Media outlet's all endorse obama. is it right?

www.kvbc.com...

Some big-name newspapers you may read are making headlines in the presidential race. Thursday, Hispanic media outlets publicly announced their support for Barack Obama

www.sltrib.com...

New York Times endorses Obama

edition.cnn.com...

Colin Powell endorses Obama

a republican hmm
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...

CNN) — No, hell has not frozen over, but a Buckley is backing a Democrat for president. Christopher Buckley, the son of the late conservative icon William F. Buckley, said Friday he's decided to back Barack Obama's White House bid, the first time in his life he will vote Democrat.

hmm another republican
www.theage.com.au...

ALASKA'S top newspaper has endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for the White House, saying it would be too risky to put the state's Republican Governor, Sarah Palin, just "one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world".

afp.google.com...

The Financial Times, the respected business daily, endorsed Barack Obama on Monday to become the next US president, even though it prefers the trade policies of his Republican rival John McCain.

www.shortnews.com...

Republican Former Massachusetts Governor Endorses Obama

ap.google.com...

Endorsements: Anchorage paper picks Obama

www.examiner.com...

The (Baltimore) Sun endorses Obama

www.whotv.com...

October 26, 2008--Iowa's largest newspaper, The Des Moines Registers has endorsed Illinois Senator Barack Obama for president of the United States.

Basically none of those new's site's i listed can be trusted during this election.
They have proved by endorsements they are bias toward none other than obama.

But more importantly my question.
Why would tv & newspapers endorse a candidate?
They give us new's..they are not suppose to go bias as picking side it thought.

I feel as if we are being spoon feed or new's ..like obama is the saint ect..
mcain is the devil.
They are both equal men in my book.
well i wonder why all major new's is feeding us the obama is the best thing since sliced bread.

Everyone watch's the new's and your own local new's...
honestly can you see a big difference in what's being said..major media vs your local media
i will give a example.
My local newspaper
www.amnews.com...

Obama would start deep depression

www.amnews.com...

Obama is wrong for our country

i hope you get what i am saying...local media is either not afraid to let people speak there mind's.
or they are fabricating how us locals feel.
Or is major media NYT ect.. feeding us the obama...on a mass scale because they are bias..endorse obama?

thanks for reading.

Not to sound rude, But tell us something we don't know already. The Media has been in the tank since Clinton.

There lies the problem with today's huge corporate media companies.
They are so big they can now influence or even create the news that they report, instead of merely reporting events and offering the facts. Actually, they are not even obliged to print facts anymore.

Newspapers do typically endorse candidates.

However, your logic I think fails when it comes to the main televised news networks...

You link a story about Colin Powell endorsing Obama as proof that CNN is biased?

I think you can do better

I would much rather that they publicly endorse a candidate than not. By doing so, they're acknowledging their bias for the world to see. Its much easier for the public to determine who's version of the facts they're actually getting from that particular newspaper or magazine.

I would prefer that even TV networks formally endorse candidates for this same reason as well. At least all the cards would be on the table.

CNN is bias. Look at some of the interviews they do with some of the major Republican faces.

1- They (CNN) always interrupt them (Reps)
2- They always try to twist the story
3- They play the blame game.

Look at some of the interviews with Ron Paul, This man is SMART, and they try to make him look like a fool.

That is only an observation from my point of view

reply to post by beforetime


You easily get confused. New York Times has been democratically leaning, historically speaking, what else it new?

As to your local paper -- sure there are localities in the red states where people have pretty radical anti-obama views.

As to "they are supposed to give us news, and that's all" -- you seem to contradict yourself here, because in the local paper links it's clearly not the news presented, but an opinion. Which is OK. But you don't seem to mind that.

Radical anti-obama vies?

We only accept that he is a liar and a socialist because he gives us the ammo.

Dont be so Naïve.

oh i'm not saying they are or aren't biased...

I was just stating that the sources the OP linked failed to back up his claim...

I would like the OP to put some better sources in there to back up his claim.

My point is if they endorse a candidate..it helps the candidate. they choose in some way shape or form.
Last i checked newspapers tv stations ect..tell us the new's not make news..and then not speak any of the damaging truths about a candidate...they become bias.
it's almost sounds illegal idk lol

Do you think NewYork Times wants to be laughed at?
They will make sure other media that branches off of them share there views and how they handle obama.

BTW i know mcain gets endorsed also..so did bush / clinton ect...

well we all know how the bush deal turned out.
No media that endorsed him will admit they picked the wrong guy in last election.
But there endorsement helped thousands of ill informed voters to make there choice.

reply to post by buddhasystem


But can you show me one "Opinion" in NYT from a real voter and there views on obama?
Ive only witnessed these real opinions from non bias local papers.

i couldn't find one.
so idk
that's my point on the opinions ..that is how Americans in my local area think and believe about the candidate's.uncensored by the media.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by beforetime]

Originally posted by beforetime
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

But can you show me one "Opinion" in NYT from a real voter and there views on obama?
not a editor a real person .
i couldn't find one.
so idk

You gotta be kidding... There are thousands of comments posted by readers of the newspaper... As to the actual column, well, in general it's left to members of staff. Is that susprusing?

One thing I have found, Most if not all Obama supporters I have come by, Dont even know their left foot from the right.

Originally posted by SGSPatriot
We only accept that he is a liar and a socialist because he gives us the ammo.

"Obama the socialist" is getting long in the tooth along with "Obama the Muslim" or "Obama the terrorist". You are using imaginary ammo and therefore getting imaginary results in this election.

Get a clue people. This last 50 years or more has been a boondoggle on the people of America by communist sell outs, backstabbers, liars, cheaters, theives. One of your friends or family might be a brainwashed moron in sheeps clothing.

Watch how the EU and UN are pumping from there sump pump mouths.."new world order"..its all a contrived by power, then downward to deceive and confuse the populace.

If were going to have one world, I pray its not a dictators playground. because if one started today, it would sadly become that, because theres enough childish sellout losers who need thorsine to medicate there psychosis, who would act on behalf of these pussbags who just ruined our world state.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by beforetime
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

But can you show me one "Opinion" in NYT from a real voter and there views on obama?
not a editor a real person .
i couldn't find one.
so idk

You gotta be kidding... There are thousands of comments posted by readers of the newspaper... As to the actual column, well, in general it's left to members of staff. Is that susprusing?

But do you think NYT the media outlet..will let a normal voter speak his mind on obama?
yes the editors pick it out..they work for the paper NYT..there fore you are still only getting the semi..truth.of what voters really want.

As with local media..that do not choose endorsement of a candidate..are not bias in anyway shape or form.
as long as you make a valid point..not a racist..or hate old people..your view is welcomed and printed.

I really don't see what your point/issue is here. Media outlets endorse candidates all the time. If you want to talk about bias, turn on FOX. FOX news is the definition of media bias.

As far as a difference b/w MSM vs Local Media, could it be that your local area is just conservative? Could that maybe be why there is a difference? My LOCAL media, like the MSM, also endorses Obama. But again, I live in a metropolitan, liberal area.

This "liberal" media crap is getting pretty old. Media outlets are supposed to be open minded and progressive (included by the way in the definition of "liberal"). I know this is a conspiracy site, but not everything is a conspiracy.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by SGSPatriot
We only accept that he is a liar and a socialist because he gives us the ammo.

"Obama the socialist" is getting long in the tooth along with "Obama the Muslim" or "Obama the terrorist". You are using imaginary ammo and therefore getting imaginary results in this election.

Dont let your ego get in the way son. You need to do a little research.

The paper trail leading to obamas ties are horrid. And instead of trolling try to stay on topic.

And last but certainly not least, denial is always the first recation when presented with facts.

whats the motto here again?

Media Endorsements lists this election's endorsements AND who they endorsed in 2004.

Barack Obama was leading in the race for daily newspaper endorsements by 160 to 59, an almost 3-1 margin, and even more in daily circulation numbers, more than 15 million to 4,139,700.[1]

During the 2008 United States presidential election, the following newspapers, magazines, and other publications have made general election endorsements.

More at link.

Originally posted by beforetime
Why would tv & newspapers endorse a candidate?

It's Tradition... I don't have a big problem with it, but I could do without newpaper endorsements. It does make a statement when Alaska's largest newspaper endorses Obama, though... It's some data for those who are undecided.

Why Newspapers Endorse

"Here are reasons why we endorse:
* "to fulfill our obligation and responsibility as a constitutionally-protected media enterprise to not only be a part of our communities but to also help improve those communities.
* "to offer information and perspective that voters can use in evaluating candidates.
* "to create dialogue with our readers.
"Our endorsements are not made:
* "to tell readers who they should vote for.
* "to make a compact with any candidate.
* "to figure out who's most likely to win a contest."

Should Newspapers Still be Taking Sides? TIME

They are both equal men in my book.

Um... I don't believe you. Not when you state that media who endorse Obama cannot be trusted.

Thank God for alternative media like ATS, Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, WorldNet Daily, Drudge!

The MSM has some competition and they can't stand it!

With the rise of alternative media, MSM giants like the NY Times are losing revenue and are having to lay people off!

www.thestreet.com...

Newspaper publisher New York Times (NYT Quote - Cramer on NYT - Stock Picks) slashed third-quarter earnings guidance and set plans to cut 500 jobs, or 4% of its staff.

Related Articles Arbitron Buying Tech Firm McClatchy Trims Guidance Viacom Names Kane Station Chief Market Activity The New York Times Company| NYT DOWNThe company said the cutbacks will include 45 newsroom jobs at its flagship New York Times newspaper. In May the company set plans for an earlier layoff round that saw it cut almost 200 jobs.
The news came as the company reported disappointing August numbers, saying revenue rose just 0.6% from a year ago. Ad revenue rose 1.7%, but excluding newly acquired information site About.com, ad revenue was down 1% and total revenue was off 1.2%.