bmags

heh. Could've come in handy last week for me. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...99.story?page=1 ON THE MEDIA In study, evidence of liberal-bias bias Cable talking heads accuse broadcast networks of liberal bias -- but a think tank finds that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Barack Obama than on John McCain in recent weeks. By JAMES RAINEY, ON THE MEDIA July 27, 2008 Haters of the mainstream media reheated a bit of conventional wisdom last week. Barack Obama, they said, was getting a free ride from those insufferable liberals. Challenges await Barack Obama at home John McCain supports expansion of Americans With Disabilities Act John McCain slams Barack Obama for canceling on the troops Such pronouncements, sorry to say, tend to be wrong since they describe a monolithic media that no longer exists. Information today cascades from countless outlets and channels, from the Huffington Post to Politico.com to CBS News and beyond. But now there's additional evidence that casts doubt on the bias claims aimed -- with particular venom -- at three broadcast networks. The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign. You read it right: tougher on the Democrat. During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative. Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center. Conservatives have been snarling about the grotesque disparity revealed by another study, the online Tyndall Report, which showed Obama receiving more than twice as much network air time as McCain in the last month and a half. Obama got 166 minutes of coverage in the seven weeks after the end of the primary season, compared with 67 minutes for McCain, according to longtime network-news observer Andrew Tyndall. I wrote last week that the networks should do more to better balance the air time. But I also suggested that much of the attention to Obama was far from glowing. That earned a spasm of e-mails that described me as irrational, unpatriotic and . . . somehow . . . French. But the center's director, RobertLichter, who has won conservative hearts with several of his previous studies, told me the facts were the facts. "This information should blow away this silly assumption that more coverage is always better coverage," he said. Here's a bit more on the research, so you'll understand how the communications professor and his researchers arrived at their conclusions. The center reviews and "codes" statements on the evening news as positive or negative toward the candidates. For example, when NBC reporter Andrea Mitchell said in June that Obama "has problems" with white men and suburban women, the media center deemed that a negative. The positive and negative remarks about each candidate are then totaled to calculate the percentages that cut for and against them. Visual images and other more subjective cues are not assessed. But the tracking applies a measure of analytical rigor to a field rife with seat-of-the-pants fulminations. The media center's most recent batch of data covers nightly newscasts beginning June 8, the day after Hillary Rodham Clinton conceded the Democratic nomination, ushering in the start of the general-election campaign. The data ran through Monday, as Obama began his overseas trip. Most on-air statements during that time could not be classified as positive or negative, Lichter said. The study found, on average, less than two opinion statements per night on the candidates on all three networks combined -- not exactly embracing or pummeling Obama or McCain. But when a point of view did emerge, it tended to tilt against Obama. That was a reversal of the trend during the primaries, when the same researchers found that 64% of statements about Obama -- new to the political spotlight -- were positive, but just 43% of statements about McCain were positive. (there is more, read link)

QUOTE (Maxwell @ Jul 28, 2008 -> 02:48 AM) Does anyone read vanity fair? I don't and I'm curious if the title of the magazine is meant to be sarcastic or if its about all things vain. It doesn't really pertain to the cover. Eh I always thought it was a literary reference to the satirical novel but I never read it so I don't know. It's just a fashion, culture, essay magazine. Had the huge article on the torture memos and U.S.

This site especially of all the sites I've been on argues the media's lack of coverage on an issue. And it always cracks me up that as evidence they'll use web sites like abcnews.com, the washington post and other major news outlets as examples. And the national review one of "taking the eye off the ball" was just dumb commentary. Is someone seriously going to argue we took our eye off the ball when major groups that planned 9/11 have taken back parts in Afghanistan while we have most of our troops committed to Iraq?

I'm a Gates man myself.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 26, 2008 -> 05:15 AM) Will you at least agree that Tim Reynolds is currently one of the best guitarist out there? I'd put Reynolds above John Mayer who is also a very talented guitarist. he uses a lot of loops and that's all nice and well. John Mayer can imitate it but he doesn't have the soul.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 26, 2008 -> 02:45 PM) And I don't think it works like it was intended, it's become a big boondoggle. I don't think they could've predicted the huge population boom that is putting it in crisis right now. BUt even so, social security only needs a temp fix. Once the baby boomers are gone, it will be back to affordability. And I do think it works as intended. Our elderly class went from one of the most likely to be in poverty to one of the least. What a thank you to them for helping build our economy and sustain our democracy.

thanks

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 26, 2008 -> 04:29 AM) Social Security. exactly what I was going to say.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 26, 2008 -> 04:19 AM) yea. some things are not meant to be impeded on. Prayer is one of those things. Ones health is another. (although, i would argue that if you are running to be president, the people have right to know you can do the job). but prayer is not something we need to know. I also want to be clear that the only reason I posed this was because "the cat was out of the bag" already. no offense, but you are sort of perpetuating the righteousness of the paper by posting it again. It proves that people want to know what he said despite private privileges. And I'll acknowledge right now that righteousness is not the word I'm looking for.

QUOTE (Shadows @ Jul 26, 2008 -> 02:13 AM) A couple of things.. 1.) Flash, your Ledger jokes serious made me LOL.. that was good, cant believe no one else laughed at it. 2.) 3.) Spoiler tags are seriously gayer than aids. If you don't want to know about the f***ing movie, don't come into this thread. If you haven't seen TDK why are you reading this thread to begin with? And don't f***ing lie, you know you highlight and read some of it anyways. 4.) Anyone who is complaining about NCFOM being spoiled by this thread needs to STFU. As stated earlier its been out forever and if it mattered that much to you, you would have seen it by now. No, I don't. Some people would probably want to see reactions to this movie without actually seeing the plot or storyline discussed. Things talking about performances or general reactions are left out of the spoiler tags. But, that gayer than aids line, really classy. And sorry, I don't live in Chicago and I don't have a lot of money. There's no video rental place round me I know of and I can't afford netflix. So STFU.

Dave Matthews is not the greatest guitarist of our generation in any way shape or form. He's not even top ... he's not mentioned.

for the record, it was given to a number of Israeli papers and only one decided to post it. Unfortunately, it seems that paper is only getting rewarded now that it's being picked up by a bunch of people. A student grabbed it out of the wall after Obama placed it in there. edited for clarification.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 25, 2008 -> 08:52 PM) Except Dave Matthews is one of the best guitarist of our generation. You can knock his music all you want, but he's a very very good guitarist. Yeah, no come on man. There's a reason every bro with his shirt off is playing #41 or whatever.

I agree with northside on this, that's how I took it as well. i.e. Obama's campaign has been in another class

tpm: Pentagon Confirms That It Told Obama He Couldn't Visit Army Base With Campaign Staff By Greg Sargent - July 25, 2008, 11:13AM I've just gotten clarification from the Pentagon on what really happened with regard to Barack Obama's canceled visit to an Army base in Germany, something the McCain campaign has been using to hit Obama since yesterday. A Pentagon spokesperson confirms to me that because of longstanding Department of Defense regulations, Pentagon officials told Obama aides that he couldn't visit the base with campaign staff. This left Obama with little choice but to cancel the trip, since the plan to visit with campaign aides had been in the works for weeks. The Obama campaign yesterday announced that it had decided to cancel the visit to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, saying that it would be "inappropriate" to make such a visit as part of a campaign trip. The McCain camp has nonetheless been using Obama's canceled trip to insinuate that he's anti-troops. "Barack Obama is wrong," McCain spokesperson Brian Rogers said in a statement yesterday. "It is never 'inappropriate' to visit our men and women in the military." But it turns out that the Pentagon did in fact tell Obama that in this case, it was not only "inappropriate," but against DOD rules, for him to conduct the visit with campaign staff. "We have longstanding Department of Defense policy in regards to political campaigns and elections," Pentagon spokesperson Elizabeth Hibner told me. "We informed the Obama staff that he was more than welcome to visit as Senator Obama, with Senate staff. However, he could not conduct the visit with campaign staff." After being told this, the Obama campaign announced yesterday that it had decided it was "inappropriate" to make the visit as part of a campaign trip. It's unclear how Obama could have made the visit at all, given the Pentagon's directives. No Senate staff was on the trip, and the Obama camp says they received the Pentagon's directives on Wednesday, after they were already abroad.

Yeah, spoiler tags are such a hassle, you have to...highlight something. What a relief.

Well, if it was really important to Obama to see injured troops, he should've just landed his plane in a field somewhere and coaxed some local boy with a cocacola to rickshaw him to the military base. What's his deal?

you are absurd, they make the trips for weeks than the day before, on a trip planned to the hour, they weren't even sure if his plane could land on the base. Grow up.

The DoD essentially canceled his trip with the troops, but nice try. Actually half the s*** on there doesn't even makes sense.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jul 25, 2008 -> 02:41 PM) Are we expected to put a spoiler tag around every key point in every movie ever made? I watched Gone with the Wind last night, I think it's fair to expect not to have no country for old men ruined for me when I go into a dark knight thread. But I realize hitting a button is pretty tough.

maybe this oil spill in the gulf should be of concern right now?

considerable questions would've been raised if Colin Powell resigned suddenly during the run-up to the war, to say the least.

you should thank your lucky stars this isn't american idol. All those McCain supporters having to figure out text messaging, it'd be a disaster.

btw, just cause it isn't the dark knight doesn't mean you shouldn't put other movies in the spoiler tags.

tomatoes