Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?

[Monolith]

It's kinda funny that you think the Republicans control our media, because a lot of people, here in the States, at least, seem to feel that the media has a decidedly anti-Bush slant to it. Personally, I despise Bush-Cheney, and I feel that no single person in recent history has caused as much anti-American sentiment as either one of these pieces of crap...

[ConstantineX]

A natural consequence of market policies. The unfortunate truth here is that most people in America don't want to hear "truthful" news, and that in actuality politics and the machinations of politicians aren't really interesting them in favor of bizarre or celebrity stories; i.e., Paris Hilton, the man who [censored] a goat. That's fine; it is just as elitist to presume that people NEED "fair and balanced" news as it is to pretend your ideology is singular and correct. My opinion is that those seeking balanced news have long migrated from the boob tube into mainly to the Internet through blogs, Youtube, other sources of online commentary, yes, even forums like 2+2 (slight ideological bent, but where else can you get good commentary from a socialist?) I still read the Economist, and it is still excellent. At least now the middle-class American can still have his biases appealed to by Fox, and the Hollywood liberal can have the same through the New York Times. The only detriment to this is that presumably they'll have a voice in the political process; if you truly believe in the democratic political process, I think there is quite an argument to protest the debasement of the media. Fortunately, I don't.

[bobman0330]

There are two really amusing things about all of these media debates. First, there's the ridiculous expectation that TV news should be good in any respect. Of course it sucks, it's a video picture of a guy reading the news. It costs millions of dollars to produce and distribute and conveys information SLOWER than reading it yourself. It's like asking why coloring books don't have much character development.

Second, there's the comical fashion in which everyone assumes that the media is controlled by the interests they hate the most. canis assumes that corporations have the media under their thumb, boro insists it's the government, pokerbobo knows that it's the lefties, [EDIT: GCYW believes the media is a servant of the two major parties], etc., etc., etc.

[GoodCallYouWin]

I do not think there is a significant 'republican' or 'democratic' bias to the media; I think it serves both parties relatively equally, while silencing any other dissenting voice by simply not airing it.

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
There are two really amusing things about all of these media debates. First, there's the ridiculous expectation that TV news should be good in any respect. Of course it sucks, it's a video picture of a guy reading the news. It costs millions of dollars to produce and distribute and conveys information SLOWER than reading it yourself. It's like asking why coloring books don't have much character development.

Second, there's the comical fashion in which everyone assumes that the media is controlled by the interests they hate the most. canis assumes that corporations have the media under their thumb, boro insists it's the government, pokerbobo knows that it's the lefties, [EDIT: GCYW believes the media is a servant of the two major parties], etc., etc., etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

When studies show roughly 90% of journalists consider themselves left or left leaning... there is no dispute about who controls it... throw in the data on what party they donate to more...not a shadow of a doubt.

[canis582]

The corporations are the government, so boro and I agree. Pokerbobo hears the rightwing talkers say the media is bias to the left, so thats what he thinks.

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
throw in the data on what party they donate to more...not a shadow of a doubt.

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean the MSNBC study that concluded that 143 of around 100,000 journalism professionals (0.14%) gave money to any candidate at all?

[ QUOTE ]
The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms — at least among the donors, who are a tiny fraction of the roughly 100,000 staffers in newsrooms across the nation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or are you referring to the overwhelming preference of media companies for Republican candidates over Democratic candidates for the millions in PAC donations they give for every election?

I mean, don't get me wrong, the fact that influential MTV News reporter Gideon Yago has donated literally hundreds of dollars to Democratic candidate surely illustrates the news media's overall bias to the extreme left.

[canis582]

Loc: Prison of my Mind

Must be a small room.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
The latest conversion of all Iraqi insurgents into "Al Queada" by the American military PR machine is not surprising. Power is desperate to make people percieve this war as one against those who attacked the WTC on 9-11.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure it's the military making the claims you refer too. Isn't the Bush administration more or less making the statements you cite? Big difference IMO.

I agree though that the media is often very lame and seemingly mindless.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
Or are you referring to the overwhelming preference of media companies for Republican candidates over Democratic candidates for the millions in PAC donations they give for every election?

[/ QUOTE ]

7-5 is overwhelming?