Minnesota Recount Favoring Franken?
By Caleb Howe
Nov 24th 2008 9:53AM
Filed Under:eDemocrats, Breaking News, 2008 Senate


The recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and challenger Al Franken continues this week amid continuing controversy. Around 2,000 ballots have been challenged so far, with 68% of the recount complete. Coleman still seems to have a slight margin, although FiveThirtyEight.com, an electoral projections website with a good reputation, has predicted a possible Franken victory. The Franken campaign has been pressing Minnesota courts to include thousands of rejected absentee ballots, a potential race changer. The state canvassing board will review the Franken challenge this Wednesday.



The recount deadline is December 5th. After the recount is complete, the challenged ballots are to be handed over to a panel of judges, overseen by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. Ritchie, who has a record as an extreme partisan Democrat, and has already criticized the Coleman campaign over the recount, has been trying to convince voters and the press that the recount and his panel will be fair and unbiased. For example, Ritchie claimed that the integrity of the ballots was protected under Minnesota law requiring two judges, one from each party, to handle the ballots at all times. It seems, however, the man in charge isn't up to speed on election law. There is a strong possibility the race will end up in court. There may be challenges over everything from vote tampering to voter registration fraud, including with regard to longtime Ritchie allies ACORN.



Ballot challenges in the race have already been the subject of controversy, with both campaigns making questionable challenges. Examination of the examples available at the Minnesota Public Radio website show the Franken challenges by far to be the most absurd.



The Franken campaign and its thousand or so lawyers have mounted other legal challenges as well. Some bearing surprising fruit, such as last week's decision to allow Franken's team to review the information regarding all rejected absentee ballots. The various legal avenues pursued by the campaign may be an effort to establish a pattern of issues on which they may later build their case to challenge the results. Similarly, the Coleman campaign is highlighting each instance of questionable activity on the part of Minnesota Democrats, which certainly may be used in any post-recount court battle.



Usually, recounts in elections which use the optical scan method don't change the result very much. Convenient for Franken, then, that between the election night and the beginning of the recount the tally changed so often, and so uniformly in his favor. The closer the margin going into the recount, the fewer changes necessary to turn the result. There is some speculation, that "sloppy" Democrat voting may account for more vote changes for Franken than for Coleman.



High profile recounts can often border on the bizarre. But with thousands of preemptive lawyers, ridiculous ballot challenges, mysterious vote tally changes, and Mark Ritchie at the helm, the Minnesota recount is becoming a display of absurdity and underhanded behavior not before seen, particularly in a state which prides itself on a tight election procedure. If and when the recount ends up in court, expect this theater to become a full-fledged circus. The entire situation might be described as darkly humorous.



Al Franken, by the way, was allegedly a comedian. Just making an observation

Rainbow Dash
11-24-2008, 03:05 PM
I'm able to hide my bias better than that when trying to be journalistic.

I just wish I could have had this with me when I took on the idea that the media has a liberal bias in a class debate.

Raist No. 2
11-24-2008, 03:45 PM
Uhh... it's a blog. It's supposed to be biased.

Dark Luther
11-24-2008, 05:12 PM
A blog is quite as much a point of view...
But this was placed as news on the front of AOL...

If this was simply a blog taken and placed forward as a report,
then perhaps it falls under AOL to rethink what it places forward in it's news...

Blatant bias in journalism just annoys me though...
just like the type on cnn and fox...

Rainbow Dash
11-24-2008, 05:44 PM
just like the type on cnn
I'm sorry, what? The only bias on CNN is Jack Cafferty.

Raist No. 2
11-24-2008, 06:30 PM
If this was simply a blog taken and placed forward as a report,
then perhaps it falls under AOL to rethink what it places forward in it's news...That.

Yahoo does the same thing.

Dark Luther
11-25-2008, 04:20 AM
I'm quite sorry but CNN is a very biased network.
Perhaps not as blatantly biased as Fox, they are very much leaned towards the liberal side.

They often place forward very controversial conservatives who tend to get angry or flustered and make inflaming remarks.
Not too commonly, but it happens.
Also, there is the fact that they often are more sympathetic towards democrats than republicans / conservative issues.
They all in all side and cater towards the liberal side, adn report that way...

True - Fox is very blatant, to the point of angering me...
They report falsely on issues, and in a racist manner at times - towards blacks, hispanics, and regularly ridicule when someone of a particular group makes an issue of something offensive.
It also supports O'Reily, among others...
O'Reily at least is a ridiculed joke - but many others are still seen as "journalists"...

They are guilty of the lesser crime of ignoring major issues that go against their logic...
( When Obama won, they were reporting on the senatorial elections and of possible democrat fraud...)
They go out of their way to sustain the fantasy world they have created...

And in counter to CNN, place forward incredibly inept "democrat" voices to counter Republicans in debate.
When they actually speak out and try to make a point - their sources are discredited without merit and their mike is turned off...
An abomination to journalism...

Sigh, I guess I'm still angered over the issue...
Well, actual political issues can be argued elsewhere..., I'll end my rant as it's becoming quite un-becoming...

Rainbow Dash
11-25-2008, 10:56 AM
They often place forward very controversial conservatives who tend to get angry or flustered and make inflaming remarks.
Funny, Fox news and Talk Radio do the same thing.

Also, there is the fact that they often are more sympathetic towards democrats than republicans / conservative issues.
Just because reality has a liberal bias and they report on reality doesn't make them biased.

CNN has nothing to gain from being liberal. That's MSNBC's territory. They've got Fox to compete with on the right, and MSNBC on the left, which pushes them towards the center to pick up the independent viewers. If they move too far to the left, the center right viewers start watching Fox, and vice versa for the other side.

The Deity
11-25-2008, 05:26 PM
CNN has nothing to gain from being liberal. That's MSNBC's territory. They've got Fox to compete with on the right, and MSNBC on the left, which pushes them towards the center to pick up the independent viewers. If they move too far to the left, the center right viewers start watching Fox, and vice versa for the other side.

That's kind of why Fox can claim having the most viewers (or at least they were the most watched news network, I suppose I'm not up on it now). I find CNN to be only marginally less biased than MSNBC.

Rainbow Dash
11-25-2008, 05:43 PM
That's kind of why Fox can claim having the most viewers (or at least they were the most watched news network, I suppose I'm not up on it now)
CNN's giving them a run for their money, but they were still on top last I checked.

I'm dying to hear some specific cases of bias from CNN though (Jack Cafferty aside.)

Dark Luther
11-25-2008, 10:04 PM
Excuse me...?
MSNBC is not by most accounts liberal...
Though unfortunately they had a bad stint during the elections - compared to CNN, they have a good amount of conservative critics and liberal critics...
Actually, usually they tend to place Democrats, not simply liberals...

And a number of the main shows in MSNBC are hosted by very neutral conservatives ( politicly speaking, arguing against bush doesn't make you a liberal, it just makes you a realist ).

I'm not going to site a specific case where cnn is liberal,
if that hurts my argument so be it....
I've watched it before and found the leaning very liberal, but I'm not going to turn the tv on and watch for half an hour to cite specific cases...


FOX has a higher viewer base because half the nation is republican;
the other half is split between CNN and MSNBC...
MSNBC is more neutral, or a little of both..., not to say their great - their news tends to be like a thin soup sometimes...

Rainbow Dash
11-25-2008, 11:15 PM
MSNBC is not by most accounts liberal...
Uh, what?

Raist No. 2
11-26-2008, 12:17 AM
Excuse me...?
MSNBC is not by most accounts liberal...
Though unfortunately they had a bad stint during the elections - compared to CNN, they have a good amount of conservative critics and liberal critics...
Actually, usually they tend to place Democrats, not simply liberals...

And a number of the main shows in MSNBC are hosted by very neutral conservatives ( politicly speaking, arguing against bush doesn't make you a liberal, it just makes you a realist ).That used to be the case, but they've been phasing out the conservative voice for about the past year and a half now in favor of the Matthewses, Olbermanns, and Maddows, until all that's left was basically Scarborough (relegated to the morning) and Buchanan (who's never won a debate in his life, even when he's right).