Monday, October 18, 2010
With conservative papers like this who needs the liberal media?
The New York Post endorses Andrew Cuomo for Governor of New York. It's not really surprising though, you knew something was up with its heavily skewed reporting in the gubernatorial race led by State Editor Fred Dicker. The Post goes against the Tea Party in the person of Buffalo businessman Carl Paladino which only proves yet again the old Z-maxim that everything tends towards liberalism in the end. I love New York but politically it's an absolutely depressing state to live in and when the only purportedly conservative paper in town so heartily endorses a liberal Democrat for Governor you have to just block your mind off to it and enter the voting booth. More and more on a daily basis I agree with the soapster that there really is not one whit of difference between (name a typical mainstream conservative and liberal) and I'm gonna apply this to the media here. Conservative media, what's that?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Newspapers shouldn't endorse candidates PERIOD. They should simply report the news. But, as we all know, they can't even do that.
ReplyDeleteWhat's most pathetic though is the sheeple that watch FOX News and think their getting "fair" unbiased information.
Consider that back in 1980, approxiamately 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the US. Today, news media is concentrated into six.
If you're getting your "news" and "information" from any of these 6 (or their affiliates) God help you.
Time Warner
Walt Disney
Viacom
News Corporation
CBS Corporation
NBC Universal
Great Article here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lewrockwell.com/rep/who-owns-the-media.html
And, you're right...there's little to no difference in Dem or Repub candidates and if their were, it wouldn't hardly matter as they are near the bottom of the pyramid. It's the people/organizations above them we need to worry about.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of News Papers, our Local News Paper has been Blasting the Tea Party Lately, especially this one Particular News Commentator. He Actually Showed Up at one of Our Meetings and was Accusing us of Things that he had no Proof of, Yelling Insults at us and Disrupting our Meeting.
ReplyDeleteI Keep Wondering why the Media is so Darn Liberal, even the Local News Papers of more Conservative Counties and Towns. This Makes no Sense to me. And Why do they have such a Monopoly? Why is there Only one Paper Per. Town? Why doesn't anyone ever Start Up a more Conservative News Paper?
I Think that there are some Good Republican Candidates, but they do not Win in the Primaries and so we are Stuck with the RINO's and yes, some of them are Indeed not much Different than the Democrats. I do not at all Like the RINO that is Currently Running for Governor in California, so I am Planning on Voting for the Independent that the Tea Party is Recommending.
I have to agree with Soapster on this. The media is horribly biased and caters to which side it endorses, but it shouldn't be endorsing either side--its job is to report the FACTS.
ReplyDeleteThere is no such thing as "fair and balanced", so if you want something even remotely close, watch an hour of Fox and then an hour of CNN.
Does this mean that a 'conservative' paper isn't allowed to criticize a 'conservative' candidate because that would indicate it's 'trending towards liberalism'?
ReplyDeleteI'm just askin. There's a lot to criticize with Paladino no matter who you are or what side of the locker room you claim.
Satyavati,
ReplyDeleteMost Forms of News Media Criticize the Right more than the Left and Leave Out News that Favors the Right, rather than the Left. This is what Constitutes the Bias.
I don't know who that Next Comment below Saty's is Directed at, but I won't be Surprised if Z Deletes it because it adds nothing Meaningful to our discussion.
Doubt endorsements play a part in elections. Michelle Bachmann's opponent in Minnesota has been endorsed by every newspaper in that district.
ReplyDeleteMs. Bachman in turn is endorsed by TP and the pulpit..
To the jerk that calls him or herself Warren Buffett.
ReplyDeleteI guess things are getting pretty bad in the Progressive party these days that you have to resort to posting that vile trash, about someone you know nothing about, except her political beliefs.
But that's what you people do. And you call it Modern Liberalism!
I call it Freeloading Socialism.
With any luck, when your kids are old enough they may turn out smart enough to think for themselves, and not like you.
BB,
ReplyDeleteYeh, you see, News Papers should not Endorse Candidates.
Saty: "Does this mean that a 'conservative' paper isn't allowed to criticize a 'conservative' candidate because that would indicate 'trending towards liberalism'?"
ReplyDeleteIn a word............YES.
They can indeed criticize a conservative candidate but the Post went out of its way early on to attack Paladino beginning with his love child and then jumped all over his rather temperate in my view comments re gays. IF the goal of your reporting and endorsing is to put a liberal Democrat in office then YES this 'conservative' paper and you were right to cap that btw IS tending towards liberalism.
"There's alot to criticize with Paladino"
ReplyDeleteWell shiver me timbers. There's also alot to criticize about you, there's also alot to criticize about me, hell there's alot to criticize about all of us because, well we're human but the main concern should be would he be an effective governor? Push comes to shove if I find his political philosophy congenial then I really don't care much about his penchant for the questionable comment, it doesn't really concern me. That's my pragmatic calculus because the goal of conservatism is more important to me then worrying about the niggling flaws of any one person. Let's say soap is irritating, hard to get along with, says bad things, takes too long in the shower and doesn't hose his pubic hairs down the drain well I really don't give a flying ~ if he'd be a kickass senator. The goal of conservatism is more important and since the Post didn't take this same pragmatic approach I do question the paper and their motives.
So soap would you say FOX is conservative or has a conservative bias as is often alleged?
ReplyDelete"the goal of conservatism is more important"...
ReplyDeletehmm. I want to think about this, because it kind of makes me feel like you're saying that it doesn't really matter if the person is a complete ass and/or Satan and/or closet homicidal maniac... as long as they're 'conservative'.
I understand the part about what you do on your own time is your own and that's not what we're hiring you for.
On the other hand, political figures are just that, political figures and as such get (rightly or wrongly) held to a rather high moral standard.
Now, no one's perfect but if the pot is going around calling the kettle black then maybe the pot might need to be told to STFU, or at least have it brought up that the pot is equally black as any kettle out there. See my point?
It's like, just because you're a 'conservative' paper doesn't mean that you ignore any and all faults of the 'conservative' candidate. That's equally unfair and misleading, don't you think?
I would not say FOX News is Conservative. What I would say is they are a wing of the Republican party establishment and they serve this interest and this interest exclusively. People like to think of them as this alternative to CNN, NBC, ABC, et al.
ReplyDeleteI don't. All peas...same pod.
There is a Liberal Tea Party Hating Commentator that is Given more Space in our Local News Paper than anyone Else and that is Bias.
ReplyDeleteSoap may not Agree with me, but if the Liberals don't like FOX News, which they don't, than FOX News is more Conservative than the Rest of them. They're not Libertarian, but that would be a Significant Bias that even I wouldn't Prefer.
Character is Important, for those who Lack Character can not be Trusted to Keep their Promises and if this is so, then nothing that they Claim to Believe in Matters.
I hate to say it, but I do not Know of any Conservative News Papers. Magazines maybe, but not News Papers.
As soon as Fox adopted that 'Fair And Balanced' tagline it became glaringly obvious how partisan and agenda-driven they actually are. Anyone who feels the need to drive home 24/7 that they're 'Fair And Balanced' is trying to convince you of it.
ReplyDeleteThere's plenty of people, of course, who actually buy into that propaganda, but Soap nailed it: Murdoch whores for the Republicans in the most blatant of ways.
He's given to Hillary Clinton on her efforts as well as a number of Democrats believe it or not.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/Rupert_Murdoch.php
"Soap may not Agree with me, but if the Liberals don't like FOX News, which they don't, than FOX News is more Conservative than the Rest of them."
That doesn't make them conservative. It merely implies that they, precisely as I stated, shill for the GOP.
A news organization in order to be reputable in my opinion needn't be Libertarian.
"Newspapers… serve as chimnies to carry off noxious vapors and smoke." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thaddeus Kosciusko, April 2, 1802
I'm going to highlight a Saty point here because it really drives home how I feel about this and why political pragmatism has become more dominant in my thinking of late:
ReplyDelete"It's like just because you're a 'conservative' paper doesn't mean that you ignore any and all faults of the 'conservative' candidate."
Why not? If you're totally pragmatic about it why does it even matter? Here's where I'm coming from on this and the Post, by them going over all of Paladino's faults this can only help to put a liberal Democrat, Andrew Cuomo in the NY Statehouse so the ends here are not at all conservative.
"That's equally unfair and misleading don't you think?"
No I don't. Now unless Paladino's personal deficits are so overwhelming it makes no sense in my view for a 'conservative' paper to keep harping on them. Again I'm looking at it mainly through a pragmatic prism, to elect a conservative to an imporant office. I'm being totally honest here and giving you an honest response so you have to respect me for that so nothing you can say here Saty is going to sway me.
It's like just because you're a 'conservative' paper doesn't mean that you ignore any and all faults of the 'conservative' candidate."
ReplyDeleteWhy not?
Credibility.
By forgoing criticism of your own candidate(s) as the party etc. was want to do with Bush 43, they end up having ZERO in the credibility department with which to criticize similar actions by Obama.
Disagree and Bush wasn't a conservative btw so that's a whole OTHER ballgame.
ReplyDeleteLet me put it another way, if the effect of all this focusing by a conservative paper on the flaws of a conservative candidate is to help put a liberal into office was it worth it?
ReplyDeleteChew on that for awhile as I have to go for now.
Of course it was worth it. If the "conservative" candidate was simply going to vote for shit like TARP, Cash for Clunkers, Ethanol Subsidies, et al. (which a whole host of Republicans did) then what is the difference?
ReplyDeleteIf you have your choice between leather or pleather which one do you want?
Bad policy is bad policy and I just, for the life of me, cannot figure out how the hell you can have a true opposition party by your theory.
Case in point:
ReplyDeleteBush-era wind farm jobs....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39759042/ns/business/
Then of course Bush wasn't a conservative but isn't that what is at issue here; the criticism and/or critique of a candidate and their fidelity towards conservative principle?
Your misunderstanding my theory then. In this scenario I'm talking about a TRUE conservative running who for whatever reason certain organs of the conservative press pick on. Is THAT worth it, not putting a TRUE conservative in office?
ReplyDelete& let's face it, Andrew Cuomo is far far more liberal or far far less conservative however you want to put it than Carl Paladino. The Post going after him might make sense if Paladino were a RINO let's say or weak on conservative credentials but for the life of me the Post's theory doesn't make sense.
ReplyDeleteThis just across the wire, Juan Williams has been fired from NPR for comments about Muslims he made on O'Reilly. Just once, just once I'd like to see a news outfit tell people we're gonna go with free speech this time.
"TRUE" is relative and completely based on one person's opinion.
ReplyDeleteSo you might think someone is a "TRUE" conservative, yet if some other person who considers themselves to be conservative disagrees with this person's policies, then they won't think the person is a "TRUE" conservative.
So it comes back to definitions; who makes them and who's the authority on them?
Either way, I think a reputable news source has the responsibility to report on ALL the news, palatable or not.
I agree with Pam though that newspapers shouldn't be in the business of endorsing candidates and therein lies the problem. The other thing you mentioned had soap all over it but as for me if someone is even 80% conservative they're good enough to vote for.
ReplyDeleteGood for you, Z. I Agree Totally with your most Recent Comment.
ReplyDeleteMy going rate is around 80%. I think soapie's is like 99.99% pure like Ivory (hey maybe that's part of the reason he calls himself soap).
ReplyDeletelololol
ReplyDelete& on the other side you had DD2, remember him? and his going rate regarding McCain was only a 60%!!!
ReplyDelete