Bias is history
Posted by aogSunday, 01 February 2009 at 15:10 TrackBack Ping URL

I have read a number of posts lately on the winter storm problems and the difference in reporting vs. Hurrican Katrina and something occurred to me — the recognition of bias requires memory. So naturally if you’re one of those journalists or more broadly of the MAL for whom history always started yesterday you will be incapable of understanding why others accuse of bias. Now that’s turning a weakness into strength.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
cjm Sunday, 01 February 2009 at 22:00

it’s pants pissingly funny that media hacks have destroyed their livelyhoods in support of their corrupt politics. maybe i will have to eat those words if obama and pelosi somehow resurrect the msm, but i really think they are going down for the count. who knows, maybe things will even start getting back to normal once the msm has been fully supplanted. MSM, B.I.H. (“burn in hell”)

erp Monday, 02 February 2009 at 08:55

cjm, yours is the second optimistic thing I’ve read this morning. Hope it’s a trend. BIH - love it!

cjm Monday, 02 February 2009 at 14:40

erp: when the NY Times is a hare’s breath away from insolvency, you know that things have got to be getting better.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 02 February 2009 at 15:32

Here’s another thing to think about —

Consider the obvious bias on reporting about Obama’s nominees for the Cabinet and their little tax problems. Now, cast your memory back to Kimba Wood and Zoë Baird. The press savaged them far more than any of Obama’s picks, despite them being nominated by then President Clinton. Is this gender bias, or is Old Media far more deferential to Obama then they were even for Clinton?

Hey Skipper Monday, 02 February 2009 at 18:45

Old Media far more deferential to Obama then they were even for Clinton?

No, it is because they are so in the tank for Obama that they have completely relinquished their powers of analytical thinking.

Oh, uh, MSM … analytical thinking. Never mind.

cjm Monday, 02 February 2009 at 19:10

it’s a class thing; clinton was perceived as low class even though he went to yale and oxford. it took them awhile to warm up to him, and even then he always had someone in the press saying mean things about him. they were still slagging hillary during the last primary season, too. who knows why they fell so hard for obama, but fallen they are.

skipper: let me know a few days before you get back here, and we can set up a lunch meeting :)

David Cohen Tuesday, 03 February 2009 at 16:03

I also think that the media thinks that it paved the way for W by reporting all of Clinton’s foibles. They won’t make that mistake again; they’ll make some entirely new mistake.

cjm Tuesday, 03 February 2009 at 19:47

they already have, and are dying as a result.

Post a comment