It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Harvard Study Reveals HUGE Extent of Anti-Trump Media Bias

page: 7
89
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.


Probably the realized early-on it was BS, so they didn't give it the attention, some nuts would have liked. Like Pizza-gate. They didn't cover it because it was such BS. Fodder for Alex Jones and his ilk.


So I guess there BS detector was on the fritz when the whole "Golden Shower" thing was making the rounds or the Ivanka Trump billboard or the Martin Luther King bust being removed from the White House etc, etc, etc.




posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. Well said!



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Well, that's one reason I was thinking about this in terms of the FEC. Its quite obvious these news outlets are drastically influencing elections.

I simply want them shut down. Leftist and Conservative, if you like, but these aren't "news" outlets, they're campaign propaganda outlets. ENDLESS campaign propaganda. I just want "news", as in, "news" events!



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel
Replying to the bolded text.

As professional journalists, I would most definitely expect them not to react to it. The same way I expect professional athletes not to beat the crap out of fans when they get taunted. The same way I expect a police officer not to use excessive force because a criminal called him a pig. Sure these things happen but usually when it does those actions are condemned not enabled and applauded.

There is the ideal and then there is the reality. Humans strive for the ideal, but we are flawed creatures. I am just stating how reality works.


The reality is that in my example (athletes, cops) most act professionally where as journalists these days have shown to not consider professionalism part of the job. If your reality consists of people in positions where they are expected to act professionally act like middle school rumor mongers I don't think I have much more to say on the subject as our realities are very different.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Lamestream nowdays looks like this:

CNN is on first, NBC is on second, CBS is on third, ABC is pitching and FOX is..... I don't know...



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.

Stop pretending like Fox isn't mainstream.


OK, I don't recall Fox running stories about it every other day or even that often to be honest. But even if they did that is ONE news outlet compared to Trumps's all BUT one.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel
Replying to the bolded text.

As professional journalists, I would most definitely expect them not to react to it. The same way I expect professional athletes not to beat the crap out of fans when they get taunted. The same way I expect a police officer not to use excessive force because a criminal called him a pig. Sure these things happen but usually when it does those actions are condemned not enabled and applauded.

There is the ideal and then there is the reality. Humans strive for the ideal, but we are flawed creatures. I am just stating how reality works.


The reality is that in my example (athletes, cops) most act professionally where as journalists these days have shown to not consider professionalism part of the job. If your reality consists of people in positions where they are expected to act professionally act like middle school rumor mongers I don't think I have much more to say on the subject as our realities are very different.

This is just wrong. I read WaPo every day and every day I read professional articles that report just the facts. Just because there are opinion or analysis articles in there doesn't mean that professionalism has left the profession. You are just being biased.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.

Stop pretending like Fox isn't mainstream.


OK, I don't recall Fox running stories about it every other day or even that often to be honest. But even if they did that is ONE news outlet compared to Trumps's all BUT one.

Dude... The birther controversy was a BIG deal throughout conservative media. To pretend otherwise is just dishonest.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel
Replying to the bolded text.

As professional journalists, I would most definitely expect them not to react to it. The same way I expect professional athletes not to beat the crap out of fans when they get taunted. The same way I expect a police officer not to use excessive force because a criminal called him a pig. Sure these things happen but usually when it does those actions are condemned not enabled and applauded.

There is the ideal and then there is the reality. Humans strive for the ideal, but we are flawed creatures. I am just stating how reality works.


The reality is that in my example (athletes, cops) most act professionally where as journalists these days have shown to not consider professionalism part of the job. If your reality consists of people in positions where they are expected to act professionally act like middle school rumor mongers I don't think I have much more to say on the subject as our realities are very different.

This is just wrong. I read WaPo every day and every day I read professional articles that report just the facts. Just because there are opinion or analysis articles in there doesn't mean that professionalism has left the profession. You are just being biased.


So why can't they report just the facts on Trump. If they can act with professionalism when dealing with other subjects why does that go out the window when reporting on Trump. For the record an "anonymous source" does not equal a fact. It should be a starting point to go out and verify what was said but should not be used as the sole source for a news article.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   
It's funny, conservatives LOVE to attack universities as Liberal Hell Holes until something said university produces that they can use to support their bias.

That said, is it any wonder the most unpopular president in modern history who pushes unpopular policies & does/says/tweets stupid things on an almost daily basis receives negative coverage? Even Fox News can't not report on his short comings.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.

Stop pretending like Fox isn't mainstream.


OK, I don't recall Fox running stories about it every other day or even that often to be honest. But even if they did that is ONE news outlet compared to Trumps's all BUT one.

Dude... The birther controversy was a BIG deal throughout conservative media. To pretend otherwise is just dishonest.


Does not even remotely compare to the media's treatment of Trump. By the way, how many conservative mainsteam media outlets are there compared to liberal media outlets.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Gargamel

Anonymous sources are part and parcel of professional journalism. They have gone hand-in-hand together since the profession was started. The only time they stopped being credible in the public's eyes is when Trump said so and his followers blindly listened without vetting the information being leaked.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.

Stop pretending like Fox isn't mainstream.


OK, I don't recall Fox running stories about it every other day or even that often to be honest. But even if they did that is ONE news outlet compared to Trumps's all BUT one.

Dude... The birther controversy was a BIG deal throughout conservative media. To pretend otherwise is just dishonest.


Does not even remotely compare to the media's treatment of Trump. By the way, how many conservative mainsteam media outlets are there compared to liberal media outlets.

Compare? Who is comparing? I'm saying they are both guilty of doing this and you are being biased by saying this is only a problem of Trump's. The minority party's media outlets are ALWAYS critical of the sitting President. Even to the ridiculous degree.

Where were you calling out the lack of professionalism in all the journalists keeping the Birther controversy alive all those years?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gargamel

So why can't they report just the facts on Trump.


But they ARE.

They are reporting Trumps own actions and words. Yet the nutjob supporters, instead of blaming their hero for his own words and actions, attempt to blame the media for doing their job.

It's beyond pathetic.


edit on 19/5/2017 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gargamel

Anonymous sources are part and parcel of professional journalism. They have gone hand-in-hand together since the profession was started. The only time they stopped being credible in the public's eyes is when Trump said so and his followers blindly listened without vetting the information being leaked.


So you expect people on a conspiracy site to vet information but not journalists?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Gargamel

I don't recall ever making that point or even insinuating it.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Gargamel

So why can't they report just the facts on Trump.


But they ARE.

They are reporting Trumps own actions and words. Yet the nutjob supporters, instead of blaming their hero for his own words and actions, attempt to blame the media for doing their job.

It's beyond pathetic.



I don't recall any evidence of collusion with the Russians but that story just gets repeated without any facts to back it up. That doesn't sound like Trumps own actions or words, how about peegate, or Martin Luther Kings bust or Ivankas billboard or two scoops of ice cream. Were those based on Trumps own actions or words?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gargamel

I don't recall ever making that point or even insinuating it.


Do you agree that an anonymous source should be backed up with facts? Did you not say that Trump's followers blindly listened without vetting the information? It seems to me you are fine with anonymous sources not being vetted but require Trump followers to vett information that they read. Am I misunderstanding what you have said?



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gargamel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks

I wouldn't know because I'm a liberal.

But just listen to yourself for one second and reflect on this. You are saying that being under scrutiny 100% of the time because of your past (not to mention before he was ever a politician) is justifiable. The fact that you are holding his past against him is already considered bias, now throw on top of that a magnifying glass of scrutiny. You see the problem yet?

You mean like harping on the President's birth certificate for 8 years straight, even after he produces said certificate despite no obligation to do so?


I don't recall the main stream media constantly going on about the Birth certificate thing. I recall individuals who questioned it not being convinced with the photoshopped version of the birth certificate going on about it but I'm pretty sure CNN, ABC, NBC etc.. didn't have constant negative coverage of it.

Stop pretending like Fox isn't mainstream.


OK, I don't recall Fox running stories about it every other day or even that often to be honest. But even if they did that is ONE news outlet compared to Trumps's all BUT one.

Dude... The birther controversy was a BIG deal throughout conservative media. To pretend otherwise is just dishonest.


Does not even remotely compare to the media's treatment of Trump. By the way, how many conservative mainsteam media outlets are there compared to liberal media outlets.

Compare? Who is comparing? I'm saying they are both guilty of doing this and you are being biased by saying this is only a problem of Trump's. The minority party's media outlets are ALWAYS critical of the sitting President. Even to the ridiculous degree.

Where were you calling out the lack of professionalism in all the journalists keeping the Birther controversy alive all those years?


Again, my stance is that the AMOUNT of media bias is not comparable. Not that it doesn't exist on both sides.



posted on May, 19 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jefferton


Lol at the never ending hypocrisy from the right.


Politics = hypocrites



new topics




 
89
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join