You Can Watch The News! (2 Viewers)

[Not-That-Bright]

Lmao, you think i'm saying news is unbias? I clearly was just making the point that while there is bias in the news, it's not that hard to watch it with a critical eye.

The New York Times and the Washington post are definately left, maybe just because they're not calling for the revolution yet you don't think they're left enough for you.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

So you don't think the washington post is left-wing?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

i wasn't saying they were calling for the revolution at all.

The revolution call I made was actually to chubbaraff who has stated that he wants the revolution and that social democratic processes simply don't work in a former post believe. He is further left than you my comments weren't even directed towards you.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

He didn't call for it in this thread at all, and he doesn't want a communist government.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

He cannot come to the conclusion that Stalin was an autocrat. I really do think Marxism/Trotskyism with a dash of Leninism is the best alternative for the genuine left. And if anything the compass proves anything, it sthat the authoritarian left is a dead and despotic trade that is not propogated by anyone in australia atm. When people realize that level of conciousness they will realize that the only next logical step is to join a revolutionary party who fights for human emancipation.

Rampant consumerism is only the beggining of the degredation of our market driven society that you propagate. And the fact is i support none of those parties. Im a member of the Socialist Alliance. So I am right in declaring class warfare because none of those parties, except the greens on some issues go close to representing a true alternative to barbaric capitalism.

There, i also visited a link he posted once which was a little more extreme.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

2nd last page of the thread called "left and right wingers - im confused!"

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? OF course it is.

The fattest file on my hard drive is jammed with letters from the disappointed, the dismayed and the irate who find in this newspaper a liberal bias that infects not just political coverage but a range of issues from abortion to zoology to the appointment of an admitted Democrat to be its watchdog. (That would be me.) By contrast, readers who attack The Times from the left -- and there are plenty -- generally confine their complaints to the paper's coverage of electoral politics and foreign policy.

I'll get to the politics-and-policy issues this fall (I want to watch the campaign coverage before I conclude anything), but for now my concern is the flammable stuff that ignites the right. These are the social issues: gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation, among others. And if you think The Times plays it down the middle on any of them, you've been reading the paper with your eyes closed.

But if you're examining the paper's coverage of these subjects from a perspective that is neither urban nor Northeastern nor culturally seen-it-all; if you are among the groups The Times treats as strange objects to be examined on a laboratory slide (devout Catholics, gun owners, Orthodox Jews, Texans); if your value system wouldn't wear well on a composite New York Times journalist, then a walk through this paper can make you feel you're traveling in a strange and forbidding world.

Start with the editorial page, so thoroughly saturated in liberal theology that when it occasionally strays from that point of view the shocked yelps from the left overwhelm even the ceaseless rumble of disapproval from the right"

From the outgoing public editor of the new york times...

 

[somechick]

I cannot believe NTB, how can you say news here is unbiased. Maybe its how we define bias. Because i see a station like say channel ten as bias because its more interested in Car crashes then politics, it has a bias towards nonsense, and is also beggining to be riddled with opinion. The new York times and washington post are by no means on the left. If they were they would not have attacked the Chavez government of venezuela like they did with no journalistic integrity, synonomous with the right. Out of the articles Ive read the only one sympathetic to the cause of Venezuela is the SMG, NYT and WP were absolute garbage. I think outfoxed stunned me because its creeping in here and unless we watch SBS and sometimes ABC, its gonna get worse. On the election, it was totally bias, they had a responsibility to cover the left, but they didnt. It was a tragedy for democracy and for the children in detention that the media didnt stress the issue.

Yes i agree.
i mean channel 9 and the fairfax papers are owned by corporate giants so it is no wonder that liberal won the election.

NTB: here's an example: during sept 11 nearly every single news network showed footage of people in the middle east dancing around the streets in joy and happiness. THis coverage was actually from a festival that was happening at the time, but was used to falsy present joy by the middle easterns at the disaster that was happening in america. It was uncovered two years later but nobody gave a shite anymore.
And what about the children overboard scandal.

Moreover, the news, just like every other text, is costructed neatly into one whole. There are some things that are being suppressed and others which are magnified. At the start, we have the most depressing of all news, the disasters/scandals etc. And at the end its probably about a flying chimpanzee or something to round off on a good note. The news reporter ladies have to look squeaky clean, and remember: THEY ARE READING SOMETHING WHICH IS CONSTRUCTED from events that happened.
Watch CNNNN and you'll know what i mean. damn i love that show.

 

[Generator]

Yes i agree.
i mean channel 9 and the fairfax papers are owned by corporate giants so it is no wonder that liberal won the election.

Even though The Age may have endorsed the Coalition and the Sydney Morning Herald may have remained on the fence on the day of the election, the Fairfax papers are known for their liberal rather than Liberal leanings... I think that you may have meant the News Limited papers, or at least that would be the better example.