I always knew that CNN drifted over the double yellow line some of the time, but it seems they have sunk to a new low. Newsflash - having a gaggle of conservative republicans and moderately conservative republicans is not giving voice to both (or multiple) sides of an issue.
Case in point - just after President Bush's speech on immigration reform, CNN (The most trusted name in news?) aired a special edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight that consisted of a roundtable discussion moderated by show host Lou Dobbs, with four other white men as guests: conservative white, male, syndicated columnist Tony Blankley, conservative, white, male, Republican strategist Charlie Black, CNN senior political analyst and conservative white male American Enterprise Institute resident fellow William Schneider, and CNN host Wolf Blitzer. Missing from the discussion was the perspective of a Democrat, a progressive, a woman, a Latino, or any minority or anyone actually close to the issue.
Moreover, the network did not air the Democratic response given by Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) minutes after the conclusion of Bush's address. Fox News also aired Bush's speech but ignored Durbin's comments, as did ABC, CBS, and NBC. By contrast, both MSNBC and PBS broadcast the Democratic response in its entirety.
Good work guys. Of all the network and cable news outlets, only two passed provided complete and balanced converage.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
They are biased toward one thing: Money. Whatever their directors and executives think will increase their viewership is what will drive what they do. And until the very unlikely day when people stop watching this crap en masse, it ain't gonna change.
It's the Golden Rule: He who has the Gold makes the Rules
I disagree with Kurt. Most of them have a conservative bias. True, this is because of money. Most of the TV news outlets are owned by rich conservatives who think their own selfish interests are helped by other conservatives. That's why they have a consistent conservative bias. Put simply, it's greed.
The few news outlets that actually do their jobs and present a balanced picture, MSNBC and PBS on TV and NPR and BBC on radio, to name a few, are constantly accused of having a liberal bias. Actually, they are just balanced and objective, but it's like Stephen Colbert said. "Reality has a well known liberal bias."
NPR is too pollictly correct for even me! I can only tolerate a few minutes a day of it. For world news BBC is still somewhat ok. Some of their interviewers are on the smarmy side.
I've also noticed this drift over the past few years on most news outlets, their propensity to have commentators interview journalists, instead of people on different sides of an issue. And when they have people representing different viewpoints, 1) the guests don't debate, they spew sound bites and stick to talking points; 2) the commentator never enforces discipline; 3) a progressive viewpoint is never presented.
I don't need a liberal perspective because it makes me sleep better - I just think we all are better citizens when many viewpoints to an issue are presented.
I had been puzzled about interviewing journalists as "experts" very strange developoment.
I quit watching television, about 1994.
I can read faster than I can hear, and it is so much saner.
All the other networks have now come to the realization that FOX is not a flash in the pan, the "newbie" is kicking their collective butts. They continue to be the highest watched cable news in the country. Their advertisers realized this before they did. So now it is catch-up time. If you want to watch a station that only shares your view of things, well fine. For varied takes on things, you have to move around.
To really get truthful and complete news, you really have to look outside of the U.S. markets. The Guardian seems to do a good job in Britain. There are probably other international news sources that are good as well. I get my news from the internet, and the Guardian is online.
Real journalists go to the scene of events, investigate them, try to dig up more information and investigate the facts behind what politicians and other newsmakers are saying to see if the opinions those people are giving are based on true facts. Unless they are actively doing that, they are not worth your time, and certainly not mine. The ones that go to the trouble of finding facts are usually labelled "liberal." That's why I agree with Stephen Colbert that reality has a well known liberal bias.