digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

US public sees news media as biased, inaccurate, uncaring: poll

rawstory.com — FINALLY! How long does it take for the American people to wake up? Poll respondents who use the Internet as their main source of news -- roughly one quarter of all Americans -- were even harsher with their criticism. Internet news audiences tend to be younger and better educated than the public as a whole. And people, turn off Fox News!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • HeartlandUSA, on 10/29/2007, -32/+155Note #6 on the list:
    Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, published research on fascism in which he examined the fascist regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each fascist State:

    1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

    2. Disdain for the recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarceration of prisoners, etc.

    3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists; terrorists, etc.

    4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military are glamorized.

    5. Rampant sexism - The government of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

    6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

    7. Obsession with National security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

    8. Religion and Government are intertwined - Government in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.

    9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation are often the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

    10. Labor Power is suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated, or are severely restricted.

    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

    12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

    13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

    14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassinations of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

    Benito Mussolini - who knew something about fascism - had a more straightforward definition: “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.”

    Abraham Lincoln stated, “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed.”
    • obliviousfool, on 10/10/2007, -4/+35Look man, take the Lincoln quote off your cut-and-paste thing. He never said it, and I'm tired of reading some reply about how Lincoln never said it every time you post this! Otherwise, rock on!
      • mdhauke, on 10/10/2007, -23/+6It's about time the public realized the glaring loberal bias in today's media.
        • bortis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+24Down with the Loberals!
        • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17I'm tired of being lobbed in the head with assortments of blunt objects.

          Down with the Loberals!
          • RobotCitizen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I too was once loberated, and it was very painful.
      • DocHoliday22, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13American news channels are completely weird to me. In the UK they have to REMAIN NEUTRAL when presenting the news and even in heated debates they don't pick sides. If we had a Bill O'reliy in the UK he would be pretty much dead because of the publics intolerance for people like that. The closest thing we have to Bill is Anne Robinson.
        • sgtbutterscotch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Wasn't she that weakest link lady?
        • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I not sure how much the BBC has to play by the UK rules, but the BBC is very Liberal bias. While they might not have the extremities of a Bill O'Reilly, they do get quite far out there in left field.
        • Teh5809, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6The BBC has been a government propaganda tool at least since WWII and probably before. I remember reading 1930s radio transcripts in history lessons where the BBC would announce giant sky nets capturing hundreds of German planes in mid air. Looking back at the reporting from just before the Iraq invasion, things haven't really improved that much, just that now they tend to selectively hype the news they want you to hear, and totally ignore the news they don't want you to hear as opposed to just lying.
        • DocHoliday22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In the 1930s everything was biased for propaganda material. Get this (British people will know about this) but when Princess Diana died and an ITV news anchor reported it, he let his emotions get the better of him slightly as he stumbled over words. His producer then told him that he would be off the show if he didn't act professionally as he was REPORTING the news as a main anchor and not giving his opinion. People praised him for this. There was another incident where Trevor Mcdonald lost his cool with one of the people he was interviewing, during the break the producer said "Trevor if you lose your cool again your gonna be off the show forever."

          All this sounds weird to you guys but it's how us Brits prefer the news. Zero bias so when the news is spoken by these guys we trust what they say. And most of the time these guys are very well informed but they never personally take sides either.
    • Astaro, on 10/10/2007, -13/+6I'm getting bored of reading this in every damn article that has any tangential connection to news media, or politics, enough already.

      We know, we've been force to read it 20 times!
      • Schmidtopolis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Actually, with this being the internet, you've had the OPTION to read it 20 times. Look there-------------------->
        It's called a scroll bar, and it moves vertically, thus allowing you to skip passed what you don't want to read. I know it's a tough concept, having the option to choose to read something or not, but enjoy that freedom.
        • brundlefly76, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Actually I regularly go over to Astaro's house and teach mandatory classes in mass communications and political science to his family, and the reading list I give them is pretty brutal and repetitive. I guess their not as into it as I thought they were :(

          My bad.
    • KataLieb, on 10/10/2007, -10/+16The connection of corporations to fascism is no coincidence. Corporations are by definition Fascist entities. The majority owner holds absolute power in the corporation, and can command anyone else in the corporation to do whatever it is the corporate dictator wants to do. Corporations have a hierarchical power structure and no democracy or freedom at all...Except the freedom to quit if you dont like how things are done around here.
      • PjsPjs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You cannot define a term by using the term in the definition.
        Corporations are legal entities.
        They exist only under law.
        Fascism hijacks corporations, churches, and schools, by passing laws.
        Laws like the power of political constructs to incorporate.
        • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I think his point might be that corporations are authoritarian, because they are run by a handful of people, while the workers don't get to "vote" on anything the company does. I think you could argue back and forth about whether that is right-wing totalitarianism, or left-wing totalitarianism.
          • PjsPjs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well a corporation is someone's property.
            Maybe Americans should incorporate themselves as a whole.
            And then lobby the Government as a corporation.
        • eryximachus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What is worse is that the word corporation has an entirely different meaning in English Law than in Italian speach. Mussolini was referring to Fascism as being the "body" of the nation, or the corpus. Corporatism, in the sense the OP is referring, is the belief that the Fascist state organizes disparate groups, each of which are "organs" of the state. Corporations, as they exist in English speaking countries, were not at all relevant to fascist society or the discussion of corporatism.
      • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Corporations themselves need constitutions, employee rights and privileges. Simply making them a democracy only (which sounds more like communism) is tyranny of the majority (mob rule/mobocracy). Think about it in terms of, if you owned something that every one wants or wanted to be in a relationship with someone that very few approve, and they decide to have a vote about whether you get to keep it or not.
      • sensoukami, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"Corporations are by definition Fascist entities." == Incredibly stupid statement
      • bufmike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1kind of sounds like how a sole proprietorship works too, or most businesses for that matter.
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15More importantly, note #1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #7, #8, #9, #12, #13, and possibly #14.
    • raskali, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Fascists also talk a lot.
    • rkiga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3wow going through the last comments he made, it seems the OP sure likes to SPAM:
      http://www.neaveru.com/digg/stats/simonln007/max_comments/50
    • philipl411, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9So almost every country out there is a fascist state. Who knew.
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9I disagree with #10. The only threat to fascism is intelligent, responsible people. Some points are frightening warnings of how easily government can be corrupted. However, I've lived in and been to third world countries, and America is FAR from fascist. Strong nationalism is completely lacking as many Americans say that would rather live in another country (and then never do), don't know the pledge of allegiance, declaration of independence, preamble to the Constitution, Gettysburg address, or other historic national creeds. Human rights are more protected in America than most of the world (maybe any other nation in the world); we even give millions of dollars to non-citizens who are not here legally! Americans are not unified by any enemy, as most believe we shouldn't be in Iraq, and some want us completely out of the Middle East. I work with the military, and there really is not special glamorization of our military in any way. It's one thing to support troops, but it's another to call that "glamorization". Sexism - again America was one of the first to end sexist traditions in government, and _governmentally_ speaking, sexism is really not an issue. I think it's safe to say that the media is not controlled by the government as the majority of media outlets are vocally hostile to the current administration. The only censorship we have is protecting CLASSIFIED information, which is not always 100% (Valerie Plame?). Of course people are concerned with national security immediately after an attack. But now, most people are much less worried about it.

      Religion in our government consists, if anything, in atheism, which is not the religion of the majority of Americans.

      Corporations in America are very limited. For over 100 years, large corporations have been forcibly broken down to promote free trade. Only recently have mega corporations become common, and these try to separate themselves from politics for fear of public reprisal.

      See my first sentence.

      I know people think of the handful of professors and intellectuals who have been chastised for their speech. But honestly, what kind of fascist nation would allow everyone, even government employees, to speak badly of the "all-powerful" government?

      I'd say we have an obsession with crime, but not so much punishment.

      While both parties have been accused of cronyism for pardoning or reprieving former employees or whatnot, many protections are in place to keep such practices in check.

      Don't be a sore loser. Sorry, shouldn't say that. I think very few Americans seriously distrust the voting system here.
      • chocolatetacos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Many of your points are good (so I dugg you up for reasoned disagreement). However, we are closer to the "fascist points" posted above now than we were 10 years ago. You've probably heard all of that evidence many times so I'm not going to rant through the list.
        • mrfunybuny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree with chocolatetacos' comment about klecu's comment 100% - we're getting closer to fascism than we have been. Also, klecu should not be digged down, it's wrong, even if his views seem too positive for some.
      • jhnshft, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Yes, this point – "Only recently have mega corporations become common, and these try to separate themselves from politics for fear of public reprisal." – is why things are heading in a not so great direction. The government is starting to allow these mega-corporations to form and even removing regulations to make it easier for them to happen. They have been limited, but that is changing and these entities are using their "mega" power to enforce their will on society.
        • thecoolestguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1How exactly how are these mega corporations enforcing their will on society? The only way corporations can enforce their will on others is by lobbying government to create regulations. Deregulation -which you are complaining about- reduces the ability of corporations to "enforce their will on society".
      • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The only difference number 10 makes is between Fascism and Communism. A union by itself is not communism, but given backing by the government giving more weight to it's authority pushes it towards communist. Like for example, if you want to work at some places you have to be part of a union, paying union dues.
      • dukeochutney, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0You may have seen other places but obviously you've seen nothing of the actual world becauase if you had you wouldn't be spouting off this *****. You would have to be a ***** twit to think that this country is moving towards fascism. I live in Dallas and its everywhere. The constant military ***** with the flags and ' my son is in the military' as if they are special to have family in a worthless country fighitng for oil. The religon everywhere, I have more religous channels on television than normal stations its ridiculous. This country is also horribly sexist and its obvious everywhere. Everyone I know my age already has children and most women stay home and pump out babies. Good to see that humans can do what their DNA has told them to. This country may not be fascist yet but sure as hell is in trend towards it.
        • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe where you live, but not where I live and work and have grown up. I occasionally see some one with a bumper sticker about troops, but I also see anti-war ones, and occasionally at a federal building near by I see protesters, although I do live near a college. Of the people I know, most of them are single or unmarried, and the ones married only some of them have kids, the others are to busy working to have kids.
    • santabanana, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Sounds like Chavez regime to me!
    • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3I think it's funny that 'simonln007' thinks that people are concerned about media bias in Fox. He's doesn't have a clue! They are talking about the big media like NY Times,CNN,MSNBC,LA Times, etc.... Fox is big because they are politically diverse (Despite constant Digg submitters brainwashing!).
    • Jelvik, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Sounds like what America is turning into. Most of those points hold true.
    • mikeb01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well here's a real one from Abe!
      Property is the fruit of labor...property is desirable...is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume VII, "Reply to New York Workingmen's Democratic Republican Association" (March 21, 1864), pp. 259-260.
    • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I think one point missing from that list is gun control. While gun control alone doesn't indicate facism, you can't have facism with out it.
    • supaklaw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So without reading your comment, media is liberals? No thinky? Average media insta-celebrity is actually a minor thousand-aire? Averaging 200K per year? They would be biased how? Are they Replubican? Does it matter if they are just above middle class and yet pretend to be filters for public information? Oh wait, your comment had nothing to do with media, just a rant about Fascism and Corporate control. Biased blathering is always important in public debate, thxkbai.
  • jgleason1, on 10/10/2007, -23/+9Those who don't history are bound to repeat it.
    • astrofire, on 10/10/2007, -4/+27Those who don't are bound to make grammar mistakes.
    • KataLieb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Bah, I didnt even notice that sentence was missing that one word. My brain spellcheck just inserted the word there in its correct place and id been just happy with that...Before you pointed out this lil slip.
    • RyukShinigami, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4that 2 minute edit window is a bugger isn't it :)
    • flashingcurser, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I do history ;)

      (You guys know what he meant)
  • jgleason1, on 10/10/2007, -19/+2Know
  • backoff34, on 10/10/2007, -18/+55Of course its biased, its that damned liberal media slandering our great country.

    (yes, I was joking for those of you who cannot detect sarcasm)
    • the6thReplicant, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9hey don't be so hard on us

      there are a lot of people on digg who believe that (even though logic states otherwise)
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It wouldn't be a good parody if no one acted like it, now would it.
    • zulfy26, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21FOX NEWS. FAIR AND BALANCED.
      • Randinn, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3As much as Kos is fair and balanced....
        • atheinostic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13Having a political viewpoint isn't bad if you're upfront about it. Fox News ought to just come out and say that they are conservative, and then no one would care.
          • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5*****.

            You'll have half a billion 12 year olds screaming about how they were right all along.
          • Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Is anyone not aware that Fox News is conservative? Or did you just not get the memo?
        • bubba9999, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8What channel is KOS on again? Is it only on satellite?
        • Bajeda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3They say right on the front page that its a source for "LIBERAL" news. Fox actually screams in your ear that its fair and balanced.
      • gerbil20, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3I am not happy at all with FOX. But others are much worse.
        Roooohhhhhhnnnnnn Poooooooowwwwhhhhhhhllll!!!
    • thebigsix, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Right, I believe everything they tell me on the Fixed News channel.
    • rationalthinker, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5There's truth in humor *****. Conservatives have known this all along... why is this research any surprise?! Especially when 8 in 10 journalist polled openly admit they're democrats. Objective?!... hardly.
    • flashingcurser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664

      Something interesting to read about the subject.
      • Terh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0And also not anywhere near 'proof' of bias. Counting how many times a news station refers to liberal/conservative based groups does not indicate bias strength. You don't need to cite a source to spew *****.
    • Vigilo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Bush is not a conservative Bush is a NEO_CON . Forget that this is liberal bias because Bush is no conservative. If Bush is a conservative then the Easter Bunny is with Al-Qaeda.
    • Vigilo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Bush is not a conservative Bush is a NEO_CON . Forget that this is liberal bias because Bush is no conservative. If Bush is a conservative then the Easter Bunny is with Al-Qaeda.
    • Vigilo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Bush is not a conservative Bush is a NEO_CON . Forget that this is liberal bias because Bush is no conservative. If Bush is a conservative then the Easter Bunny is with Al-Qaeda.
  • corevette, on 10/10/2007, -5/+72you want to know why our country is so uneducated? blame the media, not our gov't
    because although our government does ***** things up
    the media doesn't report half of the important ***** that goes on our country
    IN OTHER NEWS: Paris Hilton may loose custody of her baby
    • the6thReplicant, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15You get the government you vote for.
      You get the media that you're willing to watch.
      • ndurkes, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9"You get the government you vote for." - A great America lie...
        "You get the media that you're willing to watch." - I will buy that, but where are the "good" choices? Few and far between in my opinion.
      • bloomanchoo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7democracy now > http://www.democracynow.org/
      • sodade, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"You get the government you vote for. You get the media that you're willing to watch."
        This is total *****. There are no valid choices. We are all voting and watching the lesser evils.
        • BESTenemy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Do you grow up expecting all the choices to be given to you on a silver platter? Get off your ass and start your own organization. Produce, don't just consume. It is easy to loose the sense of taste while willingly putting up with what is spoon fed. Flex your muscles, man, before they're completely atrophied.
      • UglieJosh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Take your inspiration from Richard Prior and vote "None of the Above"!

        Don't like the news options? Don't watch them! Don't be one of those tools that whines about Fox News being conservative biased only to turn around and watch the liberal biased channels.

        Get the message across that we demand change. It is a sad world we live in that a lot of us liberals plan on voting for an anti-abortion, pro-religion libertarian; just because he is the only one telling us the truth (Gravel and Kucinich do as well but, let's be honest, they have no chance).
    • monsieurx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Amazing how little international news you get also in the US. CNN and yahoo just stink in that dept unless some US national or interest is at stake...
      • BarneyF, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah I was just over at news.yahoo.com, and had a look to see what was going on in Europe. Hoof & Mouth disease, OK, but ONLY other news item was a Diana painting contest to honor the tenth anniversary of her death.

        My last visit to that site.
    • avions, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Paris Hilton has a baby?!
    • Vigilo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why do we even need the networks to show us news. In my opinion they are becoming obsolete like vhs. Some old folks watch it but the rest of us hear news then research it on the internet from various sources. Then we see that what we saw on tv wasn't the whole story. Then we see that they have exaggerated a little, even lied. In the end we lose confidence and tune out.
    • Mavtek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0You're right something is wrong with the education alright!
      Hilton doesn't have any kids and it's lose, god damn it! not loose.
  • whatthefu, on 10/10/2007, -18/+8Yes, I'm sure reading all these blogs and alarmist websites are better than the mainstream media. Seriously, I don't understand why people trust bloggers more than journalists--they're just as bad as one another. And look what the internet has done to half of Digg: made them completely sensationalist in the same way neo-conservatives are about equally stupid *****.
    • Kewlduderules, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Digg allows one to discuss a story from different perspectives. Read the comments people will usually have different insights, knowledge, or links that can corroborate or debunk a story. That is why digg and other blogger sites are the best medium for news. With trash tv news, you only get the corporate perspective with very limited public participation and that is usually censored to fit the network's interest.
    • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Blogs that don't censor critical comments are probably more trustable. I can see that.
    • BarneyF, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4It isn't about lying and truth. American journalism is a joke. They do celebs, human interest, fear mongering, set pieces on given topics (Nazis in Germany, exploding space shuttles etc) and a little ambulance chasing but make no attempt to figure out what is going on or follow anything up.

      Watch the way they report on the campaign. There's almost no discussion of the actual policies of the candidates. They only report on "negative campaigning" or, if they're ideologues (like O'Reilly) use soundbites to launch ad hominem attacks.

      Think of the Swift Boat thing. How did that ever get published? It told us nothing about the things we needed to know about the future.

      My advice to people is to turn off their TV - which doesn't allow you to express your disapproval - and NEVER click on trite links. Complain to websites that don't offer sensible news.

      But no one really cares, so it won't happen.
    • diggtomanjeri, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1First, Digg isn't a news site or organization so your comparison is invalid.
      Second, most blogs will actually link to source material so you can read in depth on the issues being discussed and find out for your self if they are being honest or not. Newspapers, TV and Radio do not allow for that end user proof.
  • astrofire, on 10/10/2007, -1/+34I'm glad that the public at large is becoming more interested in the motivations behind news networks, instead of just taking the news stories at face value.

    However, the comment at the end of the summary is a major part of the problem. It does nothing but trivialize the conclusions of this study by turning the results into an adversarial "us vs them" mentality. The problem is not simply with Fox News as is implied, but ALL news media, and implying otherwise is juvenile. The point is that all news from any source should be taken with a large grain of salt.
    • Treoinmypocket, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You are absolutely right. The "And people, turn off Fox News!" comment just showed how truly blind people are. The major difference between Fox and the other networks is how unsubtle FOX is. The other networks are very biased but simply more careful in how they deliver it.
      • BarneyF, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Save America. Turn off your TV.
        • UglieJosh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That simple line is brilliant, Barney.
      • Takalth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0So true. If anybody has any doubts, read "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays, one of 3 founders of CBS news. He arrogantly tells us about how it's the responsibility of his news organization to shape public opinion and control the minds of the masses.
    • bufmike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why do you think fox news has such high ratings? Because many people were tired of liberal "news". If the media pre-fnc were neutral fnc probably wouldn't exist. AKA: Filling the vacuum.
  • fancypantscz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+56I don't trust any single entity to tell me what is happening in the world. I trust some sources of information more than others but ultimately I decide what to believe. The Internet is very conducive to gathering information from a variety of sources in order to develop a personal world view. Sure, many blogs are alarmist and full of spin but there is also a lot of real information out there if you are willing to do a little digging or diggging. My major problem with mainstream media is not how they cover the 'news' it is what kinds of information they deem to be 'unnewsworthy'. Democracy in America is being hurt by the way mainstream media covers the news; packaging practically every issue as conservative vs liberal. Democracy in America is being systematically dismantled by the mainstream media as a group of massive conglomerates choosing not to cover certain issues at all, namely news detrimental to corporate interests.

    The two perfect examples of this are 1. how we were mislead into the Iraq war and 2. how our perspective presidential candidates are selected for us by the network managers. Questions for candidates are systematically chosen to confine the 'debate' to only certain topics of 'national interest'. Why we let corporate executives decide what is in the nations best interest is beyond me.

    The you tube debate was an interesting idea but rendered utter ***** because the network execs. selected the videos to be shown. I think digg should sponsor a debate where we submit the questions and let the digg community decide which questions to ask based upon the number of diggs. That would be realizing some of the great potential the Internet has for reinvigorating our democracy.

    Most Americans do not concern themselves with politics because they are disgusted and marginalized. The is a result of generations of televisions. Imagine what a better place the world would be if Americans were actually responsible civic minded people. I think the Internet holds the keys to saving American democracy. It will not happen on its own because the powers that be prefer no change. We have to make it happen. It is in effect a revolution that is already well underway.
  • greenback1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+33Americans are discovering that ownership of Big Corp Media is made up of an international group of businessmen with no true allegiance to any country - modern day pirates in $10,000 suits. Among the pirates who own and pretty much dictate information content to the American public are guys like the King of Saudi Arabia or cult leader Sun Yung Moon and plenty other tyrants who hold massive amounts of shares in all the major news companies. We the People are upset by that and are determined to take back our country and our media.
    • 7shadesofcrazy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14I think this is one point people don't get - and it's not just the media. The old men running major corporations have zero allegiance to a country. They can get up and move somewhere with other opportunities. Murdoch, an Aussie, only came to the US because of the potential for wealth. He would/will move to wherever the most potential for building wealth exists, and he'll do it without any regard for the bettering of humanity.
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3There's nothing wrong with any of this. The problem is some retards like to pretend that a persons motives do not matter. The problem isn't the drive to make money but the idiots who tell us we shouldn't be cautious around people who's sole aim is making money. No sane capitalist thinks in this way, everyone has motives and it's important to know where they are coming from before you get involved.

        All part of the drive to produce generations of dumb consumers. Really America is facing the establishment of a class system like we used to have in Europe in the dark ages. Instead of being around who has the biggest armies though it's about who has the most wealth. You have the cynical and aware corporate class and the stupid and trusting consumer class. The corporate class pays for the propaganda and brain washing necessary to keep the consumer class stupid. In return the consumer class spends all their money without ever questioning why. A real capitalist strives for more information, to understand the people they deal with and their motives. The consumer strives only for an easy life, so what if they get screwed over in the process, they'd rather not have to think about it.
        • UglieJosh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Your post made me hungry. Who wants to go to *****'s and grab a burger?
  • HeartlandUSA, on 10/29/2007, -12/+3whatthefu
    Really? Facts are just folks just reading blogs & alarmist websites? I read legislation, what our elected officials say & do. But thanks, because your comments certainly shows your colors &/or ignorance. Why don't you do your homework for a few years & then present a solid factual response (its called a debate)? And how many CEOs do you know? And what was your factual case? Because it sounded like defamation of character (of someone you don't know while avoiding the argument directly), which is an attorney's last best defense when proof (facts) are not on their side. (aka: known as desperation)
    • Kewlduderules, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4spoken like a true tv guru. Get real!
  • cindylauper, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10apparently it's uber-long comment day on digg
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's also "astoundingly ironic article day", too.

      Rawstory posting a poll about the news media as "biased, inaccurate, uncaring"? If that isn't irony, I don't know what is. They are #1 on the internet in the ***** domain. I wonder if this rawstory spammer added the "turn off FoxNews" bit, or if that was more RS suppression of media it considers threatening?

      If you have any integrity and self-respect, you bury rawstory articles like many other people (including me). It's just FUD, every single time.
  • identifiedlogo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6What did they expect, their cover is blown, people dont want to leave in fear anymore;
    • SoloMalee, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I'd be happy to *leave* in fear. It's having to stay in the United States of Fear that would worry me.
  • zulfy26, on 10/10/2007, -12/+13Fox News is the only true media outlet. Fox News tells it like it is. Fox News is not biased at all. Fox News thinks every other media outlet is liberal bias!
    • coffeebot, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2if Fox News was a religion, it would be Wahibi Islam
      • KataLieb, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5More like Evangelical Christianism...Oh wait...
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4FNC is only better because they aren't nearly as pessimistic and negative as CNN, MSNBC, or the networks.
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1FNC is only better because they aren't nearly as pessimistic and negative as CNN, MSNBC, or the networks.
    • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3/sarcasm
    • techresearcher, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1who r u? a fox news rep or something? i also agree w/ klecu
    • Bercebu48, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2trailer trash tabloid t.v.
    • thecoolestguy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Fox gave a really long interview to Ron Paul so I have a new found respect for them.
  • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12"Among those who get their news from newspapers and television, criticism of the news organizations was up to 20 percentage points lower than among Internet news audiences, who tend to be younger and better educated than the public as a whole, according to Pew."

    Hell yeah! we PWNZD their asses!
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2And (Republican) internet users support Ron Paul. (Oops, did I say Ron Paul. This must be spam.)
    • franklink44, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Once again, I'm digging down anybody using any form of PWND. It must die people
  • curios, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10In the UK the news media is disproportionately negative, to the point of misery. It's a completely biased, flawed world view they present.
    • KataLieb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Ah, like BBC who just got caught rigging TV quiz shows that were supposed to be fair?
    • bubba9999, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7At least they give you topless women in the newspaper every day. We don't even get that.
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Usually that is to cover up the fact they have no content. I actually find the broadsheets to be reasonable in Britain, they tend to avoid emotion and produce the facts as they are (though naturally journalistic bias is beyond defeating, you still need to be a cynic but most who read broadsheets already are). The paper to absolutely avoid though is the Mail, never has there been a source of media so bereft of all virtue. If a kid fell over in the street they'd blame it on immigrants taking our job.
    • AustinMandi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Why does there need to be equal time for positive and negative news reports? We are living in some of the worst times we have ever faced. It's time to stop the whitewashing and soft-focus news and report reality.
  • JohnyD, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7No they don't... the American people are just as asleep to what's going on around them as they were 5 years ago. This article says nothing. It doesn't even talk about its sample size, among other things. "More than half of Americans say...". REALLY? More than half of them said it? I'm sorry... I wish I could agree with the story (I believe the US media is lending to its own destruction) but it's just another floppy statistic.

    Ok, after googling "The Pew Research Center" I was able to find that, "The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted July 25-29 among 1,503 adults" but they still do not talk about % of men/women, upper, middle, lower income families, etc. Anyhow, here's to hoping it's true and American's are going to wake up soon.
  • dmh11686, on 10/10/2007, -7/+34Whats with the Fox News bashing in the title.

    Here's the actual poll with out the Rawstory spam.

    http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=348
    • jessecurry, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17exactly, it removed any credibility that the poster had built when he threw in that last jab at one specific news outlet.
    • mstoneburner, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10Well people who hate Fox only do so because the station isn't biased in their favor. They just can't bring themselves to admit that their own news channel of choice, be it CNN, MSNBC, or the BBC, is just as biased, perhaps more so.
      • atheinostic, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6O RLY? You don't think Fox News is a propaganda outlet for the GOP? I guess that it is just a coincidence that people who got most of their news from Fox News were Bush's strongest support constituency in 2004, and just happened to have more misconceptions about Iraq (actually having WMD, etc.) than any other audience. Fox viewers voted Bush over Kerry 88% to 7%, supporting Bush more than gun owners, war supporters, or even white evangelical Christian fundies. Obviously, very fair and balanced.

        Fox news has a hard right bias, CNN has a pro-corporate center-right bias, ditto for MSNBC, and the BBC isn't in America. The rest of the developed world didn't follow the USA on its hard-right turn in the 1980s, so pretty much anything coming from Europe will seem "left-wing" to Americans used to watching the corporate ***** they put on our teevees.
        • mstoneburner, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7That's pretty funny how you assert that the BBC can't be biased because it's based in Europe. Really, that's rich.
        • shauncorleone, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4CNN is center-right? Perhaps you should actually start watching these channels you're analyzing.
      • BillyBIanks, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3"Fox News is a propaganda outlet for the GOP." Truth.
        Now pull your head out of your ass and realize that MSNBC does not have "a pro-corporate center-right bias," but rather a blatant liberal slant.

        Just because you agree with it does not make it unremarkable or less incendiary...
  • RidgeWalker76, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18The MSM is a joke.
  • IamBobX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Should I bury this as "Obvious?"
    • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No, you should bury it for being rawstory.
  • Fashion_Nugget, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Well the fact of the matter is that news is a business. The stories that are run are the ones that will be the most controversial or otherwise most talked about. That is unless a story will reflect badly on a large corporation who is also a large buyer of advertisement. And don't forget the American media's order of importance of people killed: 1. other reporters 2. Celebrity 3. Americans 4. All other people. Generally I call most "Journalists" newscasters because there is not much Journalism going on these days. Sad. True.
    • KataLieb, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4And its been decided in an US court of law that news corporations have NO obligation to tell the truth...Theres no law saying they cant lie, distort or omit facts as they please. AFAIK the channel in question was Fox news who had fired 2 journalists for refusing to lie on air. The judge thought that Fox news was right and coul, in fact, force its employees to lie. And sure, you can fire the truthers if they refuse to do so. Its business after all and not truth its about.
    • plethorex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Your comment reminds me of something I saw a few days ago on the CNN website. The giant "breaking news" headline was about the 6 miners trapped, and a majority of the side headlines were mining related stories (because people can't focus on more than one topic at a time, obviously.) But, buried and hidden on the list, near the bottom, was the story, "Suicide bomber killed 19 children." 6 Americans in a mine > 19 KIDS in Iraq.
  • rkiga, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I think the OP missed the point that the internet was seen as the most biased of those in the poll. here's what's on the front page of the Pew Research Center website (who conducted the poll):
    http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/564-front.gif
    read the link above at people-press.org run by the Pew Research Center, not the spam link in OP
  • coffeebot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6if CNN picks up this dugg article, it will be news about the news about the news
  • HollowMarkeD, on 10/10/2007, -8/+13I have to say I was amazed the first time I saw a Fox "News" story whilst on holiday, as I have been brought up on BBC (although even they are guilty of bias) Basically it was a story on how Muslims in Afghanistan had refused food because a charity had insisted they take a bible as well as the food. Imagine that happening after Katrina - sure have a blanket and food but you have to read the Koran as well?

    The Fox presenter had a Muslim spokesmen on to speak on the story and I've never seen someone so shocked at the rude, aggressive and harsh tone his interviewer newsman used on him, implying that as Islam was an "inferior" religion people should be glad of getting the chance to read a bible whilst eating their dried food snacks. An opinion yes, but to have that presented as FACT by a news outlet was astonishing, and I can only imagine that constant exposure to such bias will influence people who just plug themselves in to the TV and rely on it for all information.
    • gerbil20, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4That's what happened after 9/11. Saudi prince came with a check and a shopping list of demands. Rudy told him to fsck off. Barbara Boxer said, "yes, please, how kind of you!"
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I'm sorry you've had to endure BBC. Unfortunately, it sounds like the whole thing was misrepresented. They probably simply distribute the Bibles with the aid. It's called "missions". Nobody makes them read the book, or take a quiz on it. It's simply part of the handout.
    • Immij, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I was out in Thailand during the 7/7 London bombings and the only English language news channel I could get was Fox. It was laughable, the anchors mispronounced most of the road names (e.g. Edgware as ed-ger-wa-ray) and when Charles Clarke gave his official statement they had their own moron analyst talking total bollocks while the video of the official statement was played silently. Before then I knew Fox was bad but it wasn't until that report that I realised quite how crap it is.
  • grungegbunny, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10I too have lost faith in our media except for PBS. My 8th grade social studies teacher was right PBS does strive to report the facts unbiased.
    The killer blow for me was in the middle of a war, ABC news having something about HelloKitty as front page.
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5PBS is far from unbiased. Stay away from their "news reporting".
    • mstoneburner, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5Seriously, if you think PBS is unbiased you need to put the crack pipe down and back away slowly. They gave Bill Boyers his own show, for Pete's sake.
    • bufmike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1PBS unbiased?? wow. stay away from the brown acid..... do you think some of the opinion shows on fox are neutral too????
  • gerbil20, on 10/10/2007, -14/+3Yawn... Blooooog....spaaaaaam.








    Did I say, "buried"?
  • SystmBetatester, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10i dont see how the poster can single out fox news, i havent watched the news in months, much less TV since i find downloading shows my right since i have had to watch 15 min of commercials since i was a wee child.
  • thebigsix, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Yeah, I believe everything they tell me on the Fixed News Channel.
    • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Fan of Fox, but dugg for wittiness.
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Fox Noise, Faux News, Fox Snooze etc.
  • vide08, on 10/10/2007, -13/+3watch: Countdown, Hardball, Air America, PBS

    please turn off Faux News Channel
    • SwordofKahless, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Seems you totally miss the point of the article and prefer biased reporting.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Exactly right Sword...AirAmerica is a self avowed Liberal Network built and broadcast to combat "conservative talk radio". Its AirAmerica's mission statement.
  • nastronomical, on 10/10/2007, -8/+18Eggs on your face scew ball libs. The majority cannot stand the MSM...that aint Foxnews Morons.... Its CNN, ABC, NBC and so on.
    • Schmidtopolis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Fair enough. But for all liberal based media, there is conservative based media as well. Can you not agree with that? Our ideologies may be different, but mainstream media pollutes, and twists the "news" to fit their own agendas. This happens on both sides.
      • klecu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Fox does have a much larger viewer base than any other network. Does that tell you something about America?
      • mike17032, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3What makes you think its their agenda that they are bending it for?

        Its about ratings. They are bending it to give their viewers news they want to see. The news media isnt in control of everything, they just want as large an audiance as possible.
        • Schmidtopolis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Which is part of...... you guessed it... their agenda.
    • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5ABCNNBCBS is right wing. They simply aren't insane, drooling right wing like FNC.

      It's the difference between NY Post and Wall Street Journal, one is right wing in overalls and bare feet, one is right wing in a $1200 suit. Both right wing, but one has had a bath.
  • ukblacknight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I've always found it hard to trust the media, especially on political issues.

    When my mate visited Florida a couple of years ago, he said he couldn't believe how warped US news was, portraying how "well" the US was doing in Iraq, yet the UK news was reporting otherwise, and how the media paid little attention to the Katrina coverage.
    • rwxrwxrwx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Not that I disagree about how warped the news in the US is but what makes you think you are getting the truth in the UK?

    • sol2006, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'll agree with the warping, but it seems every time the war is talked about its another car bomb explodes, or a dozen soldiers/civilians killed or an interview with a ravaged town. I gotta disagree with you on most media outlets portraying the war as "well".
    • philipl411, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Your "mate" must be a retard. I seldom see any positive reporting on Iraq and Katrina was report almost 24 x 7 for weeks afterward
    • bufmike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1did you or your mate talk to any military on leave from iraq to find out what was going on or did you trust the news?
  • peleken, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2I'm so uber sick of you uber mench thinking you sound smarter by using random german words in your english. I believe words like uber should be verbotten.
    Where were we? Oh right we were talking about biased media.
  • theright, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7Well stop linking to Rawstory and we'd have a little less bias, inaccuracy and uncaring in our lives, mmkay?
  • SwordofKahless, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17Undugg after seeing the reference to singling out Foxnews rather than the media as a whole.
  • RevDaniel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Generally speaking, so is the public.
  • oracleofmist, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Conducted By Pew Research Centener....They got bored with their "pew pew lazerz" research and did a study on media
  • terrachronos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5News Media is Biased?

    Thats a great big DUH! No Sh*t!
  • moracity, on 10/10/2007, -11/+20Huh? I find young people on the internet to be the most ill- and under-informed people on the planet. A perfect example is somehow linking Fox News as the target of this study. Fox News is one friggin channel that has some entertainment shows that tilt conservative (Haniity, O'Reilly). Besides a handful of AM talk radio hosts...again entertainment...every news/media outlet in America is insanely left wing. This study is about mainstream media and it's ilk: CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC.

    Sorry to disappoint you, but that goes to show you how flawed left-wing ideology is. It controls everything, yet Bush was elected TWICE!! I mean, Air America couldn't even stay on the air because no one was listening. I listened to it a few times and felt like I was listening to something from the dark ages. People were screaming and just making stuff up with all these crazy conspiracies. It was too disturbing to even be entertaining.
    • Blizaine, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6very well put
    • Lrn2Fish, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Oh come on.....you dont really believe that. First off, the "Entertainment" shows on Fox news are framed in such a way that it IS news. If you dont think a LARGE amount of people take O'Reilly and Hannity as the Gospel... your kidding yourself. My grandparents...and all their rich friends all have Fox News logos burnt into their plasma TVs. Plus Hannity and OReilly each have 3 hour radio programs .. of course dont forget Rush...... then you have to look into the Republican call Centers...these people call old people and use the same emotion rousing messages that the talking heads use on TV to get people to donate money. Its a huuuge propaganda machine. Dont act like Fox News is one friggin channel.
    • Immij, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"Besides a handful of AM talk radio hosts...again entertainment...every news/media outlet in America is insanely left wing." The US political spectrum is so skewed to the right it's hilarious to hear those networks (and the Democrats) being called left-wing. From an international perspective so-called mainstream US politics seems to range from centre-right to extreme right.
    • AustinMandi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Did you say they "tilt conservative"? Not only do they tilt, they slam over sideways with bias. Go turn it on now and I bet you there will be another missing white woman to report on instead of the mean and nasty ol' war they strive so hard to avoid.
    • TomRitchford, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Insanely "left" wing? Wait, this is the same country where every major metropolitan daily except the SF Gate came out in favour of the war before it happened (even though there were never less than 100 million people opposed to it at any time)?

      Try reading international papers for a while -- that might give you an idea how the vast majority of the 6 billion planet see the world. Then take a look at the US media.

      Conservatives need to learn: *just claiming something doesn't make it true*.
  • DivisibleByZero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Isn't the "uncaring" part of that a good thing? We want them to be impartial.
    • thecoolestguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Not if they're uncaring about being impartial.
  • feckineejit, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6you can't MAKE the idiots that watch FOX NEWS stop watching it. Recently FOX NEWS came out and said that the 'liberal media' is more prevalent than the conservative media which is total BS. When the TV isn't on, the neocons are reading the drudge report ot whatever other conservative blogs there are. the only 'liberal' media I know of is NBC and local news and they still don't really go after the latest bunch of lies and deceit spewed out by the whitehouse which makes them conservative sympathizers.
    • mike17032, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Fox News came around as a direct result of there being a lack of conserative media on TV. Thats why its so popular, its the only one.
  • sol2006, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Not too long ago Rebublicans and Democrats simply meant a differing of ideas. Now it's drawn a giant jagged division line in America, and now the two sides are actually producing hate against one another. So sad...

    Sorry it's a lil off topic, but I notice it on many threads on Digg. Just thought I'd mention it.
    • Augie1969, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2A nation divided.

      With the so-called Republican and Democrat elite rich hanging out at the same country clubs, smoking Cubans and laughing their asses off.

      Great country we have become. But hey! Yacht sales are at an all time high!
  • skrowl, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13Fox News is no more biased than CNN or MSNBC.
  • rowlodge, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1their actors anymore, who can swing from one mood to another instantly, never mind the unbiased reporting there supposed to do. its a race for ratings, moody reporters attract more attention.
  • WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Whereas internet "news" is biased, inaccurate...and hateful and more than a little bit psychotic. No, that one quarter of the populace is not "waking up", they are being driven to madness by the bombardment of shrill, hyperbolic and downright nutty extremist web-sites. And by madness I mean a genuine psychological breakdown where the ability to think rationally is lost.

    The greatest disservice the internet has done to humanity is that it has allowed the freaky-fringe to organize and begin to influence the weak-willed and simple-minded. Rawstory and World Net Daily are the political equivalent of UFO nuts.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"The greatest disservice the internet has done to humanity is that it has allowed the freaky-fringe to organize and begin to influence the weak-willed and simple-minded."

      The Churches hate competition......but actually people on the internet are usually better educated than those still stuck in the last century.
      • WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I hate Churches too but at least in the old days, religious fanaticism required leg work. Now everyone is just a mouse-click away from reaching the masses.
    • machinegunopera, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You're right WhiteRaven, this kind of free speech is getting dangerous...
      • WhiteRaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You will note I did not condone doing anything to LIMIT it. Try to pay attention.
    • sensoukami, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Personally, I got agree with WhiteRaven...MSM is imperfect, but man, the ***** on the Internet is staggering. The Righ-Wing bloggers and the Left-Wing bloggers are both equally ***** in the head, and they are BOTH saying their telling the truth that supposedly the MSM is not.

      Ever notice that both of those groups complain about the media all the time!? Like I said, media ain't perfect, but on average, I'll take them over the Daily Kos or the Drudge Report every time....
  • Smurph0404, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11I love how the submitter sees 'main stream media' and reads 'fox news'. 80+% of 'main stream media' consists of outlets other than fox news that push their agenda just as hard. I am a conservative and I have no illusions that fox is fair and balanced, but I find it just as obvious that sources like CNN, MSNBC, and many network news broadcasts push a consist ant anti-bush, liberal agenda.
    • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Yeah, we all remember how ABCNNBCBS all investigated the WMD lies and pointed out that they were complete *****. They were sure anti-Bush about it.
      • Smurph0404, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Speaking of complete *****, remember when CBS aired faked military documents that some guy printed up on his mac in an attempt to smear Bush and influence the 2004 election?
    • btbalance, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5no, you need to stop looking at "liberal/conservative" bias - it's corporation/people.. both Dems and Republicans are owned by the same people.. that's why you cannot trust the mainstream media. They'll gladly drag us into a war causing the wealth of the nation to shift upwards... they'll gladly hide the truth about the Federal Reserve for the same reason.

    • TomRitchford, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"Liberal" bias? Not one of these networks came out against the war -- even though 100 million of us were against it!
      • astrofire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I found a poll that shows upwards of 80% support for the invasion of Iraq before it began. The poll didn't have sources, but seems reliable.

        Bottom line: It was not a liberal position to be in opposition to this war. Any news report negative about the prospect of invading Iraq in 2003 would have a negative effect on the news network, and therefore they supported the war (along with many Democrats).

        Not opposing the war is not indicative of a non-liberal bias in the media. It is a false negative.
  • 369view, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0I am optimist guys -- despite poor show by fascists, corporate world, Nazis and corrupt human being since the evolution -- but I am sure we would have a human race with proud history before approaching to big crunch -- www.360view4u.co.uk
  • PjsPjs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2"Just the facts Mam"
  • bbqsalad, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Who cares? Stop watching TV.. jesus.
    • bigapple666, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Who said that Jesus was watching TV? You shall no longer address our Lord and Saviour directly!
  • joltek, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3If people were smart they would questioned the validity of this poll and the agenda of the Pew Research Center !
  • ljpost0, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Reporting the obvious
  • FREETHINKER2008, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Paris, Britney, and Lindsey are continually the top stories on the so called news networks even know we have an entire channel dedicated to celeb news. When was the last time anyone heard anything about Darfur? Way to keep dumbing us down main MSM.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.