Thread: Does the US media have a liberal bias?

In an another blatant example of left-wing media bias we see New York Times Relegates Libya Email Bombshell to Page A5 Under Dull Headline

New York Times Relegates Libya Email Bombshell to Page A5 Under Dull Headline | Media Research Center

Won't help 'cause the toothpaste can't get back in the tube you know...

Getting a bit overheated there in the blogosphere, innit? Two weeks before the election too. Go figure.

If the words left wing bias, state run media, bombshell, bigger than Watergate, keeps getting better, chickens coming home to roost, communist, and socialist were banned, the rightwing blogosphere would go silent.

Originally Posted by sabang

Getting a bit overheated there in the blogosphere, innit? Two weeks before the election too. Go figure.

It's gonna get even more heated for Obama as word leaks out he let an ambassador and 3 others deliberately perish for political reasons...

Crikey, if things get a wee bit heated for a President allowing 3 people to die in the middle east then one would have thought that GW would have turned into a deep fat fryer around a decade ago. Oh yes, i recall he also got re-elected

You gotta love it!!!

China’s People’s Daily launches attack on The New York Times.

Check this out:

The mouthpiece newspaper of China’s Communist Party has launched a blistering attack on The New York Times, accusing it of “faking” and “distorting” news and being a government “propaganda tool”.

They're just callin' a spade a spade. How much coverage of Benghazie-Gate has the NYT devoted to the scandal?

Zilch...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

They're just callin' a spade a spade. How much coverage of Benghazie-Gate has the NYT devoted to the scandal? Zilch...

Another blatant lie.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/world/middleeast/no-specific-warnings-in-benghazi-attack.html
https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/l...26Q5fQ72Q3dQ30
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/wo...pagewanted=all
The Mystery of Benghazi - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/us...est-words.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/us...zi-attack.html
Attack in Libya Shows Contrasting Views of Obama and Romney - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/wo...pagewanted=all
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/wo...pagewanted=all

^
Puff pieces written to support the Obama Regime.
No hard-hitting commentary like that pesky drone that Benghazie Barry watched as the live action went down...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Puff pieces written to support the Obama Regime.

Ahem..

For days after the attack, as it became clearer that the Benghazi violence was a Qaeda operation rather than a protest, White House officials continued to stress the importance of the “hateful” and “disgusting” video, and its supposed role as a catalyst for what Susan Rice, the ambassador to the United Nations, insisted was a spontaneous attack.


This narrative was pushed on Sunday morning programs, on late-night talk shows and at news conferences, by everyone from Rice to Hillary Clinton to the president himself. When Obama spoke at the United Nations shortly after the attacks, the video was referenced six times in the text; Al Qaeda was referenced only once.
Eventually, the White House let the video slip quietly out of its public rhetoric, and refocused on terrorism instead. But everything else that’s come out about Benghazi has seemed much more damning because the administration practiced a strange denial at the outset. The missed warnings, the weaknesses in security, the drip-drip of detail unspigoted by reporting and Congressional hearings — all of it would have been received differently if the White House hadn’t spent a week acting as if it had something big to lose by calling terrorism terrorism.



.....




Another, more plausible possibility is that precisely because this White House wants to be seen as tough on terrorism, it’s loath to acknowledge the possibility that it doesn’t have Al Qaeda completely on the run.

....

If the Republican nominee were less reflexively hawkish, the White House might be facing the more comprehensive critique that it deserves — and the story wouldn’t be about just the specifics of Benghazi, but also the possibility that Obama’s entire policy in the region has put American interests and lives at risk.

Puff piece indeed...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/op...-benghazi.html

^
All well and good although being the 'Newspaper of Record' the NYT failed to note Obama watching those men die, live, and then jet off to Vegas, Baby?

Did they?

First you lie that the NYT didn't cover it.

Then when you are shown that they did you dismiss the coverage as 'puff pieces', which is another lie.

When you are shown that they weren't puff pieces you move the goalposts.

^
They were 'puff pieces' meant to give Obama a smokescreen but in the end, it's failing. Gingritch came out today with a statement that he believes at least two of the Network News people have those secret emails detailing more on Benghazie Barry's culpability. As with Watergate, the final word won't come overnight but today there's lots of 'Deep Throats' out there!

No finer example of Leftist bias in the media than when the NYT called Dubya's 2.7% GDP a "Letdown" but Obama's lower GDP a "Steady Improvement"

"The leftist bias of the New York Times beautifully encapsulated in seven words used about a week before two presidential elections. Headline over Saturday’s editorial on the third quarter GDP creeping up to 2.0 percent under Democrat Barack Obama: “Slow but Steady Improvement.” Headline twenty years ago (October 29, 1992) when Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush was in the White House and the third quarter GDP nearly doubled to 2.7 percent: “Gross National Letdown."

These People Are Shameless

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Y'all subscribe to the elimination of conservatives?

Just the ones who read the garbage right wing blogs like pjmedia.com.

The republican party has been eliminating conservatives for several years.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Y'all subscribe to the elimination of conservatives?

That would be terribly destructive towards the society.
Remembering, that the base that drives America is moderate to conservative.

The foundation of American thought is still largely conservative [akin to conventional establishment manner]....regardless of what might be promoted.

Are these people fucked-up or what?

THIS. IS. CNN. CNN Panel: Dorner’s Alleged Murder Spree ‘Exciting,’ Like ‘Denzel Washington Movie.’


Pathetic. Simply pathetic...

Originally Posted by sabang

I think the vultures are circling for Bob Mendez, but right now you have a very limited trail of evidence that can be used in the 'respectable' mainstream media- although there is plenty in the blogosphere. I did a quick google, and it shows all of the main UK papers have carried the story, but the US msm, including Fox, are treating it with kid gloves. Bill O'reilly comments he thinks 'Bob Menendez is in trouble'. Me too, but early days.

This story was originally broken by one Matthew Boyle, working for both the Daily Caller and Breitbart. Matthew Boyle has a shonky reporting history, to say the least- well, you can see who he works for. Parable of the boy that called wolf, booner. The original evidence is 'he said she said' stuff- a tape, of two anonymous women talking via a spanish translator. Prostitution is legal on Dominica, and Bob Mendez is single- it is doubtful this alone will sink him, rather embarass him. But if he has hired prossies below the age of 18, he has committed a US felony..... entirely a more serious matter. Unfortunately, none of the alleged allegers can be contacted, and another accusing Email is from an anonymous source who refuses to come forward. Then there is a denial-
Alleged Prostitute: I've Never Met Bob Menendez
ALSO, I'M NOT A PROSTITUTE, SHE SAYS
Alleged Prostitute: I've Never Met Bob Menendez - Also, I'm not a prostitute, she says

It is hardly a wonder the mainstream US media, including Fox, is treating this with kid gloves. They don't want to get sued out of existence perhaps?

But I mentioned that I think the vultures are circling. Here's why-

It’s getting worse for Bob Menendez

Why we shouldn't surprised by the mess he's made for himself


It wasn’t the best weekend for Bob Menendez. On Saturday, a New York Times editorial called on the New Jersey senator to hand in his Foreign Relations Committee gavel while the Senate ethics committee investigates whether he exerted improper influence to help one of his top donors. On Sunday, his home state newspaper, the Star-Ledger, provided an exhaustive history of Menendez’s two-decade relationship with the donor, Florida eye doctor Salomon Melgen, concluding that “when Melgen acts, Menendez reacts.” And this morning, the Times is reporting new details about the specific actions Menendez has taken on behalf of his benefactor.

There’s no smoking gun in the Star-Ledger report, but it details several instances in which an official action by Menendez on Melgen’s behalf was followed by a hefty donation from Melgen to a Menendez-aligned campaign committee. All told, according to the paper, Melgen and his family members have given $50,000 to Menendez over the last two decades and far more to groups that have advanced Menendez’s political interests — $700,000 last year to a super PAC designed to help Democratic incumbents who (like Menendez) were up for reelection in 2012, and over $100,000 last year to county Democratic organizations in New Jersey, which played a major role in turning out the vote for a ticket that Menendez was part of.

That’s on top of the free flights to the Dominican Republic that Melgen provided Menendez on several occasions; when they came to light recently, Menendez scrambled to reimburse Melgen for the $58,500 cost of using his private jet. Based on financial disclosure documents, that reimbursement represented between 32 and 87 percent of the senator’s net worth.

At the very least, this all amounts to one awful perception problem for Menendez. It’s now been reported that he called and met with federal officials to weigh in on Melgen’s behalf after he was accused of overbilling the government by $8.9 million for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.

Full Article- It’s getting worse for Bob Menendez - Salon.com


An excellent article from 'libbie' Salon- the rw blogosphere might learn something from reading some real reporting. Menendez is at minimum embarassed, but I think his association with this shonky eye doctor may well sink him, or at least leave his Senatorial ambitions in tatters. Bonked hookers under the age of 18? (not padophilia, booner) We'll see, but that would certainly be a nail in the coffin. On the basis of a quick smell test, I think Senator Menendez is in for a rough ride.

The reason the whole main stream media is treating these allegations cautiously is obvious booner- it is not a question of left or right wing bias, rather journalistic integrity and, of course, the ever present legal department.

Of course it is a question of so-called 'journalistic integrity'. If this guy Menendez was a Republican there would be howls of outrage that here we have another right-wing sex maniac on the loose. If you can't see that, the blinders are really sitting too tight on your objectivity.

But let's look at this issue from another perspective which I was attempting to illustrate thru a graphic which was not photoshopped. Again, what we're talking about here is bias in the left-wing media. Recall the numbers of stories re Menendez vs Rubio and the H2O controversy? When the least little possible negative news item emerges regarding a Republican is brought out, it's displayed for all it's worth to mock/shame, you name it but when a member of Obama's party commits a discretion, whoa! Circle the wagons, boys! That's what this thread is addressing.

BTW, what is a 'shonky' reporting history? If he was working for the HuffPo or the Atlantic or the New Yorker, that would certify his credentials?

Your bias is shining thru with total clarity.

Oh, should mention that this poster is not 'starting a fight'. This disclaimer is necessary in light of what appears to be an erroneous view of my posting of late.

An addendum:

There could be an interpretation that the graphics I posted earlier were photoshopped in the sense that there was text at the bottom of each pic? In that case, according to the rules in Issues, they were verboten - I guess.

Back on topic:

"70% of NJ voters are aware of the allegations surrounding Menendez and steps he allegedly took to benefit Dr. Salomon Melgen, a major donor to his campaign. Among these voters, 67% believe the allegations are worth investigating. Only 23% believe the allegations are politically motivated"

New Jersey (NJ) Poll - February 21, 2013 - Donor Controversy Takes Toll O | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Which should put to rest it's a witch hunt regarding underage hookers.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Of course it is a question of so-called 'journalistic integrity'.

Then why is Fox treating it with kid gloves too booner? Do they lack integrity?

Stories which are not black and white, which are in the grey area, are too vague for many on the extreme right to comprehend. Careful consideration of valid information is lacking and gossip is given full attention. The stories must be wound up to a high pitch Jerry Springer type sideshow to get any play in the right wing blogosphere.