What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Not All Free Anti-Virus Software Is Created Equal view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
194 Comments
- inactive, on 02/16/2009, -14/+107D.C. journalists are in absolute hog heaven right now. So much to write about and so little time. They are loving the soap opera that is the US House and Senate. Just like most fairly wealthy people, Wall Street fat cats, and our government, they do not exist in the same reallity as do the NORMAL people like you and me.
Yes, normal--and I don't intend any jokes around that word. We are the people who get up and go to work every day, take care of our kids, mow the lawn, do the dishes, order delivery pizza, do our own laundry (or at least take it to the cleaners ourselves), shop for our own groceries, pump our own gas (unless living in NY or NJ), etc.
The normal people, you and I, are disgusted with the childish game playing. We see our neighbors losing their homes, our family members struggling to pay bills, and our coworkers losing their jobs.
People like us have felf the economic pinch for years. It still saddens and outrages me that no one plays attention to dangerous trends in the economy until it hits Wall Street. Then, and only then, does it seem to matter to the powers that be. - Rusty626, on 02/17/2009, -6/+74Truth is, they've always been out of touch, but the internet wasn't around to point it out.
- Kinak, on 02/16/2009, -5/+70I've been wondering a lot of late if the media has always been this out of touch or if it's a recent trend. I've only been able to see now because of the internet and, even more specifically, blogging.
On the bright side: regardless of political affiliation or lack thereof, we can completely sidestep the mainstream media now. Possibly, once enough of us have done that, they'll start doing some serious reporting. - inactive, on 02/17/2009, -37/+78Dailykos research poll, now theres an unbias poll if I ever saw one!
- worldstoaster, on 02/17/2009, -2/+42Nowhere did the OP say there was anything wrong with his current life, nor did he complain or even hint at being a victim. Don't be so pretentious.
- OregonRusalka, on 02/17/2009, -15/+51Actually, until the advent of cable television, CNN, and the pressure to fill 24 hours with programming supposedly all "news", the big time, out-of-touch journalists were only in New York and worked for CBS, NBC or ABC. Journalists predominantly came from working class backgrounds, and few had a college degree. Most learned their trade "on the job" from older colleagues. Journalism salaries for White House correspondents weren't all that great (ask Helen Thomas), and few of them (Cronkite, HuntleyBrinkley et al.) had sinecures to defend and perpetuate. Now the national journalists are uniformly from upper-middle class backgrounds, graduated from prestigious universities, and honestly have no idea how the other 80% live. When they move from on-camera correspondent to "talking head opinion-meister", they have no experience of hardship or deprivation. To their minds, everyone is at least as well off as they are. As they become more famous, politicians et al. court them and they begin to see themselves as more important than they actually are. At the same time, they are so deeply self-identified with their corporate bosses that they really believe the elite propaganda they spout. In order for a Wolf Blitzer or a Joe Scarborough to have any comprehension of what daily life is like for us, they would have to be plunked down in the middle Wichita or Pocatello with no money, no identification, and no support network, with orders to build a life for themselves. They couldn't do it. They simply could not survive in an environment where they are not famous and doors do not open at the sound of their names. They would have just as hard a time finding a job as any one of us. Unfortunately, none of those know-it-alls is gutsy enough to embark on that experience -- which is actually what Barbara Ehrenreich did when she was researching for her book, "Nickeled and Dimed in America". Well, Anderson Cooper got trapped in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and found himself face to face with ordinary people -- and it changed him for a while -- but after hanging out with the powerful and privileged for the past few years, he's back to pushing the GOP line and hauling water for the neo-cons. Faux News and the Right Wingers were very adept at bullying CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC et al. for being "too liberal" -- which is such a joke! If you've never heard Pacifica Radio, you do not know what a liberal media would sound like! With Rupert Murdoch's money and blessing, Roger Ailes created a television Pravda for the neo-cons -- which scared the pants off all the other national media and drove them like a border collie drives sheep right into the right wing corner. And then, about 20% of the US population still likes the fascist right-wing anti-commie direction of the GOP. They don't see what's wrong with spying on American citizens or torturing prisoners. And that 20% has a lot of money to use to influence policy and opinion.
- jsdratm, on 02/17/2009, -6/+37This polling is done by Research 2000 which is sponsored by Daily Kos. Not a poll of Daily Kos users if I am correct. I think it is more credible than the comments here seem to suggest.
- plaguepony, on 02/17/2009, -40/+68HuffPost Spam and a DailyKos Research Poll. Goddamn Hilarity.
- kalvinb, on 02/17/2009, -33/+59The stimulus bill needed to be obstructed.
- kingmanic, on 02/17/2009, -0/+24I don't think ron paul had the support you think he did. He had a band of very vocal libertarians on side but the majority of the internet would not have backed him. The distortion many face when looking at the internet is the facts only 10% of internet citizens actually post anything. The other 90% simply lurk. So even a small group of vocal supporters can seem far more numerous than they are. Even in real life it's true. The majority of Christians aren't creationists but the creationists are so obnoxiously vocal that many thin they represent all Christians. The majority of Republicans aren't racists gun nuts with out an education but he racist gun nuts without an education are very vocal. Democrats aren't left wing hippy nut jobs but the left wing hippy nut jobs are the most vocal.
It skews peoples view of the world because the moderate majority usually remains silent and all they hear are the nut jobs from the other side. - WHauser, on 02/17/2009, -3/+23Hinting that a poll is biased does not establish that it is. If you can show me where the questions they asked were worded in such a way as to suggest the appropriate answers or if you can show me how their sampling design was any less representative and potentially biased than other telephone surveys then I'll take your words as credible.
Since you have not as yet provided any more than the baseless opinion of another internet nobody I'll go ahead and assume that you have nothing to contribute to the discussion. - pintomp3, on 02/17/2009, -1/+16So did the Iraq War resolution.
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -1/+15As someone pointed out above, to a large extent the media also *set* the truth before the advent of the Internet. Amazing how much you can get away with when you have a virtual monopoly on information dissemination....
- profgiles, on 02/17/2009, -21/+34Since the Corporate Media are owned by Republicans they will have a bias toward the Republicans. Plus, "journalism" as practiced in this country looks for conflict rather than facts int heir coverage. For these two reasons the Corporate Media will spend much more time covering Republicans complaining about Obama than actual substance of the issues the Republicans are complaining about. We say this on how the Corporate Media gave twice as much coverage to Republicans than Democrats during the stimulus debate. http://digg.com/political_opinion/Corporate_Media_ ...
- nihilville, on 02/17/2009, -19/+32As I stated below:
"The Daily Kos polling (done through Research2000) was actually more accurate at predicting the final election results of 2008 than either Rasmussen or Quinnipiac. But who cares about accuracy when you have rabid partisan bias, amirite?" - phaedoHD, on 02/17/2009, -3/+14There's always the possibility though that we think the media is out of touch because we are so acclimated to the "heartbeat" of the internet. Consider the last election. Had "the internet"'s opinion been the one that counted Ron Paul would have won a landslide victory. However, the "real world" seemed to not be too enthused about him.
The sad fact is the media dictates what 90% of the people think about issues because few (except those of us who live on the internets ;-) bother to look into issues deeper than what the media presents. This is particularly sad because media members tend not to be the sharpest tools in the shed (though they are tools). So we have very unintelligent people dictating what more intelligent people think. This is a recipe for disaster and is largely why our government is able to pretty much do whatever it wants all the time. - GnralHavoc, on 02/17/2009, -5/+16Some news channels that is true, but some not really. Here is my take of them.
Fox News - Ridiculously Republican to the point of sickness
MSNBC - Favors the Democrats (however I feel Olbermann, Maddow, and Matthew's sometimes tip the scales in Democrats favor even more)
CNN - Actually kind of neutral. I would like them more if they didn't have Larry King, he was good but now is just annoying.
Tell you the truth, Daily Show and Colbert Report are the only real neutral ones. I know they are joke news, but they at least give each party the shots they deserve. - m3th0dm4n, on 02/17/2009, -1/+1010 bucks says you are a chicken hawk GOP-tard.
- omgwhataguy, on 02/17/2009, -6/+15You have talking heads like Chuck Biscuits and Gordy Long and people just suck it up without thinking for themselves. This country needs to WAKE UP and realize the situation we are in and that we NEED the recovery to work!
- ALiberalMind, on 02/17/2009, -1/+10The issue though is that companies (especially large corporations) try to generate wealth by simply shifting money from one point to another and calling it growth. Sure, that may generate wealth in short term, but the true backbone of any economy is the physical product that's produced (i.e. the value of labor). Whether it be someone in the mines, a group of people working together to create a new database solution, someone creating a new work of art to sell, etc., this is what's used to create real growth. The problem with this "new economy" is that it was built upon things such as interest, stock derivatives, mortgages, and many other things while other sectors like manufacturing & IT support got shipped overseas. The real growth was removed while the fake growth was put in its place. That's one reason why everything is tanking sine we have no other safety cushion to fall back on except for the jagged rocks below.
If we want to recover, we do need people who are good innovators, but we also need to bring back our stable sectors again. It does no good if you invent something only to have it manufactured in China. - WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -17/+26Dailykos research poll as reported by HuffPo, no less. That's not to say that the mainstream media doesn't have its collective head up its collective ass, but come on - if you're going to complain about media bias (especially if you're pointing fingers at the GOP), at least cite a source that *pretends* to be neutral.
- Darkicewolf, on 02/17/2009, -2/+11how does tax relief exactly help? .. For me anyways all tax relief would do would help my ability to save money because I would have more money in general from my Salary to save.. Well and good for me since I still have full time employment. But how does that help the ever increasing amount of unemployed.. all tax relief would do it is slow the bleeding not fix the problem. There still unemployed and unlikely to be reemployed at there old pay scale until the market can reclaim lost growth.
- inactive, on 02/17/2009, -0/+9Paragraphs next time, please.
- GnralHavoc, on 02/17/2009, -0/+9Not really, when he made his speech on the Stimulus plan Jon Stewart let him have it pretty good. Also they let Giethner have it to when he unveiled his "Bank Bailout" plan.
- JHW539, on 02/17/2009, -3/+11"Obstruction of what? Do the American people even know what party controls and controlled the Senate and the House?"
You can't seriously be ignorant of what a filibuster is. You know, the thing that the Republican Senate did twice as much as the previous Democratic Senate, setting a new record for two sessions so far? And yes, they were filibustering the stimulus bill - it's just such standard practice for the party of no that it hasn't borne much mentioning. - Natealus, on 02/17/2009, -12/+19Hearing all the GOP *****' whine make me RAGEEEEEEEE!
- Alheithinn, on 02/18/2009, -0/+7Actually, you do. They're the only ones who can.
- ALiberalMind, on 02/17/2009, -0/+7Actually, the "Corporate Media" is biased to what it says: Corporations. It doesn't matter if they have an R or a D, they're only going to report on petty issues to keep people partisan while the other issues like Monsanto are simply left unchecked. Remember when Anna Nicole Smith died? Every damn media source was like, "Stop the presses! We have to report on this useless crap for 2 weeks!"
We are literally entertaining ourselves to death. - Batfishy, on 02/17/2009, -0/+7You know that a Stimulus and a Bailout are 2 different things, right?
- Maddoktor2, on 02/17/2009, -11/+17If this comes back and bites the GOP in the butt, it can kiss 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016 goodbye.
- Phazeless, on 02/17/2009, -4/+10 Thank Gaia for the clear, middle of the road, everyman thinking of Dailykos and The Huffington Post. They see right through the disguise of CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC and the mainstream journalists. They are Republican, neocon hotbeds. That is why they love and carefully follow Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the like. That's why these guys parrot Limbaugh and Hannity word for word so that you can hardly tell the difference.
No doubt most of these journalists attended the one or two conservative universities in the United States (if there are that many.) The eighty or so percent of journalists that vote straight ticket Democrat in every election probably do it just as cover to throw anyone who bothers to watch off. And I'm sure when Helen Thomas said " I'm a liberal. I was born a liberal. I'll be one until I die. What else should a reporter be?" that this again was a clever smoke screen to throw the average man off the trail.
There is one thing that is almost impossible to believe. It is hard to even imagine that there is a group of people who can look at today's mainstream media and think of it as Republican and conservative. It boggles the mind that they might say this. It is even more amazing that they might believe this.
The mainstream media of course is interested in conflict and almost never reports facts, just what someone said about the facts (or what someone else said about the other guy saying something.) But the idea that they are on the whole forwarding some conservative agenda.... the mind reels. Yes, they are supporting the powers that be. But the powers that be are not conservative. Just look at the kind of world we are plunging madly toward. - inactive, on 02/17/2009, -28/+34The only time I've ever agreed with the GOP was when they "obstructed" this bill. Actually reading the bill and making sure it does what it's supposed to and doesn't include ***** like anti smoking propaganda isn't a GOP or Dem or lib idea, it's ***** common sense.
- Zomgondo, on 02/17/2009, -3/+9The weird thing is that I think the Internet is making "the media" get more out of touch due to sampling bias. The idea that most Americans HATE the stimulus bill and the Democrats is a perfect example - most Americans in fact support the bill, but think it sucks that it has to happen, so they're not going to blog about their glowing support for it. The detractors HATE it, so they're going to be everywhere.
- markhere, on 02/17/2009, -6/+12Please identify at least one media outlet, that reports news or current events, without a political bias. They all have an obvious bias. The subjective measure of how biased they are depends on your own political perspective.
- iguana1001, on 02/17/2009, -40/+46Wait, so the DailyKos (and thehuffingtonpost) - both liberal blogs - don't agree with the Rebuplicans?! WOW!
- treehugger87, on 02/17/2009, -1/+6Isn't pendejo Spanish for "*****?"
- worldstoaster, on 02/18/2009, -0/+5Holy ***** you're retarded.
- treehugger87, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5Who the hell buried me? I'm just asking for a good source of objective news. wtf?
- lhbaker, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5Lots of ***** here today.
- ALiberalMind, on 02/17/2009, -1/+6Stupid comments are stupid.
- nedzeve, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5Yes, and hyperbole isn't sound reasoning.
- WasabiBomb, on 02/17/2009, -2/+7Yes, I'm sure that the Republicans are blocking the bill out of nothing but concern for our well-being. After all, they've been so civic-minded and fiscally responsible these past 8 years, right?
- wolfing, on 02/17/2009, -6/+11I totally support the stimulus, count another
- Alheithinn, on 02/18/2009, -1/+6And most of them have a Right-wing bias.
- ironhide, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4That's funny, I thought it was called shooting your mouth off with nothing to back it up with.
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -3/+7I'm a big fan of fivethirtyeight.com - talk about accurate predictions.
And you don't need to *have* and partisan bias to *recognize* partisan bias. Like them or hate them, Daily Kos and HuffPo have an openly-acknowledged left-wing bias. They're basically blogs, so there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but they're definitely NOT apolitical. - akamurph, on 02/17/2009, -1/+5It's called common sense. If you read the huffingtonpost and don't realize how way to the left and biased they are then you are a moron.
- WasabiBomb, on 02/17/2009, -1/+5Hell, for the past 8 years we weren't even consulted, and NOW you're complaining?!
- DrDigg, on 02/17/2009, -2/+6They never read bills. They read parts of the bills that relate to their district or supporters. Different groups have all reviewed parts of the legislation while its being written. Committees approve parts to add or take out. They could have given them a month to review to the bill and they still wouldn't have read it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 201 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is