eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
   
   
      
  
Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan
Since last post: 2496 days
Last activity: 2493 days
|  #1 Posted on 15.1.04 1935.51 | Instant Rating: 3.74 | CBS refuses to air Moveon.org's anti-Bush ad.
They cite company policy that doesn't allow "issue ads," despite airing those anti-drug ads this year and the past two years at the Super Bowl. Eh, Moveon.org has gotten a fair amount of press out of this whole thing already, with the ad already being shown on Tech tv and CNN (and other stations?) in its entirety.
Weekly Visitor - PSSSSHAW!
Jersey Is Dead - New Stuff! Unemployment is your friend!
| | Promote this thread! |           | Eddie Famous
Andouille
Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL
Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 7 hours
| #2 Posted on 15.1.04 1951.30 | Instant Rating: 6.44 |
Claiming not to run "issue ads" is simply giving it the wrong title. "Staying away from ads that will piss off a great deal of your audience" is the right one.
Any network that would allow that spot or any like it from any side to run duing the Super Bowl would be idiot supremes. You don't want to give the audience that much of an opportunity to tune out (and complain later), especially if it becomes a boring game in the second half.
Plus there is no comparison between a spot attacking an individual political candidate and an anti-drug PSA. That's just ridiculous.
"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..." | ParagonOfVirtue
Salami
Since: 20.8.03
From: New Jersey, USA
Since last post: 2833 days
Last activity: 2513 days
|  #3 Posted on 15.1.04 2005.03 | Instant Rating: 4.54 | | While I laugh at the geniuses that actually think the media is liberal, I applaud CBS's call to not air the ad. It is in their right to deem an ad too political to air, and no, I don't think it's similar to anti-drug ads. I'd expect they would make the same decision if the ads were anti-Dean or Clinton. Although I must say, between this story and cancelling the Reagan movie, CBS sure is making a buzz against liberal-related items lately. | MoeGates
Andouille
Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 1 hour
| #4 Posted on 15.1.04 2213.04 | Instant Rating: 6.28 | I'm torn between whether the media is really conservative, or if it's just uber-sensitive about its supposed "liberal bias," and the Republicans are really good at exploiting that. Either way, the end result is that the mainstream media pretty clearly very tilted to the right. Take, for example, the whole Bush/Hitler thing.
The other one is the "tree-hugging, sushi-eating, latte-drinking, etc." Howard Dean commercial. What uproar do you think the mainstream media would have over a Democratic commercial encouraging you to send back home that "dear-hunting, beer guzzling, Fast Food-eating" candidate back home to Alabama? Bill O'Reilly would be crying the evil prejudices of thoses elitist Liberals every night for a week. Yet another example of the pervasive double standard. It's not the stereotypical redneck who's the last available P.C. target. It's the stereotypical San Francisco Liberal.
Full disclosure: I had sushi today for lunch. But I drink my coffe black, no sugar.
(edited by MoeGates on 15.1.04 2313)
I wonder how much money George W. Bush gave Paris Hilton. | Eddie Famous
Andouille
Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL
Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 7 hours
| #5 Posted on 15.1.04 2243.00 | Instant Rating: 6.44 |
Originally posted by MoeGates
I'm torn between whether the media is really conservative, or if it's just uber-sensitive about its supposed "liberal bias," and the Republicans are really good at exploiting that. Either way, the end result is that the mainstream media pretty clearly very tilted to the right. Take, for example, the whole Bush/Hitler thing.
The other one is the "tree-hugging, sushi-eating, latte-drinking, etc." Howard Dean commercial. What uproar do you think the mainstream media would have over a Democratic commercial encouraging you to send back home that "dear-hunting, beer guzzling, Fast Food-eating" candidate back home to Alabama? Bill O'Reilly would be crying the evil prejudices of thoses elitist Liberals every night for a week. Yet another example of the pervasive double standard. It's not the stereotypical redneck who's the last available P.C. target. It's the stereotypical San Francisco Liberal.
Full disclosure: I had sushi today for lunch. But I drink my coffe black, no sugar.
(edited by MoeGates on 15.1.04 2313)
Being compared to Hitler and that stupid Dean commercial are in two different solar systems.
Besides, the last Presidential candidate along the "deer-hunting, beer-guzzling, Fast Food-eating" variety was from Arkansas :)
"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..." | DrDirt
Banger
Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country
Since last post: 26 days
Last activity: 1 day
| #6 Posted on 15.1.04 2320.03 | Instant Rating: 7.54 | Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
CBS refuses to air Moveon.org's anti-Bush ad.
They cite company policy that doesn't allow "issue ads," despite airing those anti-drug ads this year and the past two years at the Super Bowl. Eh, Moveon.org has gotten a fair amount of press out of this whole thing already, with the ad already being shown on Tech tv and CNN (and other stations?) in its entirety.
We have got to differentiate between the network and the news department. If anyone thinks that besides a Murdoch, that the networks want to do anything but make money is crazy.
Is there a somewhat liberal bent to the people reporting news overall? Probably. It is that bent in their psyche that makes them want to be in news. Very few in the media make a decent wage. If you don't believe me, look at the increase in women reporters in the print media and tv at the local levels. I am not saying this to be sexist, just observing a fact. Many of these people want to make a difference, expose injustice, and right perceived wrongs.
The people pulling ads are execs in three-piece suits who only want to crusade about lowering corporate taxes and personal income taxes.
Perception is reality | StaggerLee
Scrapple
Since: 3.10.02
From: ST Louis
Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | | Y!: |  |
|
| #7 Posted on 16.1.04 0329.45 | Instant Rating: 3.10 | http://www.amazon.com/ gp/reader/0060520841/ ref=sib_dp_pt/102-7769970- 0575328#reader-link
If you really, REALLY think there is a CONSERVATIVE bias in the media, do yourself a favor and pick up this book. | PoorlyToldJoke
Longanisa
Since: 15.12.03
From: Cincinnati
Since last post: 3070 days
Last activity: 3053 days
| #8 Posted on 16.1.04 0943.28 | Instant Rating: 1.91 | | The Bernie Goldberg book? That book should be subtitled "Why I am disgruntled at CBS and hate Dan Rather". It has as much intellectual heft as the cat in the hat.. Probably less actually, because it is not written in rhyme. | Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Since: 6.1.04
From: New York
Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 10 hours
| #9 Posted on 16.1.04 0949.45 | Instant Rating: 3.51 | Moe. I have a question.
In one moment you question whether there is indeed a Left leaning bias in the mainstream media, & then to prove your point you bring up an article that uses the NY Post to prove that there isn't.
Putting aside the fact that almost every liberal I know ridicules the Post & dismisses it out of hand, how is a paper that is unapologetically Right leaning proving that there is no bias?
Just looking at the editorial policy of America's mainsteam media outlets (i.e. NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, NPR, etc...) tells you where their bias lies. The fact that overwhelming majority of America's media votes Democratic tells you that reporting probably is as well... | Leroy
Andouille
Since: 7.2.02
From: Queens, NY
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 hours
| #10 Posted on 16.1.04 1140.04 | Instant Rating: 4.22 | Originally posted by PoorlyToldJoke
The Bernie Goldberg book? That book should be subtitled "Why I am disgruntled at CBS and hate Dan Rather". It has as much intellectual heft as the cat in the hat.. Probably less actually, because it is not written in rhyme.
Goldberg has even backed off from some of those claims. When he really started getting challenged about some of things he wrote about, they were more generalizations than actualities - and started saying "well, any bias is bad, even a conservative one."
Originally posted by Von Maestro
In one moment you question whether there is indeed a Left leaning bias in the mainstream media, & then to prove your point you bring up an article that uses the NY Post to prove that there isn't.
I think you need to re-read that article... | StaggerLee
Scrapple
Since: 3.10.02
From: ST Louis
Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
| AIM: | |
| | | Y!: | |
|
| #11 Posted on 16.1.04 1147.54 | Instant Rating: 3.33 | Originally posted by PoorlyToldJoke
The Bernie Goldberg book? That book should be subtitled "Why I am disgruntled at CBS and hate Dan Rather". It has as much intellectual heft as the cat in the hat.. Probably less actually, because it is not written in rhyme.
Um, did you read the book?
No sour grapes anywhere in it.
As a matter of fact, he says in the book " I know Dan Rather real well. And I like him"
He makes a valid point in it when he says something to the effect that nobody IN the media thinks there is a bias, because they, for the most part are all same thinking. So, when somebody says something contrary to what they think, THEY are the ones who are wrong and labeled CONSERVATIVE.
Want a good show of how "Unbiased" network news is, count how many times George Bush is refered to as Mr Bush, and not PRESIDENT Bush. Hell, I remember all the time, it was PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, never Mr Clinton. They dont even respect the man in the White House, because of the difference of opinion. | Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Since: 6.1.04
From: New York
Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 10 hours
| #12 Posted on 16.1.04 1227.22 | Instant Rating: 3.51 | Originally posted by Leroy
Originally posted by Von Maestro
In one moment you question whether there is indeed a Left leaning bias in the mainstream media, & then to prove your point you bring up an article that uses the NY Post to prove that there isn't.
I think you need to re-read that article...
My question still stands.
If the Post is the rag most liberals say it is, why is it being pointed to as something that should get media attention for something found in its pages?
Aside from which. Peters' piece saying that Dean's supporters are using the Geobbels tactic of "repeating lies often enough" is something I have read in countless articles over the years. It appearing in the editorial pages of a newspaper is not even close to comparing the President of the USA to Hitler in a contest for a Super Bowl ad!! | Leroy
Andouille
Since: 7.2.02
From: Queens, NY
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 hours
| #13 Posted on 16.1.04 1245.34 | Instant Rating: 4.22 | Originally posted by Von Maestro
It appearing in the editorial pages of a newspaper is not even close to comparing the President of the USA to Hitler in a contest for a Super Bowl ad!!
MoveOn.org admitted the ad - which never aired - was in bad taste, shouldn't have gotten through, pulled it from the website, and apologized - and they are STILL taking flack for it. It's not even a piece they produced, but a piece that was submitted to them for a contest that most of America didn't even know about.
There hasn't been nearly as much heat directed towards the NY Post - nor has there been any retraction or apology demanded. That's the double standard the article was talking about.
(edited by Leroy on 16.1.04 1048)
(edited by Leroy on 16.1.04 1049) | JoshMann
Andouille
Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL
Since last post: 1801 days
Last activity: 1798 days
| AIM: |  |
| | | Y!: |  |
|
| #14 Posted on 16.1.04 1249.06 | Instant Rating: 3.60 | Originally posted by StaggerLee
Originally posted by PoorlyToldJoke
The Bernie Goldberg book? That book should be subtitled "Why I am disgruntled at CBS and hate Dan Rather". It has as much intellectual heft as the cat in the hat.. Probably less actually, because it is not written in rhyme.
Um, did you read the book?
No sour grapes anywhere in it.
As a matter of fact, he says in the book " I know Dan Rather real well. And I like him"
He makes a valid point in it when he says something to the effect that nobody IN the media thinks there is a bias, because they, for the most part are all same thinking. So, when somebody says something contrary to what they think, THEY are the ones who are wrong and labeled CONSERVATIVE.
Want a good show of how "Unbiased" network news is, count how many times George Bush is refered to as Mr Bush, and not PRESIDENT Bush. Hell, I remember all the time, it was PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, never Mr Clinton. They dont even respect the man in the White House, because of the difference of opinion.
I'm sorry, but I gave him 5 minutes during one of his plug appearances and he couldn't sell me on the thesis. There's a thin line between being a pundit and talking out of your ass, and I'm sorry but Bernie Goldberg's talking out of his ass. My experience tells me I've never beeen in a pressroom where 5 debates at the same time we're breaking out. Give them enough time and they'll argue on which ocean is the biggest.
And also, I higly recall a great amount of the time where Bill Clinton didn't even get the courtesy of being called MISTER...it was to the talk radio heads just CLINTON, period. So it's not as if the gate only swung one way and that was it. But now they've all learned their lesson apparantly about RESPECTING THE MAN IN OFFICE...that is, after they got their licks into the other side for 8 years, and all of the sudden fow non-partian reasons they've decided to become respectable-like? Uh huh.
Welcome To The Bryant Street Theater...have a Fruit Roll-Up
| Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Since: 6.1.04
From: New York
Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 10 hours
| #15 Posted on 16.1.04 1257.12 | Instant Rating: 3.51 | Originally posted by Leroy
Originally posted by Von Maestro
It appearing in the editorial pages of a newspaper is not even close to comparing the President of the USA to Hitler in a contest for a Super Bowl ad!!
MoveOn.org admitted the ad - which never aired - was in bad taste, shouldn't have gotten through, pulled it from the website, and apologized - and they are STILL taking flack for it. It's not even a piece they produced, but a piece that was submitted to them for a contest that most of America didn't even know about.
There hasn't been nearly as much heat directed towards the NY Post - nor has there been any retraction or apology demanded. That's the double standard the article was talking about.
(edited by Leroy on 16.1.04 1048)
(edited by Leroy on 16.1.04 1049)
I understand the point of the article, I just don't agree with it.
Firstly, my question still stands. Does the Left still dismiss the Post as a rag & should therefore ignore whatever appears in its pages, or are they to be taken seriously & therefore worthy of demanding the retraction you are calling for?
Secondly, to dismiss the MoveOn ads as something that just "got through" is naive. They were having a contest & were choosing which entries to post on their site. To say that these ads simply "got through" is not only intellectually dishonest, but obviously something that MoveOn saw, reviewed & approved for posting on its site. The removal is more a testament to their getting caught (so to speak) than their actual contrition. | Leroy
Andouille
Since: 7.2.02
From: Queens, NY
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 hours
| #16 Posted on 16.1.04 1322.46 | Instant Rating: 4.22 | Originally posted by Von Maestro
Firstly, my question still stands. Does the Left still dismiss the Post as a rag & should therefore ignore whatever appears in its pages, or are they to be taken seriously & therefore worthy of demanding the retraction you are calling for?
Well, they're not the Star or the National Enquirer.
It doesn't matter whether the Left dismisses them or not. If they claim to be a reputable paper, then they should be held to certain standards. At any rate, the NY Post is far more well known than MoveOn.org...
Originally posted by Von Maestro
Secondly, to dismiss the MoveOn ads as something that just "got through" is naive. They were having a contest & were choosing which entries to post on their site. To say that these ads simply "got through" is not only intellectually dishonest, but obviously something that MoveOn saw, reviewed & approved for posting on its site. The removal is more a testament to their getting caught (so to speak) than their actual contrition.
I totally agree, but that's not the point.
You have the NY Post - which has a obvious slant to the right - and you have MoveOn.org - which has an obvious slant to the left. Both attack their opponents by using Third Reich analogies - and MoveOn.org is lambasted with criticisms (some of which aren't even true), while the NY Post barely hears a peep.
Added to that is the fact that MoveOn.org pulls the add, etc, etc... while NY Post doesn't even acknowledge the article was in bad taste - and could publish another editorial of the same ilk.
Edit: By the way, Happy Birthday Von Maestro....
(edited by Leroy on 16.1.04 1208) | JoshMann
Andouille
Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL
Since last post: 1801 days
Last activity: 1798 days
| AIM: | |
| | | Y!: | |
|
| #17 Posted on 16.1.04 1331.47 | Instant Rating: 3.58 | Originally posted by Leroy
It doesn't matter whether the Left dismisses them or not. If they claim to be a reputable paper, then they should be held to certain standards. At any rate, the NY Post is far more well known than MoveOn.org...
PLEASE don't tell me you just put "reputable" and "New York Post" in the same sentence. I'm a leftist and even *I* find fault with that.
Welcome To The Bryant Street Theater...have a Fruit Roll-Up
| Barbwire Mike
Boudin rouge
Since: 6.11.03
From: Dudleyville
Since last post: 2808 days
Last activity: 2801 days
| #18 Posted on 16.1.04 1412.02 | Instant Rating: 2.64 | The NY Post has an inarguable right-wing tilt. If it were any more biased it would be as brazenly slanted as the NY Times is to the left.
And say what you want about sour grapes being the driving force behind "Bias", but the most oft-quoted line in it from Pauline Kael at a gathering of powerful NY media is very telling. I was looking for an exact quote but found an article by PAT SAJAK of all people that not only includes it expands upon it (even though most of the article is directed more at Hollywood than the news):
At a dinner party in Los Angeles recently, our hostess was about to say some grudgingly kind words about President Bush and the way he was handling the War on Terror. She prefaced her remarks by saying, "Now I know everyone at this table voted for Al Gore, but...." Well, she knew no such thing. She just presumed it. It's what "right-thinking" people did. This "false reality" is a phenomenon that permeates media circles.
It's the phenomenon that caused Pauline Kael, former film critic for The New Yorker, to remark after Richard Nixon's election sweep in 1972, "I can't believe it! I don't know a single person who voted for him." This was a man who won in 49 out of 50 states and she didn't know one person who voted for him. And I don't think she was dealing in hyperbole. She simply had never met those people. She couldn't believe they really existed.
http://www.capitalistchicks.com/news/sajaak.html
Lethalwrestling.com: If you don't read us, you're probably gay | Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA
Since last post: 824 days
Last activity: 12 days
| #19 Posted on 16.1.04 1454.45 | Instant Rating: 4.24 | I do think that in general, most media presented has a leftward slant. Sure, the owners of the media outlets may be right-wingish, but those producing the stories sway for left.
All the proof I need is the media's reaction to certain news coverage. Take a look at the way the media handled the Trent Lott comment about Strom, and compare it to the way they reacted to Hillary's "joke" about Ghandi (what? That got zero coverage?,) or just about anything out of Ted Kennedy's mouth.
Of course there are exceptions. Occasionally a story presenting a Republican in a good light makes the front page. Every-so often, something blowing a Democratic position out of hte water sneaks up out of the depths of page B-28. But it is rare, and most definitely not the rule.
Still on the Shelf- Every Monday
"I will do whatever the Americans want. I saw what they did in Iraq, and I was afraid," -Moamer Kadhafi | Grimis
Scrapple
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 778 days
Last activity: 575 days
| #20 Posted on 16.1.04 1803.12 | Instant Rating: 7.29 | I wouldn't have a problem with airing an ad, but they do reserve the right to use good judgment. Since it is MoveOn.org, I know the spot will be in poor taste because they don't have any actual legitimate points to make...
 | | Pages: 1 2 Next
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.22 seconds.