An example of news bias.

[Anonymous]

the idea that the mainstream media isn't biased to the left is like arguing the sky isn't blue or the grass isn't green.  



In fact I wouldn't even call it bias anymore.  Its outright activism.  It couldn't be more skewed if you put SJW activists, university professors or the democrat party in charge of the media.



Peaches you and other progs, or whatever you want to call yourself, don't see the bias because its right along with your thinking, so of course you don't have a problem with it.

I hope you realize that I can as readily say the exact thing you just said, about the way YUO and other trogs don't see the rightwing bias.



Let us see if Brickie can come up with something more persuasive.

[Wazzzup]

the idea that the mainstream media isn't biased to the left is like arguing the sky isn't blue or the grass isn't green.  



In fact I wouldn't even call it bias anymore.  Its outright activism.  It couldn't be more skewed if you put SJW activists, university professors or the democrat party in charge of the media.



Peaches you and other progs, or whatever you want to call yourself, don't see the bias because its right along with your thinking, so of course you don't have a problem with it.

I hope you realize that I can as readily say the exact thing you just said, about the way YUO and other trogs don't see the rightwing bias.



Let us see if Brickie can come up with something more persuasive.

Fox news isn't biased, neither are Breitbart, the Washington Times, washington Examiner, Newsmax and the Daily caller.  they are just pursuing money.

[Bricktop]

===

and I am never bashful in pressing my case.



Here is one factual basis for accusing mainstream media of being a cheer squad for socialism;



===

I don't doubt these results would be replicated in most western nations.



Now, instead of playing word games, how about you discuss this issue based on FACT, not the past or present vocation of contributors to the discussion.

I haven't yet found time to offer a "competing" flim-flam "study" but I'm more than happy to tell you why I reject yours as having no value beyond Entertainment.



First, the study you endorse is from 2005, the beginning of Bush43's second term.  Just stop for a second and contemplate how far back in time that was in terms of US politics and the political issues of the day.



Second, the primary author of this study has used a methodology which he takes pride in suggesting that NO media scholar would ever think to use.  And he spends some time assuring the reader that no outside money funded the survey -- it was all paid for from UCLA's research slush funds (I forget what universities call that fund.)  That turns out to be a diversion from discussing his OWN bona fides, which I'll offer you here.



http://timgroseclose.com/biography/">//http://timgroseclose.com/biography/

To this day, I consider Goldwater one of my political heroes.  Four others are Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, Bob Dole, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.  Four other heroes, in addition to being successful politicians, are true scholars] Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Dick Armey, and Dick Cheney.



My own PQ is approximately 13.

That's a PQ that puts him further to the right of the putative center than Ted Kennedy was to the left of it, okay?



Third, in designing his study he has used a metric which was originally developed by the leftist ADA for scoring the public posturing and the voting of members of Congress.  Such metrics are often developed by various pressure groups, the NRA being another notorious example.  The problem with his use of this metric is that it doesn't measure BIAS, but rather it tries to measure the amount of congruence between media "thinking" and the "thinking" of legislators.  



Inasmuch as said legislators are in large part outright whores who base their "thinking" on the corporate and special-interest money flowing into their pockets, it is highly laughable to suggest that the congressional Middle of 50 would also be the ideal, healthy benchmark for media to aspire to as its Middle.



I could rant on, but here are a couple of other discussions of the merits of your survey.

https://journalism.nyu.edu/publishing/archives/pressethic/node/1129">//https://journalism.nyu.edu/publishing/archives/pressethic/node/1129

https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=335819">//https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=335819

At no stage during that extended expose did you at any time REBUT the results of the study.



Instead you resort to the time honoured tradition of the left when confronted with inconvenient truths, which is to attack the purveyor, as did the sources you cited, which essentially boil down to "he's wrong" without even the slightest hint of empirical corroboration.



A UCLA researcher carried out an empirical study that drew a reasoned conclusion. I see no rebuttal of that conclusion provided by a duly accredited academic using empirical research methodology.



Put another way, you try to put a smokescreen between the public and the truth in accordance with true socialist dogma.

[Anonymous]

===

and I am never bashful in pressing my case.



Here is one factual basis for accusing mainstream media of being a cheer squad for socialism;



===

I don't doubt these results would be replicated in most western nations.



Now, instead of playing word games, how about you discuss this issue based on FACT, not the past or present vocation of contributors to the discussion.

I haven't yet found time to offer a "competing" flim-flam "study" but I'm more than happy to tell you why I reject yours as having no value beyond Entertainment.



First, the study you endorse is from 2005, the beginning of Bush43's second term.  Just stop for a second and contemplate how far back in time that was in terms of US politics and the political issues of the day.



Second, the primary author of this study has used a methodology which he takes pride in suggesting that NO media scholar would ever think to use.  And he spends some time assuring the reader that no outside money funded the survey -- it was all paid for from UCLA's research slush funds (I forget what universities call that fund.)  That turns out to be a diversion from discussing his OWN bona fides, which I'll offer you here.



http://timgroseclose.com/biography/">//http://timgroseclose.com/biography/

To this day, I consider Goldwater one of my political heroes.  Four others are Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, Bob Dole, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.  Four other heroes, in addition to being successful politicians, are true scholars] Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Dick Armey, and Dick Cheney.



My own PQ is approximately 13.

That's a PQ that puts him further to the right of the putative center than Ted Kennedy was to the left of it, okay?



Third, in designing his study he has used a metric which was originally developed by the leftist ADA for scoring the public posturing and the voting of members of Congress.  Such metrics are often developed by various pressure groups, the NRA being another notorious example.  The problem with his use of this metric is that it doesn't measure BIAS, but rather it tries to measure the amount of congruence between media "thinking" and the "thinking" of legislators.  



Inasmuch as said legislators are in large part outright whores who base their "thinking" on the corporate and special-interest money flowing into their pockets, it is highly laughable to suggest that the congressional Middle of 50 would also be the ideal, healthy benchmark for media to aspire to as its Middle.



I could rant on, but here are a couple of other discussions of the merits of your survey.

https://journalism.nyu.edu/publishing/archives/pressethic/node/1129">//https://journalism.nyu.edu/publishing/archives/pressethic/node/1129

https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=335819">//https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=335819

At no stage during that extended expose did you at any time REBUT the results of the study.



Instead you resort to the time honoured tradition of the left when confronted with inconvenient truths, which is to attack the purveyor, as did the sources you cited, which essentially boil down to "he's wrong" without even the slightest hint of empirical corroboration.



A UCLA researcher carried out an empirical study that drew a reasoned conclusion. I see no rebuttal of that conclusion provided by a duly accredited academic using empirical research methodology.



Put another way, you try to put a smokescreen between the public and the truth in accordance with true socialist dogma.

I didn't "attack" the purveyor, I fucking BURIED him...AND his methodology.  



I can't be arsed to go find some other schmuck academic who bothered to disprove his results using better science, because it's unnecessary and beneath me.  "Garbage In = Garbage Out."



No, I haven't "returned."  Just needed to send a PM.

[Bricktop]

Hey, Peachy...



Good to see you.



Hang around, man...

[Anonymous]

Hey, Peachy...



Good to see you.



Hang around, man...

I don't know what he's babbling about and like anyone who isn't a CBT regular, I don't care.

[Bricktop]

I suspect he's just using us as a letter drop for Flea.



Felt the need to take a swing for old times sake.

[Anonymous]

I suspect he's just using us as a letter drop for Flea.



Felt the need to take a swing for old times sake.

Meh, whatever.

[Bricktop]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

[Anonymous]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

He loves Shen Li and Herman..



They are the welcoming committee.

 

[Anonymous]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

He loves Shen Li and Herman..



They are the welcoming committee.

 

I'm not going to kiss his effeminate, white libtard ass. He knows this place is not CBT,

[Anonymous]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

He loves Shen Li and Herman..



They are the welcoming committee.

 

I'm not going to kiss his effeminate, white libtard ass. He knows this place is not CBT,

Nobody that knows you expects you to do that.

[cc]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

He loves Shen Li and Herman..



They are the welcoming committee.

 

Do they have official greeting uniforms?

[Anonymous]

He'll be back. He loves it here.

He loves Shen Li and Herman..



They are the welcoming committee.

 

Do they have official greeting uniforms?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRShguENTlwXIoqF8wco4Os_KBvC1gZIhLn9vXx3JYMatbR7mI9">

[cc]

That is "fitting"