Mr. McCain Picks a Woman for V.P. Mate

[darrianation]

That's because she's new to the scene.

CBSNews.com: So you think the media is being uniquely tough on Palin now?

Mark Penn: Well, I think that the media is doing the kinds of stories on Palin that they're not doing on the other candidates. And that's going to subject them to people concluding that they're giving her a tougher time. Now, the media defense would be, "Yeah, we looked at these other candidates who have been in public life at an earlier time."

What happened here very clearly is that the controversy over Palin led to 37 million Americans tuning into a vice-presidential speech, something that is unprecedented, because they wanted to see for themselves. This is an election in which the voters are going to decide for themselves. The media has lost credibility with them.

Matk Penn is a Ex-Clinton Aide.

Ex-Clinton Aide: Media Tougher On Palin, Political Players: Former Clinton Chief Strategist Mark Penn Argues The Press Has Lost Its Credibility - CBS News

[treelizard]

'The Media'? No Such Thing
By JIMMY BOEGLE

Ever since John McCain announced his running-mate decision--which resulted in a media firestorm that can be summed up with the words, "Palin? Really?!"--Republicans have been running around criticizing "the media," like a bunch of talking-point-injected simpletons.

The media are being unfair to Sarah Palin because she's a woman. The media are being harder on Palin because she's not a "Beltway insider," and therefore, reporters don't know her. The media are too liberal. The media are saying mean things about us, waaah!

Here's a tip: Whenever you hear/read someone blame, criticize or critique "the media" as a whole, 19 times out of 20, that speaker/writer is completely full of shit.

There is no such thing as "the media." Daily newspapers do things differently than weeklies do them; 24-hour cable-news networks do things differently than more focused TV news sources. And even within these media genres--like those 24-hour cable-news networks--there's a hell of a lot of difference. Usually, when people use the phrase "the media" (and let me be clear--it's not just Republicans who do this) they're trying to use "the media" as a distraction, a scapegoat, a campaign tool.

Take all of the claims about the Palin coverage. While some media sources may have indeed been sexist in their coverage, or may dislike Palin because she's not a known quantity, or may lean liberal (like the paper you're reading right now--though it's important to realize there's a difference between "liberal" and "unfair"), most media sources have reported the Palin story rather accurately.

Don't let any talking heads convince you otherwise. To repeat: There is no such thing as "the media."

[Tant01]

LOL

This debate almost reminds me of BJJ/GJJ back in the day...

Ever get the feeling you were fighting from the bottom? Getting thrown around and slammed hard on the deck?

Never tap out girl. I gotta say I admire your convictions. Seeing that it's still a free country (mostly) as long as you have the right to SAY what you want then do IT!!!

More power to you...

And enjoy it while it lasts.

[treelizard]

Thanks! There are definitely a LOT of areas where I disagree with the Democratic party so didn't mean to gloss over that... I just think it's the best option right now.

[betall]

Don't let any talking heads convince you otherwise. To repeat: There is no such thing as "the media."

This is retarded. I don't like all the political crap on a martial arts forum, but this is just one of the dumbest statements ever made.

"You don't need to see his identification. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along."

Fricking Jedi mind trick or something.

[treelizard]

This is retarded. I don't like all the political crap on a martial arts forum, but this is just one of the dumbest statements ever made.

"You don't need to see his identification. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along."

Fricking Jedi mind trick or something.

So you see no distinction between different types of media or media outlets and think it is one homogenous group that covers everything exactly the same way?

[jubaji]

'The Media'? No Such Thing
By JIMMY BOEGLE
Don't let any talking heads convince you otherwise. To repeat: There is no such thing as "the media."

What was that expression about the Devil's greatest trick?

[treelizard]

What was that expression about the Devil's greatest trick?

If you go back and reread the editorial, what it asserts is not that the media does not exist but that it does not act as a single unified body. Which I'd be more than happy to debate.

[darrianation]

Thanks! There are definitely a LOT of areas where I disagree with the Democratic party so didn't mean to gloss over that... I just think it's the best option right now.

The facts are the facts –

Fact- McCain and the Republicans have been complaining about lopsided and biased media coverage before Palin ever can on the seen.

Fact- the W.Post gave positive front page coverage to barrack over McCain 3 to 1.

Fact- Voters Give Media Failing Grades in Objectivity for Election 2008

Media unfair to Palin, poll suggests - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com

Fact- we are at war and Russia and China are working together more and more and both acting out more aggressively towards the US and many of our enemies are seeking nuclear weapons in which to destroy us and Israel and N. Koerea has just upgraded their ballistic missile capabilities. Barrack promises to cut spending for defense. Every democratic president since Carter has cut spending and in each instance decreased our militaries capabilities.

Fact- In the 90’s we had a good economy but the real boom happened in 97 after Clinton lowered capital gains and other corporate taxes.

Fact- Obama wants to raise taxes in an already slow economy at a higher rate than Clinton’s taxes.

Fact: Obama is not a patriot; he has never been a patriot. His whole life has bees spent around mentors, confidants, friends, and colleagues who are ashamed of America and anti-America.

Fact- His foreign policy record has been dangerous and reckless. Obama backed communist Raila Odinga in the Kenya’s elections as a US senator including campaigning for him in Kenya. Odinga lost the elections and the Muslims rioted killing more than 1000 Christians and burning hundreds of Christian churches. The winning president agreed to share power with Odinga and the violence stopped. Later it was found that Odinga had a deal with Muslims clerics to help get him elected. A very BAD decision Obama made to get involved in the Kenya elections.

Tell me again how will Obama be good for this country right now?

[betall]

No, but I do recognize that they are all suppliers of a similar product, with common practices and goals, methods, means, policies, regulations, and aims. I understand that all media outlets share a common goal of providing news or stories that will bring in readership or viewership and that the way to do that is to "report" on the things people want to see. I get that they are all judged by their investors or shareholders or whatever based on the profits that they return and I get that they're gonna do what they need to do to make those shareholders happy.

By your reasoning, "Big Oil" doesn't exist either.

[treelizard]

Sarah Palin on Hilary Clinton:

When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism, or maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'Man, that doesn't do us any good, women in politics, or women in general, trying to progress this country.

...but only when it's a Democrat?

[treelizard]

Here's an article by a non-profit that thinks "the media" bias is slanted in favor of McCain.

Post's Post-Convention 'Balancing' Act

[treelizard]

Question: Is Fox news "the media"? What about independent blogs, like this one? Women Against Sarah Palin Are they "the media"? Is defend.net "the media"? What about newspapers that endorse McCain? Are they "the media" too?

[treelizard]

blogs are usually considered the media because they are considered opinions, they are generally not expected to live up to "journalistic Integrity" and be objective and unbiased.

Most of the political blogs are just partisan commentators.

Anything in a blog needs to be fact checked and scrutinized before it should be accepted as the truth.
"

I agree that everything should be fact-checked and scrutinized. I just don't believe there is one media conglomerate. I mean there are major media owned by corporations, but there is also a lot of independent media. There is advertiser influence, but different advertisers want different things. Also some media outlets like PBS and NPR and my local community radio station have underwriters instead of media, which is a little different. News executives often hang out with politicians, but which politicians differs by which station it is. Some media outlets rely on PR and press releases and others not so much. Pressure groups influence some media outlets and not others. Media is often driven by readership, but there are different audiences for different media outlets. The New York Times is read by different people than say The Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post; BBC reports differently than Fox which reports differently than the View. Some outlets censor and some do not. It really depends on WHAT you are reading or watching. The same news story is often reported differently in different places.

For example, one of the propaganda units I teach in my advisory class focuses on tobacco advertising. So one could say "the media" promotes tobacco. But if you read scientific and health journals, they run anti-smoking articles. So one could say "the media" is opposed to tobacco. Or one could just admit there is more than one media outlet and they all have different audiences, purposes and influences.

[treelizard]

I actually teach a unit on media bias and propaganda.

I think advertising can indeed show bias, especially if it's advertising for campaigns. Also sometimes media outlets spin stories more positively for companies that run ads in order to keep their advertising. But some don't. It really depends.

If the media does appear biased in favor of Obama, and again I agree that there's not "one media," it may have something to do with Bush treatment of the media in the past... or it may have to do with a lot of other things... I guess I don't buy the whole "we're victims of the media" BS. There is always more to it than that.