Anyone notice the corruption of the media on this shooting?

[WVPATX]

When Giffords was shot the media were quick to blame the GOP, GOP rhetoric and Palin specifically. With this shooting, no blame being assigned by the main stream media. I wonder why the switch in tone and coverage? Now the media claims the shooter is to blame or Trump's rhetoric is to blame or an attack on one is an attack on all of us or of course the gun is to blame.

Amazing what the media does to protect it's chosen ones.

 

[old buzzard]

It's not hard to imagine someone bordering on insanity being influenced by the way current events are being presented by the main stream media. In my opinion they are the ones that pushed yesterdays shooter over the edge, but they will not take their share of the blame.

 

[WVPATX]

It's not hard to imagine someone bordering on insanity being influenced by the way current events are being presented by the main stream media. In my opinion they are the ones that pushed yesterdays shooter over the edge, but they will not take their share of the blame.

When coverage is 91% negative and entertainers are doing and saying crazy, hate filled stuff, the loons will notice.

 

[Keyser76]

When coverage is 91% negative and entertainers are doing and saying crazy, hate filled stuff, the loons will notice.

Your boy was endorsed by the KKK and the American Nazi party, ya got no cred except with folks already agree with ya.

 

[moe]

When Giffords was shot the media were quick to blame the GOP, GOP rhetoric and Palin specifically. With this shooting, no blame being assigned by the main stream media. I wonder why the switch in tone and coverage? Now the media claims the shooter is to blame or Trump's rhetoric is to blame or an attack on one is an attack on all of us or of course the gun is to blame.

Amazing what the media does to protect it's chosen ones.

The media can't win with you can they? According to you the media is giving fair coverage now, right? Yet you're still complaining. I guess it's good that the media got it right this time or you'd really let them have it, huh? Hopefully you'll recover some day from your trauma from some GOP criticism that occurred with the Gifford's shooting, good luck.

 

[atlkvb]

When Giffords was shot the media were quick to blame the GOP, GOP rhetoric and Palin specifically. With this shooting, no blame being assigned by the main stream media. I wonder why the switch in tone and coverage? Now the media claims the shooter is to blame or Trump's rhetoric is to blame or an attack on one is an attack on all of us or of course the gun is to blame.

Amazing what the media does to protect it's chosen ones.

Yup. Remember how they ignored this divisive rhetoric?
(while they were blaming Trump for his alleged calls for "violence" during his rallies?)

Obama says "if they bring a knife to the fight, we'll bring a gun"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/15/obama-criticizes-trump-violence-rallies/

 

[Boomboom521]

No

 

[atlkvb]

The media can't win with you can they? According to you the media is giving fair coverage now, right? Yet you're still complaining. I guess it's good that the media got it right this time or you'd really let them have it, huh? Hopefully you'll recover some day from your trauma from some GOP criticism that occurred with the Gifford's shooting, good luck.

That's not a rebuttal to the obvious double standard he pointed out. You're blaming him for complaining about it, but you didn't explain why the difference in coverage on the part of the media?

 

[atlkvb]

No

Yes

 

[WVPATX]

Your boy was endorsed by the KKK and the American Nazi party, ya got no cred except with folks already agree with ya.

And Hillary was endorsed by BLM, CAIR, Nation of Islam, La Raza, etc., what does that prove?

 

[WVPATX]

The media can't win with you can they? According to you the media is giving fair coverage now, right? Yet you're still complaining. I guess it's good that the media got it right this time or you'd really let them have it, huh? Hopefully you'll recover some day from your trauma from some GOP criticism that occurred with the Gifford's shooting, good luck.

I just point out the facts. The media is thoroughly corrupt. Dishonest.

 

[atlkvb]

I just point out the facts. The media is thoroughly corrupt. Dishonest.

and incompetent.

They haven't read that guy's Facebook page?

They don't know he was a Left wing radical?

They don't think his political beliefs have any merit to this story as to his motivations for murder?

That's not news?

Incompetence.

 

[WVPATX]

and incompetent.

They haven't read that guy's Facebook page?

They don't know he was a Left wing radical?

They don't think his political beliefs have any merit to this story as to his motivations for murder?

That's not news?

Incompetence.

They don't want to know. They don't want to assign blame unless of course it is guns or the GOP. The NY Times even recounted the Giffords shooting today and still blamed Palin. OMG.

We still differ on incompetence. For you see, I think they know exactly what they are doing. It is a planned and executed strategy.

 

[atlkvb]

They don't want to know. They don't want to assign blame unless of course it is guns or the GOP. The NY Times even recounted the Giffords shooting today and still blamed Palin. OMG.

We still differ on incompetence. For you see, I think they know exactly what they are doing. It is a planned and executed strategy.

Yes I agree with you they do know what they're doing, and as I said I don't have a problem with their bias or even allegiance to Leftist ideology Pax. They're free to believe what they want.

They're supposed to be non biased and objective, but I've stated since that's impossible I'd settle for them just being honest about their bias or beliefs.

We already see it so they're not really fooling anyone, but they are steadily losing credibility (what little they have left) pretending they're not already biased.

Their credibility happens to be the one thing they need in order to be believed doing their jobs yet that little fact goes completely over their stupid Leftist heads.

That's their incompetence.

 

[moe]

I just point out the facts. The media is thoroughly corrupt. Dishonest.

lol complainers complain, that's what they do. sniff

 

[WVPATX]

lol complainers complain, that's what they do. sniff

Pot calling kettle black, lol.

 

[moe]

Pot calling kettle black, lol.

lol no one comes anywhere close to you. You've started 4 threads whining about the media just today which is probably about average for you but it's early.

 

[Boomboom521]

lol no one comes anywhere close to you. You've started 4 threads whining about the media just today which is probably about average for you but it's early.

It's in his contract.

 

[WVPATX]

lol no one comes anywhere close to you. You've started 4 threads whining about the media just today which is probably about average for you but it's early.

You guys afraid of a debate? Personally, I believe that since the media has a special place in our Constitution they need to live up to that honor. If the media is corrupt and choosing sides, they should lose those privileges. For example, make it easier to sue for slander or libel.

 

[old buzzard]

lol no one comes anywhere close to you. You've started 4 threads whining about the media just today which is probably about average for you but it's early.

The only people not complaining about the media are the weak minded ones who can't see how biased it has become. All media has reduced themselves to nothing more than propaganda machines, too bad you're one of the weak minded ones.

 

[atlkvb]

You guys afraid of a debate? Personally, I believe that since the media has a special place in our Constitution they need to live up to that honor. If the media is corrupt and choosing sides, they should lose those privileges. For example, make it easier to sue for slander or libel.

I'd favor them wearing "D" lapel pins on their clothing or "R" or "I" so we can tell immediately what their bias is.

Or just like milk is arranged in the supermarket, they can broadcast on properly labeled channels.

You can buy Whole milk, 2% 1% or skim.

Truth in labeling, that'll solve the problem of any "bias" because folks will instantly know what kind of milk they're buying and drinking.

 

[moe]

The only people not complaining about the media are the weak minded ones who can't see how biased it has become. All media has reduced themselves to nothing more than propaganda machines, too bad you're one of the weak minded ones.

I'm sorry that the news has become so confusing for you and patx. Let me know if you need anything explained to you, I'm glad to help.

 

[WVPATX]

I'd favor them wearing "D" lapel pins on their clothing or "R" or "I" so we can tell immediately what their bias is.

Or just like milk is arranged in the supermarket, they can broadcast on properly labeled channels.

You can buy Whole milk, 2% 1% or skim.

Truth in labeling, that'll solve the problem of any "bias" because folks will instantly know what kind of milk they're buying and drinking.

I read the former public editor of the NY Times opine on this issue. Her op ed was on fairness and balance. She raised this issue of reporters and editors proclaiming information on how they voted, who they donate to, what party affiliation do they have, etc. In the end, she was against it.

I think it would be, as you suggest, transparency. We should know the biases of the reporters and editors. They should make it apparent to the reader. It would give us more information so that we can use if when evaluating the reporting.

 

[WVPATX]

I'm sorry that the news has become so confusing for you and patx. Let me know if you need anything explained to you, I'm glad to help.

Not confusing at all. I realize you are easily confused, but we are not. I will continue to point out the obvious examples of main stream media corruption. If you notice, I don't cite MSNBC because they acknowledge their biases. I do include CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Wash Post and other papers that claim to be hard news reporters.

 

[old buzzard]

I'm sorry that the news has become so confusing for you and patx. Let me know if you need anything explained to you, I'm glad to help.

No confusion here, no help needed. I fully understand that Fox is the propaganda arm of the right, and that the rest are the propaganda arm of the left. Too bad you can't see that. I'd like to see a news outlet that reports on the news from both sides without trying to slant it to fit their own agenda. Currently a media outlet that fits that description doesn't exist.

 

[moe]

Not confusing at all. I realize you are easily confused, but we are not. I will continue to point out the obvious examples of main stream media corruption. If you notice, I don't cite MSNBC because they acknowledge their biases. I do include CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Wash Post and other papers that claim to be hard news reporters.

You left out Fox.

 

[atlkvb]

I read the former public editor of the NY Times opine on this issue. Her op ed was on fairness and balance. She raised this issue of reporters and editors proclaiming information on how they voted, who they donate to, what party affiliation do they have, etc. In the end, she was against it.

I think it would be, as you suggest, transparency. We should know the biases of the reporters and editors. They should make it apparent to the reader. It would give us more information so that we can use if when evaluating the reporting.

Yea I mean we already know they're a bunch of Leftist sycophants. But they're still asking us to believe whatever they report ostensibly because they are simply fairly and objectively reporting "facts"?

They haven't earned our trust of whatever they report. So much of it is either wrong, or made up, or they pick and choose what to tell us, or they flat out lie! They have zero credibility, and I don't think anyone should listen to a word out their mouths.

I'm for allowing everyone else to know up front what their bias is so we can simply ignore them like I already do.

 

[atlkvb]

CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, Wash Post and other papers that claim to be hard news reporters.

Is that what they do? Claim to be reporters? I thought they were apparatchiks.

 

[bornaneer]

Your boy was endorsed by the KKK and the American Nazi party, ya got no cred except with folks already agree with ya.

Wow......what a very large voting bloc. I guess thats why our "boy" immediately disavowed both groups. I believe your "boy" was going to disavow the endorsement of his mentor and cop killer Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers and his b*tch terriost wife Bernardine Dohrn UNTIL his puppetmaster George Soros instructed him otherwise.

 

[WVPATX]

You left out Fox.

Fox hard news reporting is very fair. Shep Smith (gay and liberal), Chris Wallace (a registered Dem who is a NEVERTRUMPer) and Brett Baier are their hard news reporters. Their opinion analysts are certainly to the right, but not their hard news. MSNBC is different, they have no real hard news. Trump has received lots of negative press from Fox, just not as much as the 91% of the main stream media.

 

[moe]

Fox hard news reporting is very fair. Shep Smith (gay and liberal), Chris Wallace (a registered Dem who is a NEVERTRUMPer) and Brett Baier are their hard news reporters. Their opinion analysts are certainly to the right, but not their hard news. MSNBC is different, they have no real hard news. Trump has received lots of negative press from Fox, just not as much as the 91% of the main stream media.

If you agree with it, then it's fair. If you don't, then it's not. Pretty simple.

 

[atlkvb]

If you agree with it, then it's fair. If you don't, then it's not. Pretty simple.

If they're on the Left they should admit it. Hate the Right? Admit it. On the Right? Admit it. Hate the Left? Admit it.

Talk radio hosts (Conservative) admit their bias and point of view up front.

Ironically, they do a much more thorough job of informing because they often explain the Left to make their points even though they admit to being on the opposite side of it.

Their audiences aren't upset with them and don't get mad at their admitted Right wing slants. They often engage Leftists who call in and try to challenge them.

It's not only good entertainment, it's wildly popular.

It's an information format the Left has yet to capitalize on because just like this forum, if you're FOS, you get exposed rather quickly by facts proving it.

The same reason Leftists on this board like you moe run away and refuse to debate facts or answer questions to counter your emotional outbursts.

I'd favor the MSM being subjected to same type of scrutiny through simple truth in labeling.

My prediction is their Leftist ideology laying bare and exposed for all to see without them hiding behind the farce of "objectivity" would spell their near immediate on air deaths.

I'd be OK with THAT!kay:

 

[WVPATX]

If you agree with it, then it's fair. If you don't, then it's not. Pretty simple.

No, if they report facts, I agree with them. When they report lies or innuendo or don't report both sides of an issue, then I have a problem. You should to. Our democracy depends on a free and fair media.

 

[Brushy Bill]

Your boy was endorsed by the KKK and the American Nazi party, ya got no cred except with folks already agree with ya.

Your gal let the KKK kiss her in public.

 

[Brushy Bill]

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[eerdoc]

Your boy was endorsed by the KKK and the American Nazi party, ya got no cred except with folks already agree with ya.

That is a stretch and anyone with the IQ above single digits KNOWS it. Who might endorse spoke one is not within the power or the one being endorsed to control. You infer that Trump agrees with and, thus, is an equal to a member of the KKK. You know that is NOT factual. Do you want to discuss the escapades of Sir Robert Byrd who WAS a n active member of the Klan. The charges against Trump are, we might say, really 'trumped up'. Why not rely on fact without the spin and appear at least as a somewhat reasonable individual rather than one only interested in trying to unduly paint one in an unkind light which could influence some one who also lacks the intelligence or knowledge or ability to reason. Sad that you or anyone else sees such a position as being an admirable trait. It is truly the mark of a sick soul and deranged mind.

 

[atlkvb]

Why not rely on fact without the spin and appear at least as a somewhat reasonable individual

Asking this of someone on the Left is like asking an Isis terrorist to foreswear violence & take a pledge for Peace.

 

[eerdoc]

Asking this of someone on the Left is like asking an Isis terrorist to foreswear violence & take a pledge for Peace.

Probably more true than many of us wish to admit. Are so many folks so deranged that they no longer possess basic decencies?

 

[WVPATX]

That is a stretch and anyone with the IQ above single digits KNOWS it. Who might endorse spoke one is not within the power or the one being endorsed to control. You infer that Trump agrees with and, thus, is an equal to a member of the KKK. You know that is NOT factual. Do you want to discuss the escapades of Sir Robert Byrd who WAS a n active member of the Klan. The charges against Trump are, we might say, really 'trumped up'. Why not rely on fact without the spin and appear at least as a somewhat reasonable individual rather than one only interested in trying to unduly paint one in an unkind light which could influence some one who also lacks the intelligence or knowledge or ability to reason. Sad that you or anyone else sees such a position as being an admirable trait. It is truly the mark of a sick soul and deranged mind.

Notice how he didn't respond when I pointed out Hillary's endorsement by La Raza, CAIR, BLM, Nation of Islam, etc. I wonder why?