It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Dronetek
Everyone just needs to remember all of this for the next time Democrats starting wringing their hands about something.
Democrats always think its ok when they do it.
Originally posted by pavil
So the premise of this thread is possible. Some in the media who support Obama are doing more than reporting, they have become part of the process when they openly side with one side or person. To say that the media's reporting of an event has no influence on the public's perception would be a gross understatement.
The thing that is bothering me is that normal news shows and mainstream magazines have seemed to become Op-Ed pieces, in this case for Obama. Normal journalistic standards have seem to been thrown out the door. I can understand certain shows and mags having a bias but it seems supposedly news/current event shows have become shills for one side over the other, when they should be objective and neutral.
According to Bill O'Reilly and others, George Soros is funding Media Matters through Democracy Alliance -- an organization of progressive donors. The Democracy Alliance does not collect and distribute money on behalf of its members. Alliance members donate directly to the organizations of their choice. Media Matters has stated publicly on numerous occasions that Soros has never given money to the organization either directly or through another organization
Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by Dronetek
So if those on the left can influence and election, are you admitting that a right wing channel like Fox can also have influence over it's listeners? People have been saying that for years, and republicans will say it's not true, so it's ok.
We should remember that also.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Given that that's the way it is, it is our responsibility (I believe) to realize that what we hear is NOT the Truth. It's a jazzed up, sensationalized version of slanted and spun entertainment that resembles something that might have some truth in it.
Originally posted by Hal9000
As far as favorable opinions on Obama, I would limit that to only a few reporters like Chris Mathews, whom I have never watched and have only heard that he favors Obama. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there are others on the other side of the fence like Bill O'reilly, who is going to favor McCain.
If you don't like what is happening in the media, then you can't have it one sided. You have to complain about both sides.
McCain thought it was important for Obama to see the war firsthand. Now the media is treating the trip as important, and McCain acts as though they shouldn't.
The Arizona senator may be especially resentful because, in past campaigns, he was seen as the media darling--and even jokingly referred to reporters as "my base." But given that experience, he should know that if the press is treating Obama favorably now, it won't last.
Washington: The Republican presidential hopeful, John McCain, let his frustration with the U.S. media boil over on Tuesday for its coverage of Senator Barack Obama’s visit to West Asia and Europe.
Mr. McCain, upset over the extent to which his campaign has been eclipsed, launched a video on the Internet entitled Obama Love, with quotes from TV anchors and journalists that he regards as evidence of bias. It came the day after Mr. McCain protested over what he saw as another sign of bias, a rejection of a comment article on Iraq he submitted to the New York Times.
It is a turnaround for Mr. McCain, who established a reputation for open relations with the press during his unsuccessful run for the Republican nomination in 2000 and during this year’s primaries contest. But since Mr. Obama won the Democratic nomination last month, his campaign team has complained repeatedly that the U.S. media is behaving as if the election is a foregone conclusion.