| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > TV News Corner > Topic: NBC and MSNBC News reporting attacked for bias |
Topic: NBC and MSNBC News reporting attacked for bias
| Author | Message |
| Latin1 | Posted – 5/20/2008 4:41:46 AM | show profile Republicans recently came out against the editing of an interview that Richard Engel of NBC Nightly News did with President Bush. The interview was edited to make it appear that Bush was talking about Obama when he made the speech in Israel. Bush explained himself, but NBC edited the interview to make it appear that Bush WAS talking about Obama only. White House Counselor Ed Gillespie sent a scathing letter to NBC News President Steve Capus criticizing the editing that was done by NBC News. NBC and their sister Cable News TV network MSNBC has been under scrutiny for being unfair and attacking both Republicans and Hillary Clinton in favor of Barack Obama. MSNBC is considered ultra-left and cheerleaders for Barack Obama. This week Hillary Clinton had a TV commercial in the state of Oregon showing Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Tim Russert declaring her 'dead in the water'. Funny that a campaign commercial would highlight TV Cable and Network News commentators as the main characters/foes. Is MSNBC the new "Willie Hortons" of the campaign? Apparently so. It appears that NBC/MSNBC is now considered the Obama Network. |
| al medio | Posted – 5/20/2008 8:02:27 AM | show profile I just read Ed Gillespie's letter. What ever happened to the Iraq civil war? Did someone win and NBC News just decided not to report the outcome or were they using DNC talking points all along? Someone must have won because it didn't end with the failed surge,unless that comment"failed surge" was part of DNC talking points also.Is NBC neutral or just another arm of the DNC? |
| Suet | Posted – 5/20/2008 4:40:09 PM | show profile Latin1, Do you have any thoughts, feelings, or beliefs of your own about these issues? You know, the kind that would make you start a sentence with "I think...", "I feel..", "I believe..."? (Then it would go something like, "I think MSNBC is biased because ____", "I believe that MSNBC should ____" etc. Are you getting the picture?) Or, are you just a good foot soldier for the right-wing propaganda machine? What is YOUR opinion on these issues that you raise? |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/20/2008 8:56:06 PM | show profile Anything SUET but answer the concerns raised. Do you foot soldiers for the left wing libs do anything else but run interference when valid objections and questions are raised or is running scared with hopes of distractions your only hope? Now, grow up, stay on topic and learn to answer the questions raised. |
| Suet | Posted – 5/20/2008 10:15:55 PM | show profile Guyarthurthomas, I'll bite, what in HELL are you talking about. Latin1 posts all this stuff - "some say", "people say", etc., and I was just pointing out how lemminglike that was, to not even state your own opinion but rather attribute it to 'some poeple". And you're no different - you've got a bunch of stock phrases that you throw out that have absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. You remind me of that right-wing talk radio hack who got nailed, yelling "appeasement!" over and over but not knowing what he was talking about. |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 5/21/2008 7:14:22 AM | show profile guy has appointed himself MB hall monitor. all hail! |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/22/2008 9:04:07 PM | show profile SUET Okay SUET let's look at your post. ___________________________________________ Suet Posted ? 5/20/2008 10:15:55 PM | show profile Guyarthurthomas, I'll bite, what in HELL are you talking about. Latin1 posts all this stuff - "some say", "people say", etc., and I was just pointing out how lemminglike that was, to not even state your own opinion but rather attribute it to 'some poeple". And you're no different - you've got a bunch of stock phrases that you throw out that have absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. You remind me of that right-wing talk radio hack who got nailed, yelling "appeasement!" over and over but not knowing what he was talking about _________________________________________ So now let's examine Latin's post, the one you charge with being being based on "some say" and "people say". ___________________________________________ Latin1 Posted ? 5/20/2008 4:41:46 AM | show profile Republicans recently came out against the editing of an interview that Richard Engel of NBC Nightly News did with President Bush. The interview was edited to make it appear that Bush was talking about Obama when he made the speech in Israel. Bush explained himself, but NBC edited the interview to make it appear that Bush WAS talking about Obama only. ( no "some say" and "people say" here) White House Counselor Ed Gillespie sent a scathing letter to NBC News President Steve Capus criticizing the editing that was done by NBC News. ( no "some say" and "people say" here) NBC and their sister Cable News TV network MSNBC has been under scrutiny for being unfair and attacking both Republicans and Hillary Clinton in favor of Barack Obama. MSNBC is considered ultra-left and cheerleaders for Barack Obama. ( no "some say" and "people say" here) This week Hillary Clinton had a TV commercial in the state of Oregon showing Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Tim Russert declaring her 'dead in the water'. Funny that a campaign commercial would highlight TV Cable and Network News commentators as the main characters/foes. Is MSNBC the new "Willie Hortons" of the campaign? Apparently so. ( no "some say" and "people say" here) It appears that NBC/MSNBC is now considered the Obama Network. ( no "some say" and "people say" here) ___________________________________________ No SUET it appears YOU need to ask YOURSELF "what the hell are you talking about". Next please! |
| northcoastlife | Posted – 5/22/2008 9:11:39 PM | show profile Huh? "Under scrutiny" by whom precisely? Bush? Perino? Her underlings? Does anyone give a shit what they or you think? Maybe you should be worrying about who will be "under scrutiny" after January and in venues that do have the authority to go after genuine criminality. In the meanwhile, you'll just have to get over the fact that not every channel will be following Fixed News in endorsing McBoob. Bwaah! Isn't life so...unfair? SOB. LOL! |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/23/2008 8:36:08 AM | show profile You poor scabs, can't you ever stay on topic without ranting? No wonder you clowns are stupid enough to choose The Obamanation. Oh I forgot, you're the idiots that picked KERRY to run against an unpopular Bush in 2004. hahahahahaha Next please! |
| Suet | Posted – 5/23/2008 10:29:24 AM | show profile Guyarthurthomas, I was paraphrasing, and I was referring to Latin1's "body of work" (all the stuff Latin1 posts here). Please review his post. You will see that in no instance does Latin1 attribute any opinion to himself or herself. For example: "MSNBC is considered ultra-left and cheerleaders for Barack Obama." Who is the subject doing the considering here? It is, roughly "some people". It is certainly not the writer. Another example: "It appears that NBC/MSNBC is now considered the Obama Network." Again, who is doing the considering here? To whom does "it appear"? All I was saying is that Latin1 takes no responsibility for the opnions expressed in Latin1's posts. I hope all this isn't too subtle for you. PS - Name calling and stupid puns ("The Obamanation") weaken any argument you make, rather than strengthening it. |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/23/2008 3:39:37 PM | show profile Time for a little more dissection and corrections for SUET. So let's examine this new post and new claims. _____________________________________________ Suet Posted ? 5/23/2008 10:29:24 AM | show profile I was paraphrasing, and I was referring to Latin1's "body of work" (all the stuff Latin1 posts here). Please review his post. You will see that in no instance does Latin1 attribute any opinion to himself or herself. For example: "MSNBC is considered ultra-left and cheerleaders for Barack Obama." Who is the subject doing the considering here? It is, roughly "some people". It is certainly not the writer. Another example: "It appears that NBC/MSNBC is now considered the Obama Network." Again, who is doing the considering here? To whom does "it appear"? All I was saying is that Latin1 takes no responsibility for the opnions expressed in Latin1's posts. I hope all this isn't too subtle for you. PS - Name calling and stupid puns ("The Obamanation") weaken any argument you make, rather than strengthening it __________________________________________ Paraphrase means to restate the same idea with different words. Here you were NOT paraphrasing but attempting to INTERPRET. At no place did Latin state "some say" or "people say". Most of his statements were declarative. Secondly, the statement "it appears" uses the understood subject of "me". You only relief might come with the SINGULAR statement "is considered" to imply Latin is referring to the opinions of others. However you didn't even paraphrase that, you interpreted it and determined he did NOT include himself in that opinion when no such information can conclusively be determined. So no, you didn't paraphrase at you, you attempted to interpret and wrongly so regarding "it appears". Simple grammar provides the rules as to the subject in that sentence. Secondly, I find it hilarious that in the same sentence while deriding name calling you refer to my pun as STUPID....hahahahahahahahaha, you poor libs, you are so clueless to your own offenses. While complaining self-righteously objecting to name calling you engage in it in the middle of your complaint. Hahahahahahaha...gawd does this get any worse? Next Please! |
| noname1234 | Posted – 5/23/2008 3:53:31 PM | show profile Guy, passive sentence construction like: "NBC and their sister Cable News TV network MSNBC has been under scrutiny for being unfair and attacking both Republicans and Hillary Clinton in favor of Barack Obama. MSNBC is considered ultra-left and cheerleaders for Barack Obama." is: a) weak, poor writing b) does not imply that author is the actor. It leaves the actor unknown, and implies a vague "general consensus" where there may be none. If Latin1 is stating his point of view, he should simply make that clear: "I consider MSNBC..." (or even "I and several critics such as X, Y, Z consider MSNBC..." rather than "MSNBC is considered..." That's just basic good, strong writing. |
| Suet | Posted – 5/23/2008 4:44:38 PM | show profile Guyarthurthomas, Referring to a pun as stupid is expressing an opinion of it. That is not the same thing as name-calling. I express opinions. I don't engage in name-calling. In case that wasn't clear: Referring to Barack Obama "The Obamanation" is name-calling. Name-calling is inherently weak. Puns are the lowest form of humor, you know. Stating that "Barack Obama is an abomination!" would be expressing an opinon. An incoherent one but an opinon nevertheless. Calling someone a "lib" is name-calling too. A sign of desperation. As to your other "dissection" - you are so far off base that I don't imagine I could bring you back to reality on that one. |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/23/2008 6:20:58 PM | show profile You poor scabs, offended by puns and the use of the passive voice in expressing thoughts. God forbid you ever have to translate anything more heady than Dr. Seuss. |
| Suet | Posted – 5/23/2008 6:33:52 PM | show profile Nice non-response Guyarthurthomas! |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/25/2008 10:58:53 AM | show profile SUET, you libs never cease to amaze and thank goodness since life needs a little entertainment. Non-response you cry? Is this your whine for the day...because your non-sequitur isn't being taken seriously. Listen sister, the OP brings up a very valid point, the fact of an NBC interview with the President being manipulated and broadcasted so as to show a deceitful version of the remarks of the President regarding a question Engel asked. Of course this doesn't offend your senses. A lying reporter from whom many receive news and information is fine with you. No that is no problem that he and a network would willingly manipulate an interview to skew its accuracy. No, you are busy being offended by puns and one comment that uses the passive voice. Forget that NBC, a major network, has abandoned objectivity. Forget that as a news source it has demonstrated, repeatedly, it is willing to manipulate facts, videos and interviews to misrepresent the truth. THAT doesn't bother you, you are bothered by petty issues. Now you know why you aren't taken seriously? Now you understand why these so-called non-responses are the most offered to you? Because you have demonstrated that by being offended by the LESSER, in fact FAR LESS issues of grammar and linguistic style and NOT the substance of the matter, EXTREME BIAS by a network purporting to be objective, you remove YOURSELF from serious dialog and debate. Next please! |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 5/25/2008 6:01:39 PM | show profile guy, all that hot air would be more productively spent inflating your girlfriend |
| Guyarthurthomas | Posted – 5/25/2008 6:55:00 PM | show profile Dayum Stanley, I didn't realize when I verbally b!tch slapped you it would leave with even less to say than earlier. But then you were running on empty to begin with. |
| Latin1 | Posted – 5/25/2008 8:59:57 PM | show profile Nice way to stay on topic... Lol, nice way to stay on topic. First I am a Democrat. I think I have written that several times. Secondly the topic is about NBC and MSNBC and how far left they stations have become. I didn't know this was a forum on writing and sentence structure? This was a thread on a TV Cable News forum about how MSNBC is ruining the credibility of NBC by going totally far left. If you want to comment on writing go to another thread and start one there. As for being a right wing propagandist, why is it that anyone who disagrees with deranged leftists they are labeled 'right wing'. Many Democrats dislike left leaning idiots, that is why many voted for Hillary and not for Obama. |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 5/25/2008 11:51:44 PM | show profile that's right guy, i don't have much to say. that's why I keep my comments short. you obviously operate under a different philosophy. |
