Are you suffering from Fox-o-phobia?

[sirs]

Your opinion is duely noted, as are the facts reported by MRC as still being unrefuted

[BT]

Your opinion is duely noted, as are the facts reported by MRC as still being unrefuted

Well let's look at one of their assertions of bias. They say Brian Williams built Jimmy Carter up to being a better ex-president than he was a President. Not sure if that is incorrect. What would be subjective would be how Carter ranks among ex presidents for post presidency work. He certainly has been busy, so has Bill Clinton. So who would be the better ex president. That would depend on who was doing the ranking.

[sirs]

I supposed that would be based on accepting your conclusion/premice that the the "agenda" here was to demonstrate Carter as being a better ex-president.  Since I don't accept nor agree with that premice, the rest of the commentary is pretty much.....moot.  Maybe that was Williams' agenda, but sure wasn't MRC's, in bringing this to light.

[BT]

One of MRC's complaints was how Williams treated Carter.

Whether Carter is one of the better ex-presidents is subjective, (you know what that means don't you?) so I'm not sure why MRC and you would list that as an example of Williams bias.

In selecting which excerpts, from his sit-down with former President Jimmy Carter, to showcase on Monday's NBC Nightly News, Williams began with the not so humble boast from Carter that ?I feel that my role as a former President is probably superior to that of other Presidents, primarily because of the activism and the injection of the Carter Center into international affairs,?

I happen to think Carter a much better ex-president than he was as a president. Of course that is my subjective opinion.

It's kinda like bitching that Brown was responsible for California's pension woes, when further examination shows that was not the case.

Beware of sound bites from either side of the spectrum. Take responsibility to be an informed citizen and double check the propaganda coming from all quarters, because somewhere in between lays the truth.

[sirs]

One of MRC's complaints was how Williams treated Carter.

That wasn't in dispute

Whether Carter is one of the better ex-presidents is subjective, (you know what that means don't you?) so I'm not sure why MRC and you would list that as an example of Williams bias.

YOUR premice of whether Carter is a better ex-president, is subjective on top of subjective.  Yea, all snide of yours aside, I do know what subjective is.  Your beef, if you have one, is with Williams, if you believe that's what he was doing.  The flaw is claiming that's what MRC was claiming he was doing.  That's the flawed premice I don't agree with, nor see it in MRC.  MRC is merely reporting the platform that Williams, a reporter and prominent member of the MSM, provided an ex-president, without even a hint of trying to question the ex-president's credentials or allegations aimed at Fox

I happen to think Carter a much better ex-president than he was as a president. Of course that is my subjective opinion.

Good for you.  Not an issue here though.  the issue is as I explained above

It's kinda like bitching that Brown was responsible for California's pension woes, when further examination shows that was not the case.

WOW, you're going to pull that gross misrepresentation/fabrication again??  I think the term there is "desperate", or perhaps "grasping", at something that never was

 

[BT]

Unless you can provide examples of MRC showing right wing bias on the MSM , by default they are biased simply because the only thing they look for and report is subjective left wing bias in the MSM. They are a poor source for proving your case.

I have no beef with Williams. I don't watch him. Nor do i watch the other network nightly newscasts.

My premise is that in the end this alleged bias does not matter, because i have accepted the responsibility of researching issues to the point that i can reached an informed decision on the matter. I have not and will not abrogate that responsibility to any reporter, pundit or poster.

Your mileage may vary.

[sirs]

I'm glad to know that folks like Government watch dog groups, looking out and reporting overt, excessive, inexcusable Government spending are merely biased partisans who must......I guess hate the Government, since they're just being "subjective" in their reporting.  Couldn't possibly be a legitimate & sincere response to an out of control X.

So, for those not so diligent as your self, at "researching the issues", I'll give some credence to those organizations that do fill a void in reporting facts that largely the MSM avoids like the plague

[BT]

I'm glad to know that folks like Government watch dog groups, looking out and reporting overt, excessive, inexcusable Government spending are merely biased partisans who must......I guess hate the Government, since they're just being "subjective" in their reporting.  Couldn't possibly be a legitimate & sincere response to an out of control X.

So, for those not so diligent as your self, at "researching the issues", I'll give some credence to those organizations that do fill a void in reporting facts that largely the MSM avoids like the plague

That's an interesting position to take re: watchdog groups.  My guess is these watchdog groups look at GOP spending as well as Dem spending.

I don't think you can claim the same for MRC.

BTW did you come up with an example of MRC reporting bias from the right?

[sirs]

They look at out of control Government spending.  So, since they don't also report on how well the Government does spend, and/or when they're being shrewed with tax dollars, they're obviously biased, and can't be taken seriously

Your mileage may vary

[BT]

They look at out of control Government spending.  So, since they don't also report on how well the Government does spend, and/or when they're being shrewed with tax dollars, they're obviously biased, and can't be taken seriously

Your mileage may vary

That's certainly an interesting deflection. Are you saying the GOP would not be scrutinized when examining out of control spending?

[sirs]

Are you saying MRC wouldn't scrutinize out of control RW media bias, if that were actually the case?  Government watch dog groups focus on a perceived problem.  MRC's doing the same.  If one is biased and can't really be counted on as being objective, obviously neither can the other

[BT]

Are you saying MRC wouldn't scrutinize out of control RW media bias, if that were actually the case?

I have asked repeatedly for examples, but so far you have provided zilch, nada, zippo examples.

Perhaps that would be because their mission is to expose liberal bias in the media.

The mission of the Media Research Center, "America's Media Watchdog," is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove ? through sound scientific research ? that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed ? Media Research Center (MRC).

http://www.mrc.org/about/about.aspx

Note that there is no mission to expose ALL BIAS in the media only a certain (liberal) type.
 
The same  can not be said for government spending watchdog groups who go after anyone (GOP or Dem) who abuses the public purse.

[sirs]

Are you saying MRC wouldn't scrutinize out of control RW media bias, if that were actually the case?

I have asked repeatedly for examples, but so far you have provided zilch, nada, zippo examples.  Perhaps that would be because their mission is to expose liberal bias in the media.

Not expose as much as highlight the overwhelming amount.  But expose works as well.  Compared to any vast RW media bias, it's nearly non-existant, which is why you wouldn't see much, if any.  It's analogus to Government watch groups exposing government abuse of tax dollars.  But according to you, their focus is ok, but MRC's is not.  Nice double standard

Note that there is no mission to expose ALL BIAS in the media only a certain (liberal) type.

The one that is far and away the most predominant & problematic.  Analogus to out of control Government spending, where the focus of Watchdog groups, are on a certain type of spending, (irresponsible, if not wreckless)

[BT]

It's analogus to Government watch groups exposing government abuse of tax dollars.  But according to you, their focus is ok, but MRC's is not.  Nice double standard

I think you have finally grasped my point. I'm sure you could find numerous complaints about the inherent abuse of tax payer funds when examining the Bush Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit from government spending watchdog groups.

How many complaints do you see from MRC about Fox News Broadcasts?

Double standard anyone?

or simply biased reporting?

[sirs]

It's analogus to Government watch groups exposing government abuse of tax dollars.  But according to you, their focus is ok, but MRC's is not.  Nice double standard

I think you have finally grasped my point.

No, just the double standard

I'm sure you could find numerous complaints about the inherent abuse of tax payer funds when examining the Bush Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit from government spending watchdog groups.

Yea, and.....?  Not at issue

How many complaints do you see from MRC about Fox News Broadcasts?

Considering I've seen them, as well as the other news outlets, and having "done my research", they actually are fair and balanced.  Hannity obviously is not a "news show", nor is O'Reilly's, yet the latter goes after Republicans just as hard as Democrats.  Chris Wallace is about as fair and balanced a news host can get.  The reason you don't see any compliants from MRC is precisely as they've provided, they go after the excessive government spending, ooops, wrong watch dog, the excessive liberal bias in the MSM.  If the Government functioned appropriately, as far as handling our tax dollars, watch dog groups would have little to report.  Same for the MSM and it's pervasive, and blatant left leaning bias