I suppose intelligent discourse really is dead.

[kellinator]

scarcrest reports that certain parties have not taken well to the Lone Star Iconoclast's endorsement of John Kerry.

"In the past, when individuals disagreed with an editorial, they would write a letter to the editor politely expressing a different point of view in contrast to the views of the publishers, which we have usually published.... The new mode of operation, I am told, is that when a newspaper prints an editorial of which some sectors might disagree, the focus is now upon how to run the newspaper out of business.... Unfortunately, for the Iconoclast and its publishers there have been threats — big ones including physical harm.

...Next time you hear a Republican crowing about how the Republicans are the party of values, I want you to think about the values of threatening and harrassing newspaper employees who aren't even on the editorial staff. I want to you think about the values of trying to silence those who disagree with you, rather than offering articulate reasoning as to why you disagree. And then I want you to think about what kind of values they're really selling you.

Yes, I agree: I am rude and condescending when it comes to politics. In return, I put up with rude and condescending comments from many of my circle, because it's only fair. But I have never threatened those of opposing viewpoints with physical harm (well, maybe alanator, but he was goading me while I was drunk). If these people are willing to do so, you might want to ask yourself exactly what they're afraid of.

If I make it through the next month without losing my fucking mind, it'll be a fucking miracle.

Comments

[ariedana.livejournal.com]

I would like to believe the "starch crease" explanation, but the placement is just a little bit off for me to completely buy that. And I've never been a conspiracy theorist by any means. I also think it was slightly foolhardy for the White House to say that Bush wasn't wearing a bulletproof vest that night, since that's information that could be kind of useful for any sniper in the planning stages.

Frankly, I think that the "liberal bias" in the media is BS, for two reasons. One is that I've spent enough time reading viewer email and listening to phone calls to know that people are scrutinizing our coverage for any perceived bias, and because we're tired of dealing with public reaction to anything we put on that's critical of Bush or complimentary of Kerry that we're becoming avoidant of the subject altogether. That's why punditry has become so popular - just put a couple of guys on-screen, let them spout off what they want, and then blame it on them when people complain. Also, big media has become too corporate to have an overt political agenda, at least on the liberal side. And yes, I know that RatherGate can be used to dispute my opinion, but my belief is that TPTB latched onto that to boost ratings, not to promote a liberal agenda.

[dwivian]

Not at all -- the position is exactly the same as in my pic, which is about dead center of the shoulder blades, minus an inch or two. That's where the bulge appears in my jacket, which is why I take pains to "fluff" my shirt beforehand. I also pull down on it when sitting, to avoid the roll on the shoulders look. Am I vain? :)

I learned of the slight left bias in a class I attended on inherent bias in linguistic analysis, and how descriptives are brought into the public mind, and how such descriptives can be used to sway public opinion ahead of polls, and ahead of elections. The professor, someone that makes Ted Kennedy look like Strom Thurmond, was unhappy to admit it, but for academic integrity showed us how the bias in the media exists, and then proceeded to explain some of why it comes about (advertising revenue, learned phrases from journalism schools, learned phrases from the academic world, refusal to accept some spin and the creation of sound bytes that take on their own lives, etc). She was very clear that the media is slightly left of center.

She also postulated that it could reflect the fact that America was left of center, but it was argued back that media is representative of the target audience more so than the population in general. Her return argument was that the media, in serving the largest part of the population, met the rules for reasonable sample size as reflective of the trends of a population, and it pretty much stalemated there.

I got an A in the class, but I think that was as much because I memorized the ANOVA formulas as because of any study of bias... ::grin::

[sujata.livejournal.com]

I learned of the slight left bias in a class I attended on inherent bias in linguistic analysis,

What year did you take this class?

Personally, I've seen the "liberal bias" disappear and be replaced by a "conservative bias" during the past twenty years. I've a hunch you took that class at a time when liberal bias in the media was gasping out its dying breath, and conservatism was moving in to take over.

ariedana makes an excellent point about corporate control of the media, nowadays. She doesn't really make clear how pervasive it is, though. Incidentally, corporate control of the media ultimately resulting in a conservative bias, along with almost every other major influence on conditions in America as they now exist, was predicted in 1984 in Herbert I. Schiller's Information and the Crisis Economy. The only influence on contemporary conditions and affairs that Schiller didn't outright predict was 9-11, and he even hinted at the possibility of something like that occurring.

[dwivian]

Took the course in 2001. Not quite so late as you'd expect. And, my continued, and now informed, read shows that the bias is still there. Remember, this is not in the decision of what to report (which is a seperate bias of its own) but in the language used in the reporting. That is almost never influenced by the ownership, as it is a tone set by regional authors and newsfeeds, which tend not to change overmuch because of market needs for writers.

What is covered, and what isn't, comes out of the desire to protect the revenue stream, and thus is related to the advertiser base. Watch, sometime, to see how far apart a story about the evils of fast food can get from the latest HappyMeal placement.... If that's conservative or liberal I can't say, as I'm sure it is more a reflection of the target market than anything else. So.... is America becoming more conservative? Or is there some other reason you'd guess? I'll admit to not reading Schiller's book, so I'll bet you have an answer in there you can share!

::waiting, with anticipation::