CBS Fallout
So news of the CBS fallout is all over the news.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/11/business/media/11network.html
And while I understand that it's a major journalistic scandal, I can't help but feel like everyone is overreacting. Maybe part of me is so jaded that I have come to expect this kind of thing from mainstream news. And maybe part of me wonders, "What if CBS had misinformation about John Kerry?" How much would people be upset over this story?
Armstrong Williams was caught accepting money to push Bush administration policies and it's not hitting the headlines like CBS News.
-Jean Chen
posted by flika @ 1:42 PM
12 comments
12 Comments:
The key point for me in this story is the line from employees that they think CBS News might not be around in a few years. The news industry is in big trouble and back when I used to work at ABC, about five years ago, people were already saying one of the three network newscasts would be dead in a decade.
They’re not over-reacting. CBS is just giving itself a well deserved and long overdue public flogging. They’ve been caught red (blue?) handed, in plain view of America pushing the left-biased agenda they always (and still) deny they have. Most Americans know better. CBS’s biggest challenge is to rebuild its own self-esteem after being confronted with the unimpeachable truth about itself. So, still pretending to have journalistic integrity, they conduct a full investigation and roll a few heads. The only way they could over-react would be to form a merger with Al Jazeera in an effort to improve their objectivity.
Fathers of our revolution
Did not die for this pollution
Get your scoop at any price
You desecrate their sacrifice
We’re pukin’ on your gross creation
In the name of free expression
Don’t forget to check your ratings.
www.StandForSomethin.blogspot.com
To The Green Man: Please don’t take my word for it, sir. Check out an article called "Bias Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" by Robert J. Barro (visit http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/997meijg.asp?pg=2). The article summarizes an ongoing study called "A Measure of Media Bias" by two university professors, Tim Groseclose of UCLA and Jeffrey Milyo of the University of Missouri. They analyzed and actually quantified media bias in 20 of America’s top news outlets. Here’s what they learned as reported in Barro’s article:
“On the conservative end, the only two outlets below 50 were the "Washington Times" (35) and "Fox News Special Report with Brit Hume" (40). Although right of center, these ratings are much closer to the centrist position of 50 than to congressional Republicans' average position of 16.
The other 18 outlets are on the liberal side of 50. Particularly striking are the high liberal ratings for the "New York Times" and "CBS Evening News" (both 74), not too far below the average score of 84 for Democratic members of Congress. The news programs of the other two traditional television networks are closer to the center--62 for "NBC Nightly News" and 61 for "ABC World News Tonight".”
So Green Man, if you don't think the media has a liberal bias, then you must be watching only Fox News reading only the Washington Times. I urge you to change the channel and cancel your subscription.
Green Man: I'm not interested in spinning anything. I'm just looking for the objective reality in this discussion. That's why I quoted from the article by Robert J. Barrow above about the Groseclose-Milyo study. It is arguably the most objective and scientific analysis of U.S. media bias ever assembled. Did you read the article? Here's the url:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/997meijg.asp?pg=1
You seem to be looking for an evil political conspiracy beneath every rock. Everyone who breathes air has an agenda. Who cares? Defend your freedom and seek the truth.
Mr. White: if you cannot clearly define morality, then you have a lot of thinking to do. And how can you attack the definitions used in the study when you don't even know what they are? I mean no disrespect sir, but you are clearly in denial on the media bias issue. Read the study.
Mr. White: If you think you cannot rely on definitions, how is it that you are able to understand this sentence? For the definition of liberal and conservative, check with Webster.
You ask all these questions you consider ambiguous, and every one of them has a yes or no answer. There's an objective morality in every moral issue. Some issues are more challenging than others.
You asked for a definition of morality: it's a human characteristic resulting from actions of individual integrity that inflict no limitations on the rights and freedom of others.
As for who I would like to see in power in Iraq, I'll go with the will of the people everytime. I couldn't care less whether they're left or right. Same with you. I'm not interested in changing your politics. That's your choice.
We're drifting off topic (Media Bias, remember?). If you would like to continue the morality discussion, email me at patrick@coastcottages.net.
Mr. White: You've made assumptions about my position on a variety of issues. That is partly my fault for labeling myself conservative in my profile. I am conservative on many issues, but it may surprise you to know that we do not disagree on everything.
I consider the Bible to be a collection of stories written with great literary license and assembled by organized religion for its own self-promotion (see www.JoeCreator.blogspot.com). And by my definition of morality, taking another human life is never acceptable except in self defense or in defense of the helpless. If America is divided 50-50 on the death penalty, then 50% of us are right and 50% of us are wrong.
I do not agree with every position of the Bush administration, and I think if the majority of Iraqis want to strap on the shackles of a theocracy, then they should have it their way. I believe in equality of opportunity regardless of gender or race, but not in affirmative action, socialism or the redistribution of wealth. The media is largely biased to the left, but all the science in the world will not change your mind nor The Green Man's. Any further debate on that issue is likely to sedate the readers of this forum.
I surely did misread and misconstrue your point on "certain" concepts being subjective. I do agree with your statement, just not with all of the concepts you chose as examples. My apologies for missing the word "certain." In closing, I wish you well in all your endeavors. You, too, Green Man. Peace.
Green Man: Sigh. You and Mr. White are like a tag team. I really shouldn't keep this thread going after your statement "that's not the particular way I'm being unreasonable today." Nonetheless, and despite your clear admission of unreasonableness, I will tell you what the authors of the study "A Measure of Media Bias" think about your assertion that their work is not scientific. I corresponded with both Professor Groseclose and Dr. Milyo today and here is what they had to say:
From Tim Groseclose,Department of Political Science, UCLA, and Associate Professor of Political Economy, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University says: "I think most professional scientists use the definition proposed by Karl Popper (a famous philosopher of science) to define scientific. By his notion a theory is scientific if and only if it is falsifiable . . . Our theory, that most of the mainstream media are liberal, is clearly falsifiable. That is, if the data had turned out differently our measure could have concluded that e.g. the NY Times and CBS News and all the rest lean right. If the data had turned out that way, then our theory would have been falsified. Thus, our theory, by Popper's defition is falsifiable. Just to bolster the point, every professional scientist that I know would agree that if a paper conducts a statistical test, then the theory it examines is falsifiable. Thus, a statistical test is a sufficient condition for scientific. (Our paper conducts several statistical tests.)"
From Dr. Jeffrey D. Milyo, Associate Professor, Department of Economics and Truman School of Public Affairs, University of Missouri says, among other things: "your cranky friend is simply wrong."
Hi :)
You have a great blog! Keep up the great work, and I'll be sure to visit regularly.
I have a online degree education compass related site, check it out if you get some time!
Look forward to reading more of your insightful post!
Wow, I really like this one. I have a website that talks mostly about california seo You should check it out sometime.
Ik houd werkelijk van wat doet u met uw blog, en moedig u aan om het omhoog te houden.Cheerio, Susie arizona medical malpractice attorneys
Are you tired of getting nice compliments on your blog, when really you're not makeng the kind of money that you deserve? Now you can join a completely FREE program. FREE to join. All you do is refer customers. To get started fast, click here: Build Your Business Online site. It pretty much covers Build Your Business Online related stuff and it's FREE to join.
Post a Comment
<< Home