6 ms·

Fox news only exists as a balance to the left-lean of most other corporate media. And since it's existed, the others have felt free to embrace their partisanshi

by beaner 6y ago

Fox news only exists as a balance to the left-lean of most other corporate media. And since it's existed, the others have felt free to embrace their partisanship more deeply. As a result, today, CNN is just as partisan as Fox.

QuesnayJr 6y ago
I don't understand how someone can say this with a straight face. Whitewater was a New York Times created scandal. It was the New York Times that ran cover for the Bush administration in invading Iraq. It was the New York Times that a week before the 2016 election ran dueling stories that played up the Clinton e-mail story and simultaneously absolved Trump of any links to Russia. All of these stories got widespread media attention by the so-called left-leaning media. The Whitewater story never amounted to anything, the grounds for invading Iraq were all lies, and the Clinton e-mail story lead to nothing while Trump's ties led to a long-running investigation that led to jail time for several members of Trump's campaign. If Biden wins, then by spring, the leading story in the "left-leaning" media will be that we need to cut social spending to combat the deficit. The deficit miraculously stops being a story whenever a Republican is in the White House, and becomes a major priority whenever a Democrat is in the White House. Just because people in the media think that racism is bad doesn't make the media left-leaning.
- nailer 6y ago
  > simultaneously absolved Trump of any links to Russia The investigation also failed to find sufficient evidence to charge anyone in the Trump administration with collusion. At this point Russiagate is thoroughly debunked.
  - croon 6y ago
    Collusion is a very specific charge. I wouldn't call "Russiagate" in any way debunked given this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_the_Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_th...
    - TMWNN 6y ago
      No American on that list got indicted of anything related to "Russiagate", but for unrelated procedural crimes discovered during the investigation. (You know the saying that everyone wittingly or unwittingly commits three crimes a day?) Several Russian agents were indicted for Russiagate-related things; Putin will turn his goons over to US custody any day now.
      - croon 6y ago
        > but for unrelated procedural crimes discovered during the investigation The "unrelated" is completely false, which invalidates your entire argument. Name an American indicted for unrelated crimes and maybe I can fill in the connection. It's mostly covered in the wiki under each of their paragraphs though.
        TMWNN 6y ago
        >It's mostly covered in the wiki under each of their paragraphs though. You're hoping that people won't bother to read said Wiki, or get confused by the legalese. Papadopoulos: Indicted for making a false statement to FBI. Manafort and Gates: Indicted for not registering as foreign agents of Ukraine (which, you might have noticed, is sort of an enemy of Russia right now) Flynn: Indicted for making a false statement to FBI. (Forced by lack of legal fees into pleading guilty, which later caused problems when the government tried to drop charges.) Pinedo (Who? Exactly): Indicted for identity fraud. van der Zwaan: Indicted for making false statements (and not an American, anyway). Cohen: Indicted for making false statements. Stone: Indicted for making false statements and witness tampering. Then we have people like Carter Page, whose name was raked over the coals for years because a FBI lawyer intentionally altered evidence (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/fbi-ig-report-russia-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/fbi-ig-report...) showing that far from being a Russian asset, Page had for years briefed the CIA every time he met with suspicious Russians. (Got to love how the Times describes said altering evidence as a "serious error".) You want an actual Russiagate-related indictment and guilty plea? Kevin Clinesmith, said FBI lawyer, is your man.
  - QuesnayJr 6y ago
    It's really not. Mueller went as far as he felt his remit allowed, and turned it over to the Justice Department, where Barr was determined not to follow up on it. Expect this to change in January.
- bnlpmk 6y ago
  Indeed, both parties want to exploit the people who do actual work. The champagne socialists of FAANG, the New York Times etc. want to preserve inflated academic salaries and cozy bullshit jobs, the right wants to preserve existing ownership and rent seeking. Two sides of the same coin.
- apatters 6y ago
  If you genuinely believe the mainstream US media doesn't lean left, have a look at the Media Bias Chart: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/ https://www.adfontesmedia.com/ The methodology is thorough and non-partisan (that's the point). Note that the triangle's apex is literally left of center.
  - croon 6y ago
    Isn't the vertical alignment much more important than the horizontal? Not that it counters your point, but the left alignment at the top is very minor.
    - beaner 6y ago
      It would be more helpful if the logos were encased in circles, sized to represent the reach of the publication. This chart is part of the equation, but it says nothing about which of the publications in it have more influence.
  - QuesnayJr 6y ago
    So how do you explain the many times in which the media trumpets news stories that benefit the Republicans that don't hold up? Judith Miller's reporting on the lead-up to the Iraq War, reporting on leaks from the Democrats of dubious news-worthiness (like John Podesta's risotto recipe). If you want a chart, look at this chart of the most common words associated with each candidate in 2016: https://www.businessinsider.com/gallup-candidate-word-clouds-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-emails-2016-11?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/gallup-candidate-word-clouds... That's as clear an example of media bias in favor of the Republicans as you can wish for.

by beaner 6y ago

QuesnayJr 6y ago

I don't understand how someone can say this with a straight face. Whitewater was a New York Times created scandal. It was the New York Times that ran cover for the Bush administration in invading Iraq. It was the New York Times that a week before the 2016 election ran dueling stories that played up the Clinton e-mail story and simultaneously absolved Trump of any links to Russia. All of these stories got widespread media attention by the so-called left-leaning media. The Whitewater story never amounted to anything, the grounds for invading Iraq were all lies, and the Clinton e-mail story lead to nothing while Trump's ties led to a long-running investigation that led to jail time for several members of Trump's campaign. If Biden wins, then by spring, the leading story in the "left-leaning" media will be that we need to cut social spending to combat the deficit. The deficit miraculously stops being a story whenever a Republican is in the White House, and becomes a major priority whenever a Democrat is in the White House. Just because people in the media think that racism is bad doesn't make the media left-leaning.

nailer 6y ago
> simultaneously absolved Trump of any links to Russia The investigation also failed to find sufficient evidence to charge anyone in the Trump administration with collusion. At this point Russiagate is thoroughly debunked.
- croon 6y ago
  Collusion is a very specific charge. I wouldn't call "Russiagate" in any way debunked given this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_the_Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_th...
  - TMWNN 6y ago
    No American on that list got indicted of anything related to "Russiagate", but for unrelated procedural crimes discovered during the investigation. (You know the saying that everyone wittingly or unwittingly commits three crimes a day?) Several Russian agents were indicted for Russiagate-related things; Putin will turn his goons over to US custody any day now.
    - croon 6y ago
      > but for unrelated procedural crimes discovered during the investigation The "unrelated" is completely false, which invalidates your entire argument. Name an American indicted for unrelated crimes and maybe I can fill in the connection. It's mostly covered in the wiki under each of their paragraphs though.
      - TMWNN 6y ago
        >It's mostly covered in the wiki under each of their paragraphs though. You're hoping that people won't bother to read said Wiki, or get confused by the legalese. Papadopoulos: Indicted for making a false statement to FBI. Manafort and Gates: Indicted for not registering as foreign agents of Ukraine (which, you might have noticed, is sort of an enemy of Russia right now) Flynn: Indicted for making a false statement to FBI. (Forced by lack of legal fees into pleading guilty, which later caused problems when the government tried to drop charges.) Pinedo (Who? Exactly): Indicted for identity fraud. van der Zwaan: Indicted for making false statements (and not an American, anyway). Cohen: Indicted for making false statements. Stone: Indicted for making false statements and witness tampering. Then we have people like Carter Page, whose name was raked over the coals for years because a FBI lawyer intentionally altered evidence (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/fbi-ig-report-russia-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/fbi-ig-report...) showing that far from being a Russian asset, Page had for years briefed the CIA every time he met with suspicious Russians. (Got to love how the Times describes said altering evidence as a "serious error".) You want an actual Russiagate-related indictment and guilty plea? Kevin Clinesmith, said FBI lawyer, is your man.
- QuesnayJr 6y ago
  It's really not. Mueller went as far as he felt his remit allowed, and turned it over to the Justice Department, where Barr was determined not to follow up on it. Expect this to change in January.
bnlpmk 6y ago
Indeed, both parties want to exploit the people who do actual work. The champagne socialists of FAANG, the New York Times etc. want to preserve inflated academic salaries and cozy bullshit jobs, the right wants to preserve existing ownership and rent seeking. Two sides of the same coin.
apatters 6y ago
If you genuinely believe the mainstream US media doesn't lean left, have a look at the Media Bias Chart: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/ https://www.adfontesmedia.com/ The methodology is thorough and non-partisan (that's the point). Note that the triangle's apex is literally left of center.
- croon 6y ago
  Isn't the vertical alignment much more important than the horizontal? Not that it counters your point, but the left alignment at the top is very minor.
  - beaner 6y ago
    It would be more helpful if the logos were encased in circles, sized to represent the reach of the publication. This chart is part of the equation, but it says nothing about which of the publications in it have more influence.
- QuesnayJr 6y ago
  So how do you explain the many times in which the media trumpets news stories that benefit the Republicans that don't hold up? Judith Miller's reporting on the lead-up to the Iraq War, reporting on leaks from the Democrats of dubious news-worthiness (like John Podesta's risotto recipe). If you want a chart, look at this chart of the most common words associated with each candidate in 2016: https://www.businessinsider.com/gallup-candidate-word-clouds-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-emails-2016-11?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/gallup-candidate-word-clouds... That's as clear an example of media bias in favor of the Republicans as you can wish for.