Ministry of Truth

1:09 pm EST September 16th, 2005 | Media | 14 Comments

CNN edits video to cast Joe Lieberman in a bad light. Sad.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

14 Responses to “Ministry of Truth”

  1. mr.curmudgeon says:
    September 16, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    PSU94,

    Generally true, but this time his statement was being used to paint the entire Democratic party as complicit in Brownie’s ascension.

    Do you care to address the ethics of the editing, or just smear more shit?
    From you’re statement, I’d gather you’re just another “ends justify the means” right-winger. Say it ain’t so?

  2. PSU94 says:
    September 16, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    I thought making Joe Lieberman look bad was a good thing to the far-left.

  3. Dugger says:
    September 16, 2005 at 2:09 pm

    Lets get rid of CNN, then, OK? Since they cast one of your guys in bad light, lets get rid of them. You guys can control half their programming and us the other half. It will tough on us conservatives losing such a reliable conservative voice as CNN, but to show you our good faith, we’ll give a full half of their programming. Won’t you join me today in this bi-partisan effort?

    Dugger, a very Earnest Person and Amigo to Progressives Everywhere

  4. mike3k says:
    September 16, 2005 at 3:09 pm

    Go fuck yourself, Dugger. I’m really sick of your crap.

  5. Todd B. says:
    September 16, 2005 at 3:09 pm

    I’d much prefer we get rid of the talking head blowhards on both sides and get back to some straight news, personally.

    Does anyone care about this “media bias” thing anymore? It’s laughable now – the conservatives will come out and say it’s biased to liberals, the liberals will come out and say it’s biased to conservatives, and the media will come out and say it’s not biased at all.

    If both sides complain about media bias, then I’m pretty sure it’s not really about the media but more so about how each side wants to hear the news so it conforms to their opinions, which have already been set in stone.

  6. Dugger says:
    September 16, 2005 at 4:09 pm

    Todd,

    I care. And I think there is rampant bias, about 70% skewed left, in the media. Would rather read OW and listen to Franken, who are honest about their biases, than to someone pretending one way but with an agenda the other. To me there is no other answer than to have Fox and talk radio on one side and Big Liberal media on the other. problem with that equation is that it is lopsoide left IMO.

    Mike3K,

    Sorry to here you are ‘really’ sick. Try not reading my posts and see if the problem clears up. If not – – somebody may need to invoke the Ol’ Yeller cure for you.

    Dugger, A Cyber Typhoid Mary?

  7. Todd B. says:
    September 16, 2005 at 6:09 pm

    I care. And I think there is rampant bias, about 70% skewed left, in the media. Would rather read OW and listen to Franken, who are honest about their biases, than to someone pretending one way but with an agenda the other. To me there is no other answer than to have Fox and talk radio on one side and Big Liberal media on the other. problem with that equation is that it is lopsoide left IMO.

    Dugger:

    The problem is that there is bias in just about everything – different people hear only what they want to hear. The anti-Bush people on the left only want to hear criticism about the President while the pro-Bush people on the right cry foul everytime they think the newscaster is being unfair by levying complaints against the policy of the United States and/or the President (generalizing for the sake of ease).

    It’s all perception.

    The major problem is that people gravitate to Limbaugh, Hannity, Malloy, and Rhodes because they tell them how to think rather then listening to both sides of an issue and forming an opinion for themselves.

    I also think that the media bears some brunt of the responsibility because they have successfully molded editorialism and hard news together as one entity with shows like the O’Reilly Factor, Hardball, etc that people can no longer tell the difference between straight news and opinion oriented shows.

  8. Semanticleo says:
    September 16, 2005 at 6:09 pm

    Todd;

    “I also think that the media bears some brunt of the responsibility because they have successfully molded editorialism and hard news together as one entity with shows like the O Reilly Factor, Hardball, etc that people can no longer tell the difference between straight news and opinion oriented shows.”

    Unfortunately, the past 40 years has seen the emergence of News Lite as the viewing choice of the public. We cannot blame the media entirely for pandering to it’s own economic interests.

    The viewer determines, almost exclusively, the quality and temperament of ad-supporting programming.

    People want to be entertained. So, that’s what they get.

  9. Todd B. says:
    September 16, 2005 at 8:09 pm

    Unfortunately, the past 40 years has seen the emergence of News Lite as the viewing choice of the public. We cannot blame the media entirely for pandering to it s own economic interests.

    Oh, I’m not arguing that the entertainment/news industry is a business looking to make a profit – one only needs to look at the coverage of celebrity trials and Entertainment Tonight type of shows to realize this.

    I also don’t fault the media completely – we, as in the broad scope of the United States, tend to gravite towards more “gossipy” stories rather then actual news so the media is catering to the demand.

    However, there is a line that we must draw in the sand when entertainers like Hannity, Scarborough, O’Reilly, Matthews, and others are presented as news makers rather then editorialists – just look at how most news networks promote their prime time lineup.

  10. James E. Powell says:
    September 16, 2005 at 9:09 pm

    It would take a lot of make me feel bad for Holy Joe. He is tied with MNBA Joe for No. 1 enabler and suck-up to the Republicans. But, when one of the Republicans propaganda outlets, here CNN, decides to use him to smear all Democrats, I have to object.

    Of course, my objection to this, like all my objections to the Republican Party, is noted and promptly forgotten.

  11. Semanticleo says:
    September 16, 2005 at 9:09 pm

    “However, there is a line that we must draw in the sand when entertainers like Hannity, Scarborough, O Reilly, Matthews, and others are presented as news makers rather then editorialists – just look at how most news networks promote their prime time lineup.”

    I agree whith most of what you say. However, in the post previous to last you said ‘people hear what they want to hear’ (paraphrase) and yet you say above that ‘we’, the american people have chosen to be satisfied with what they see. Sometimes it satisfies by providing them with something to be critical of and that is a really powerful drug.

    What has to be done by the ‘we’ is to take a more active role in the process of changing attitudes,(sometimes-one at a time) about what constitutes the facilitation of human development.

    That is where you fault the media. They are in a position of providing truthful matters in a non-judgmental manner. And that judgmental approach is not just the purview of the right.

    But you cannot blame the media(which I know you DO NOT)

  12. Semanticleo says:
    September 16, 2005 at 9:09 pm

    delete last line

  13. dugger1 says:
    September 17, 2005 at 7:09 am

    Todd,

    IMHO there really needs to be a true rededication to pure news reporting – getting the facts. I agree three is likely to be some bias in everything but there needs to be a strong anti-bias ethic established- one that overrirdes social consciousness etc. I could give a d*mn if I hear bad stuff about Republicans and conservatives (its there) as long as it is fair and the standard is applied across the board. I believe they should start with the example set by Brian Lamb (who really doesn’t do a lot of reporting, but used to do a lot of interviewing) and CSPAN. It can be done, but the guiding ethic has to be “no bias”.

    Dugger

  14. bryan says:
    September 18, 2005 at 10:09 pm

    If they had shown the Kanye West outburst all over the USA, instead of just where the time delay wasn’t working, I would go along with the idea of there being no censorship in the USA