Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

[JB]

At the end of a report on the siege of Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan, the reporter said, "The world is waiting to see if this is a breakthrough in the war on terror. . . or just another false alarm." (italics mine). The italicized words dripped with disdain.<br /><br />This is, of course, just one more example of biased reporting by the media.<br /><br />Why not, ". . .more progress in the war on terror or a false alarm"? or some other balanced comment?<br /><br />I really hate it when I hear such biased "reporting".<br /><br />Well, no matter. The News Hour will treat it fairly. I just got so annoyed I had to vent. My turn, anyway.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Yea that is what gets my goat too JB.<br />Nothing is on a even playing field anymore.

 

[SS MAYFLOAT]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Speculation is not permissable in court and it shouldn't be used in reporting. I hate it when the media can pesuade people into their thoughts and beliefs right or wrong. <br /><br />I try not to watch much of the news anymore. Just having too much depression lately.

 

[11 footer]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

I don't read the papers, buy I always hear my dad saying how biased the paper is, the the "Boston glode" its a democrat they always favor them.<br /><br />The media tells us what they want us to hear.

 

[Bondo]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

my dad saying how biased the paper is

Your Dad's Almost Right.........<br /><br />90% of the mainstream Media is LIBERAL ........

 

[pjc]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Driving home from work I always listen to AM radio talk shows. Local guy Mark Belling was commenting on anniversary of Iraq War. Subject line was expectations on this day last year. And how todays results of war are totally politicized. <br /><br />Think folks what your expectations were a year ago. Mine were for rationally minimal US and allied casualties as well as same for Iraq civilians. And capture or elimination of Saddam's government. Oh yea, for those who will cite this, the WMD thing.<br /><br />The results one year later are pretty much what is stated above.<br /><br />Yet the French, as well as the US opposition, have stated that the war is a failure. And furthermore, the French have announced that now terrorism is rampant in Iraq. What the hell did Sadam subject his citizens to for Gods sake.<br /><br />To the point of this topic, the media is as biased as usual. Typical, considering it is a Presidential Election campaign year.

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

The media is on the top of my list of "hates"<br /><br />They are so pathetic.<br /><br />I get a lot of good unbiased info from www.snopes.com<br /><br />Anybody else have a good source of unbiased investigative reporting. Most other media outlets just re report the news with thier own little spin.<br /><br />Ken

 

[BassMan283]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Freakin' liberals. Whattya gonna do?<br /><br />I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it. --Jack Handy Deep Thoughts

 

[snapperbait]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Yet the conservatives absolutely hang on every word that pops out of the so called "liberal medias" mouth...

 

[Bondo]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Ken,<br />Try this one.......<br />It's a little more Conservative........<br /><br /> http://www.drudgereport.com/

 

[plywoody]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Whatever the intonation used, the question remains the proper question to ask. Is it the real deal, or is it yet another false alarm? It has, as of yet, not been answered.<br /><br />Do you really think the media should just read the news in some sort of monotone delivery so as to express nothing of their personal views?<br /><br />You can find plently of the radical right variety news and resulting spin, and I am able to sort out the proverbial wheat from the chaff, and figure out what to take from it, and what to throw away.<br /><br />I am going to take a wild guess here, and say that I bet others are able to do this as well--so what's the big deal?<br /><br />And is it the real deal, or is it yet another false alarm???

 

[rolmops]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

J.B. Do you think we should all listen to Rush Limbaugh attack anything that is not conservative rightwing and call him balanced?<br />I used this example of a rightwing radio man who has long tirades about anything that is not right wing.<br />His conclusions never carry a question mark,question marks leave room for other possibilities.<br />I think your complaint of bias in this case is based on one or 2 words as part of a question.<br />You are right that news gathering should be exactly that, whereas opinion should be in the editorials.<br />Right and left have long engaged in selling opinion as news, but the real product they sell is advertisement and they will say anything their sponsors tell them to, in order to sell more advertizement<br />ps.Please react JB for that would be 10000

 

[JB]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Is it another real deal or just a false alarm, PW?<br /><br />Journalists have an ethical responsibility to report what is known to be true. All of it.<br /><br />Editorial comments belong in an editorial, not in reportage.

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

I dont want a conservative view, just a report of the facts with no spin. That means spin either way.<br /><br />My favorite example is the Houston Newspaper here had "NFL gets free ride in Houston" when the superbowl was here. Houston gave then NFL the stadium and other things free to attract them here. Newspaper tried to turn that into a negative. The headline should have read "Houston makes investment in hopes of large payoff". Houston gave the NFL everything free cause the Supebowl brings in tns of money. But that headline wouldnt have sold as many papers. <br /><br />Ken

 

[JB]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Rush Limbaugh??<br /><br />That loudmouth jerk?<br /><br />Well, at least he admits to bias. NBC does not.<br /><br />On the news I want unbiased, factual reportage.<br /><br />Don't listen to much editorialism on either side, though I like to watch The News Hour, when they get reps of both sides to discuss the meaning of the facts. They usually manage to present their points of view without flaming and stupid name calling.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

I saw some of the worst bias ever in the last 24 hours. Here is the one I "like" the best:<br /><br />James Hattori on MSNBC said, "there were no terrorist attacks in Iraq prior to the US invasion." He also misquoted the BBC poll which show 2/3 of Iraqis say their life is better today than it was under Saddam - he claimed the poll showed the opposite.<br /><br />I wonder if the Kurdish civilians, who were gassed by Saddam, would agree with Mr Hattori?<br /><br />Of coarse, he ripped that comment off (and almost his whole report) from the CNN guy who said the same stuff the night before.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Hello Ralph.<br />The thing on MSNBC really shows something much worse than biased reporting.In fact it shows that we westerners still see ourselves as the center of it all.Whatever happened out there to the "aboriginals" in the "colonies" is not important because there were no western casualties.Now that westerners are getting hurt,the media call it terrorism.<br />I don't think this is bias,I think it is oldfashioned colonialist racism.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

Interesting angle there Rolmops. You may be right, but Hatorri is asian (Japanese I think).<br /><br />The second best example from last night was what Chris Matthews did. He had his protégé, David Schuster interview Jerry Bremer. Schuster attacked as if Bremer was UBL and asked the most accusatory, semantic questions I have ever heard like asking Jerry, "why does your website call them engagements instead of attacks on American Troops?" Bremer had to explain that they are called engagements because in at least half of the incidents, it was US troops who initiated the contact. To which the brilliant Schuster replied, "Well then why don't you call the other half attacks." To which Jerry replied, because that would require time and effort to evaluate each and every one every time and for what purpose?<br /><br />Then Schuster went on to ask why Bremer was strengthening the border crossing with Iran when there are lots of minor border crossing. Jerry shot back, "you have to start somewhere. Just because there are minor crossings does that mean we should do nothing?"<br /><br />Then Schuster attacked Bremer for pressing the Governing Council to seek UN help. He said, "why did you do that when you disrespected the UN in the beginning." Bremer then when on to explain that is was Saddam who thumbed his nose at the UN for 15 years and that the President went to the UN on several occasions to convince them to act. Schuster interrupted Bremer as soon as he started to give that answer and Bremer had to B slap him and tell him to "Please allow me to finish my answer."<br /><br />Schuster and the gutless Pig Matthews, did themselves great harm with that one last night. The fact that Chris did not interview Bremer himself and fed Schuster these idiotic questions speaks volumes about the kind of person Matthews really is. (Hear that PW? Your hero is a gutless pig! No wonder he is such a an appeaser - he is a coward at heart!)

 

[Bigfun]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

I use to feel your pain JB, I have not watched one lick of tv in about 4 years. I'll tune back in when our kids are out (2yrs.) Facts, just the facts please. The good news is that stations that give biased info. are loosing viewers.

 

[plywoody]

Re: Dad-gummit!! NBC News bias.

I did not see the Matthews show in question, but I suspect you are mischaracterizing it some. whatever, as Matthews is hardly a hero of mine, though I do occasionally watch his show.<br />I do think there has to be some critical interviewing with the powers that be regarding Iraq, and the turning over of power on July 1, and the role to be played by the international community and the UN regarding this.<br />I can't comment on that Matthews segment because I did not see it.<br /><br />For the Record, the program and person that accurately reflects my views on this topic was last week, when Joe Biden appeared on Imus in the Morning on MSNBC.<br /><br />And the current topic, regarding the Pakistani effort, requires some inquiry as well. To the extent Pakistani troops are killing Alqaeda types, I am all for it, but I am not at all sure that Pakistan shares the same goals as the US, and I admit to a certain degree of skepticism.<br /><br />Since polls taken with the Pakistani people have shown the US has an unfavorable rating in excess of 80%, with a favorable rating in the low teens, it is hard to imagine that Musharef is somehow changing his tune regarding the US because of assasination attempts. It is hard to figure how aiding the US is going to increase his security.<br /><br />Now we have annointed Pakistan as some sort of favored non Nato nation--and while I am not exactly sure what this means, I remain skeptical. Pakistan has been the source of nuclear and other weapons technology to all sorts of other rogue countries, including Lybia.<br /><br />This country has a long history of arming rogue regimes in order to achieve a specific goal, only to have it come back later to haunt us later. A classic example is the one you cite regarding Saddam and the Kurds. We managed to arm Saddam with chemical weapons to use on the Iranians, and he used them on his real enemies, the Kurds. What a shock!<br /><br />Pakistan has been using weapons we provided during the cold war to fight the communists in order to fight the Indians, (as have the Indians to fight the Pakistanis.<br /><br />I would like to know exactly what we are giving for what we are getting regarding Pakistan, but history shows that we should all be nervous about this.